Skinnylinny Posted April 10, 2019 Author Share Posted April 10, 2019 (edited) That is indeed the ultimate plan, although unfortunately that link is to a different diagram of carriage - the first one of these I intend to release is the 6-lav tricomposite as seen here: Tricomposite Edited April 10, 2019 by Skinnylinny 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drduncan Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 Hi Linny, Your link seems to be broken. Duncan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 10, 2019 Author Share Posted April 10, 2019 Hopefully fixed now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drduncan Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 Yes working now D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium ianmaccormac Posted April 10, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 10, 2019 Yes that works for me! Keep at it, looking good! Cheers Ian in Blackpool Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrymx5 Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 Fascinating thread. And well beyond my modelling skills. But if you do get a saleable kit together I could be interested. My PC model of LSWR 57 ft brake from the 1980s was a challenge at the time and is looking past its best! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 In many way the logical LSW coach products are those 56' Corridor and Non-Corridor types formerly in the PC Kits range. These lasted well into SR without the substantial rebuilding that afflicted other types. Otherwise I'd be interested in the 1909-10 bogie branch 2-set rebuilds and suitable through bogie coach to attach in ones and twos to branch services. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 10, 2019 Author Share Posted April 10, 2019 While the 58 footers would be the longest-lasting, they're a bit modern for a layout the period of which starts in 1900, especially on what for the LSWR was effectively a branch line! I think I'm fact the 1897 tricomposite is rather modern, but I'm rather struck by the 42-foot ones of the 1880s... At the moment I'm mostly focusing on stock which will be suitable for my own layout, when it finally gets built! However I'll then work on expanding the range. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Skinnylinny said: While the 58 footers would be the longest-lasting, they're a bit modern for a layout the period of which starts in 1900, especially on what for the LSWR was effectively a branch line! I think I'm fact the 1897 tricomposite is rather modern, but I'm rather struck by the 42-foot ones of the 1880s... At the moment I'm mostly focusing on stock which will be suitable for my own layout, when it finally gets built! However I'll then work on expanding the range. Actually, Roxey Mouldings seems to cover both the 48' and the 56' types formerly produced by PC (with the exception of the clerestory diner). Of those examples given below, the 14 1/2 set coaches are all produced by Roxey Mouldings. The 56' corridor and non-corridor coaches were formerly produced by PC, but Roxey also produce both the 56' corridors and non-corridors, which I had not appreciated until I checked just now. The 1910 non-corridor sets combine 56' and 48' types. I don't believe any one models the 42' Third and 45' Compo exist in either original form or as rebuilt as brakes in 1909-10. Hence my continual hints! You could do both as-built and re-built and keep us both happy! 1898 ‘Four and a half’ non-corridor coach sets: D688 30’ 6-wheel Full Brake / D712 48’ 6-Lav. Tri-Compo (1897) / D650 48’ 2-Lav. Tri-Compo (1896) D772/848 48’ Third (1894) / D606 48’ Brake Third (1896) 1904-1911, Corridor mainline express stock: D1227 56’ Brake Third / D1226 (Dia. 21) 56’ Third / D1214(Dia. 282) 54’ Compo / D1227 56’ Brake Third NB: The Brake Thirds were produced in both right (SR Dia. 139) and left hand (SR Dia. 131) versions. May be run with Clerestory Dining Car. 1906-1910 Non-corridor cross country & mainline semi-fast 4-coach sets: D1446 56’ Lav. Brake Third / D1302 56’ Lav. Second-Third Compo / D1298 56’ Lav. First-Second Compo / D1446 56’ Lav. Brake Third NB: SR removed the D1302s from 1935 1909, Branch Line 2-Sets: D391 45' Brake Tri-Compo (ex-Tri Compo of 1892) / D110 42' Brake Third (ex-D511 Third of 1890) NB Both elliptical and arc-roof pairs formed. Some sets later strengthened with 48' coach to centre of set 1910-1912 Non-corridor 4-coach sets: D1936 56’ Lav. Brake Third / D650 48’ Lav. Compo / D758 48’ Lav. Compo / D1936 56’ Lav. Brake Third SR changed this to: D1936 (125) 56’ Lav. Brake Third / D285 58’ Lav. Comp (Maunsel rebuild) / D1936(125) 56’ Lav. Brake Third In addition to the Weddell books, the following magazines contained plans: D1936 56’ Non-Corr. Brake Third Model Railway Constructor, September 1975 D650 48’ Non-Corr. Compo Model Railway Constructor, September 1970 D758 48’ Non-Corr. Compo Model Railway Constructor, March 1973 D1446 56’ Non-Corr. Brake Third Model Railway Constructor, October 1974 D1302 56’ Non-Corr. Second/Third Compo Model Railway Constructor, October 1974 D1298 54’ Non-Corr. First/Second Compo Model Railway Constructor, October 1974 D1227 56’ Corr. Brake Third LH Model Railway Constructor, January 1974 D1226 56’ Corr. Third Model Railway Constructor, January 1974 D1214 54’ Corr. Compo Model Railway Constructor, January 1974 D1227 56’ Corr. Brake Third RH Model Railway Constructor, January 1974 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 11, 2019 Author Share Posted April 11, 2019 The second test print arrived yesterday, although unfortunately I've not had a chance to prime it yet. However, having looked under a microscope, while there is more of the fine detail I've drawn (door bump stops and solebar rivets), there's one more major issue - the parts don't fit together! On closer inspection with a set of Vernier calipers, it looks as though this extra detail comes with a cost - all of the parts have come out between 0.1 and 0.15mm over thick in the horizontal direction. This means that, for example, getting the seats into the body took quite a bit of delicate sanding, filing and scraping with a scalpel blade. The roof could not be persuaded to fit over the body end and compartment dividers, and in fact it snapped when I tried, even after shaving down the end as best as I could. I believe this is due to a limitation in the type of printer used (DLP rather than SLA). The material appears to be less flexible and less forgiving than the material used for the first print. Finally, prints from this supplier unfortunately cost about twice what the other supplier's prints do. Personally I'm more inclined to lean towards much cheaper prints that actually fit together with minimal extra work over parts that have detail only really visible under magnification but which would require redrawing of all components! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted April 11, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) The shorter the better, where bogie carriages are concerned - anything over 48 ft is a bit on the long side unless you're modelling a Scotch Express. The 42 ft / 43 ft / 45 ft carriages of the 1880s-90s are what one wants in abundance if modelling the early 20th century, pretty much whatever your line except the L&YR, whose 808 49 ft bogie thirds make a major dent in my case. A five carriage train in just 3 ft. I have a lazy question for the LSWR experts, about those 4 1/2 non-corridor sets - are their spheres of operation when new known? I have at the back of my mind my fantasy Earley - Loddon Bridge c. 1899 layout... (the main line into Reading, served by trains from two of the chief London stations). Edited April 11, 2019 by Compound2632 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 (edited) On 11/04/2019 at 09:52, Compound2632 said: The shorter the better, where bogie carriages are concerned - anything over 48 ft is a bit on the long side unless you're modelling a Scotch Express. The 42 ft / 43 ft / 45 ft carriages of the 1880s-90s are what one wants in abundance if modelling the early 20th century, pretty much whatever your line except the L&YR, whose 808 49 ft bogie thirds make a major dent in my case. A five carriage train in just 3 ft. I have a lazy question for the LSWR experts, about those 4 1/2 non-corridor sets - are their spheres of operation when new known? I have at the back of my mind my fantasy Earley - Loddon Bridge c. 1899 layout... (the main line into Reading, served by trains from two of the chief London stations). I don't know the answer to that. The constituent coaches of the 4 1/2 Sets were introduced progressively during the 1890s, and many would have remained loose coaches. Weddell's only picture is in SR days, showing the set as the front portion of a longer express. One thing for sure, these were long-distance mainline coaches, as the liberality of lavatories suggests. Non-lav bogies coaches of the late '80s and early '90s, generally shorter than 48', would have been cascaded to branch and shorter workings. My interest is that I can probably cobble a 4 1/2 set together from Roxey coaches. It's an attractive, and short, mainline formation and is a lazy route to modelling a through service for Ilfracombe. I envisage a Jubilee A12 taking one through Barnstaple Town as a reasonably prototypical way of representing a long-distance through service for my chosen time frame of 1907-1914. Through coaches can also be added to the branch set. In the Barnstaple Town topic, we've seen an example of 4 and 6-wheel stock, including GW coaches, on the Taw Bridge, but from c.1909, a branch set was formed of one 42' bogie and one 45' bogie (a third and composite converted to include brake compartments). I am hoping that these coaches in their original condition would be considered suitable for Linny's layout and hence tempt him to tackle them in their various versions! A couple of SW mainline coaches could be added to this branch set as a through portion to Ilfracombe, which is what I think is seen in the picture below. The two shorter, earlier, arc-roofed branch coaches can be seen to the right. The other two are clearly longer. The left-hand coach at the end of the train looks to me like a 48' Brake Third of 1896, of the type also seen in 4 1/2 sets. I do not think it is the 1899 Lav. Brake Third, as I do not detect a gap between the ultimate and penultimate passenger compartments. The other coach looks longer to me, and has duckets at the nearer end and uneven compartment spacing, with closer-spaced compartments at the left-hand end, followed by a space that is a lavatory compartment, followed by wider spaced compartments. I suggest that this is a 51' brake Tri-Composite of 1902, comprising 3 + 3 + 1 + Lav + 1 + 2 + 2 + Guard. Unlike the denizens of of my 4 1/2 Set, holiday makers travelling through to these coaches had no access to the loo unless they paid the First Class fare! The 48' Brake Third and the 51' Brake Tr-Composite make a really useful mainline coach through portion. So, again, I commend these to Linny! There is evidence of two GW bogie coaches worked through to Ilfracombe, one of which was a dining car IIRC. Perhaps yet another option for Linny! Edited April 12, 2019 by Edwardian Picture 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted April 12, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 12, 2019 Good carriage spotting! I'm poorly-informed about railways south of the river but I gather the familiar "cove" roof profile (to borrow a LNWR term) came in in the early 1890s, so these arc-roofed vehicles are from the 1880s but, if bogie, no earlier than that. They do seem to share the deep waist panel of the later carriages so for once the Ratio Midland Bain suburban sides might not be such a bad starting point... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 7 minutes ago, Compound2632 said: Good carriage spotting! I'm poorly-informed about railways south of the river but I gather the familiar "cove" roof profile (to borrow a LNWR term) came in in the early 1890s, so these arc-roofed vehicles are from the 1880s but, if bogie, no earlier than that. They do seem to share the deep waist panel of the later carriages so for once the Ratio Midland Bain suburban sides might not be such a bad starting point... The arc-roofed branch set comprises D391 45' Brake Tri-Compo (ex-Tri Compo of 1892) / D110 42' Brake Third (ex-D511 Third of 1890). The original coaches mark the transition in roof styles from "arc" to "elliptical", with both styles employed on these coaches. When the SW added brake compartments and formed them into 2-Sets, they took care to match the roof styles. Also of note is the fact that some rebuilds placed the duckets at the coach ends, as here, on the Ilfracombe set, but others had them set back from the ends, as with, for instance, the set sent to the Lyme Regis branch (also arc-roofed). The advantage of 3D printing over injection moudling - hint, hint - is that all such variations can be readily catered for.. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Nick C Posted April 14, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 14, 2019 On 10/04/2019 at 12:18, Skinnylinny said: but I'm rather struck by the 42-foot ones of the 1880s... Gra models do resin kits for the LSWR 42' stock - brake third, third and tricompo. I've got a bt on my 'round tuit' pile... https://www.gramodels.co.uk 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 14, 2019 Author Share Posted April 14, 2019 I attempted to buy them a while back but didn't actually manage to get any kits from them - I ordered in January of last year, and was repeatedly promised that the kits would be sent out within a week of several emails. At one point I got the impression he'd made my kits (already paid for!) and then sold them at a show. By April I'd had enough and it took a week for him to cancel. I personally wouldn't buy from him except in person at a show. A pity, because he seems to have a quite interesting range of kits! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwardian Posted April 14, 2019 Share Posted April 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Skinnylinny said: I attempted to buy them a while back but didn't actually manage to get any kits from them - I ordered in January of last year, and was repeatedly promised that the kits would be sent out within a week of several emails. At one point I got the impression he'd made my kits (already paid for!) and then sold them at a show. By April I'd had enough and it took a week for him to cancel. I personally wouldn't buy from him except in person at a show. A pity, because he seems to have a quite interesting range of kits! Well, he'll be at York Show next weekend .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 14, 2019 Author Share Posted April 14, 2019 Indeed, although I won't have any money to spend with him if I do manage to make it down south of the border. If it had been another month, after the first paycheque from the new job... Ah well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 20, 2019 Author Share Posted April 20, 2019 (edited) I am just about ready to throw my laptop out of the window today! I am trying to get my head around Autodesk Fusion 360 - a much more powerful piece of software than the SketchUp I've been using up until now, and much better suited to 3D printing. I just can't get it! It could be that I've been very tired lately, and my short-term memory is currently very poor, or possibly that I've just got so used to the way SketchUp works that anything new is strange and scary, but I'm just so frustrated right now. I'm convinced that even following the on-screen prompts I'm not getting things behaving how they shoul I have started out with what should be a very simple task - drawing a flat end of a carriage. So far I've been at it for an hour and a half and I've just managed to get the most basic shape down. {Edit: And then the program crashed without saving. Time to quit for tonight.} Edited April 20, 2019 by Skinnylinny 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 This is what I found when I gave 'Solidworks' a try - I was hopeless. Everyone else who was learning it as their first ever 3D CAD software took to it perfectly, but I was so used to doing things the Sketchup way that I just couldn't get my head around them. I was given a copy of this book which although I didn't read properly (and need to try and find) I seem to remember that it gave railway-specific step-by-step guides to Fusion 360, though I may be wrong - https://www.amazon.com/Printing-Laser-Cutting-Modelling-Companion/dp/0711038414 It might be worth a look? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 21, 2019 Author Share Posted April 21, 2019 (edited) I actually have a copy of that book. I shall have to have another rummage through it. Thanks for reminding me! Perhaps I should stop treating Fusion as though it does the same thing as SketchUp, and try to treat it as a completely new thing. I've woken up this morning feeling a little less hopeless. It was pointed out by a friend that even if I can't get my head around Fusion 360, I'm still capable of producing interesting and/or intricate things using Sketchup, and that there's nothing wrong with it as a piece of software. I think yesterday was just a very long day and the brain gremlins were getting to me. Edited April 21, 2019 by Skinnylinny 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 If you know how to use it, and you very clearly do (much more so than I do), then Sketchup is perfectly capable of fulfilling most of the needs of a railway modeller. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted April 21, 2019 Author Share Posted April 21, 2019 (edited) You will get there - I think I've had a few more years using it than you (from memory I've been using it since I was about 12 so... 15 years or so, on and off?) Practice makes perfect! Besides, there are still many things I find tricky in SketchUp (I still can't seem to draw up locos for example) as well as things which are just time consuming; apparently there are widgets for things like that in Fusion - things like "See this box? Make it hollow with 1mm thick walls!" in one click. These sound like excellent timesavers. Edited April 21, 2019 by Skinnylinny 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 Moving to a parametric modelling software is hard, but way more powerful once you get the hang of it. I've had the good fortune to learn on such systems - at time of writing I have 5 separate CAD programs on my laptop through student licences! And I can't use most of them... I'm starting to have a go at Fusion360, and most of my issues are finding where they've moved all the buttons to. Three commands in most CAD packages that I find most useful: - Thin Wall/Shell - the thing Linny so eloquently described - is great for making space inside models to add weight, or to reduce the amount of resin used, which reduces the cost - Mirror - if you set up a model with the centre of the model at the origin of the co-ordinate system, you only have to do half the amount of work you'd otherwise do. And you can mirror mirrors in different axis, to build things like bufferbeams etc. - Pattern - not just square or circular, but along sketch curves as well - great for rivet detail in particular 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium ianmaccormac Posted April 22, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 22, 2019 Hi Linny I started using Fusion a few weeks ago and found the Warwick university tutorials excellent to get me started. See https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/wmg/about/outreach/3d_design_printing/fusion_tutorials/ Cheers Ian in Blackpool 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now