wainwright1 Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 That is very interesting. Is it on a Peckett chassis ? Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted November 30, 2020 Author Share Posted November 30, 2020 38 minutes ago, wainwright1 said: That is very interesting. Is it on a Peckett chassis ? It's on the new Hornby Terrier chassis. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 4, 2020 Author Share Posted December 4, 2020 Slightly odd post this morning, so here goes: I've recently come into possession of this cable drum, which I intend to make into a table of some kind - but that's not the interesting bit. The interesting bit is that it occurs to me that I might be able to fit a circle of track, about 450mm diameter, on the lower level. This could give me somewhere to run in small locos (I don't have a continuous run layout) and if I add some scenery, might help it look a bit less like someone's just plonked a cable drum on some legs and called it a day... The obvious next step is to see if a Peckett or Pug and some wagons could happily negotiate that tight a radius, but unfortunately I don't have enough flexitrack to test this out at the moment. What do we think? Nice little feature layout or am I barking up the wrong tree? 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schooner Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 (edited) Grear idea! Who am I to give advice...but... 450mm radius is, I understand, still on the tight side for a fixed-radius flexitrack curve. Peco etc 2nd radius is 438mm, is that too small for the drum? Either way, the radius should be fine for your lovely little locos and wagons EDIT: Apologies, misread. Edited December 4, 2020 by Schooner Morning brain 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 4, 2020 Author Share Posted December 4, 2020 I may have mistyped somewhere there, I meant 450mm diameter, or 225mm radius... which is very tight for OO! It would very much be 0-4-0s only! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schooner Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 Ah, no, you said the right thing, I understood the wrong thing...more coffee required... To make up for it, these might be of use: I'm not able to watch them and can't remember the answer, but it's small. It certainly made me feel much happier about my proposed curves on a Docklands layout! Hope this is a bit more help than the previous effort! Schooner 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 4, 2020 Author Share Posted December 4, 2020 Having a look at that, the chap uses a 20" diameter circle, or 500mm(ish), so not far off what I need, reason to be cautiously hopeful. This might have to be a Christmas experiment when I can next get access to some of my deep storage (also knows as the parents' loft) 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaZagato Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 N gauge 1st radius is 230mm. At 225, you're inside that. You might be a little too tight. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 4, 2020 Author Share Posted December 4, 2020 3 hours ago, AlfaZagato said: N gauge 1st radius is 230mm. At 225, you're inside that. You might be a little too tight. I might well be. Still think it's worth a test though! If it works, it will really be a novelty, not a serious layout so I'm not bothered by prototypical inaccuracy. In the meantime, I've finally got round to crewing four more locos. I don't really enjoy figure painting, so tend to do them in batches! 12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 6, 2020 Author Share Posted December 6, 2020 Progress on the tiny Ruston loco, very fiddly to paint all the black! Now I've "just" got to see if I can get the top-mounted motion working... 9 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 10, 2020 Author Share Posted December 10, 2020 A little while back, we had a conversation going about whether I could make a tiny circle of track on a cable drum... we may now be closer to an answer! 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpeffers Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 It should definitely be possible. Whether it proves practical, particularly for the purpose of a test track/running in circuit, is probably more the question. Two considerations from my brief, (semi-)related experience trying to get a similar radius of curve to work reliably in N gauge: I believe flexitrack tends to experience a bit of gauge tightening if you try and bend it through quite a harsh radius - essentially the sleepers splay out slightly away from perpendicular to the rails. This is the opposite of what you want in this scenario - if anything, a bit of gauge easing would be better to accommodate the relatively large angle of attack between the fixed-wheelbase wheels and the outer running rail. It’s also difficult (although not impossible) to achieve a nice constant radius of curvature which would improve running. Derailments will almost invariably be to the outside of the circle - intuitive really. Maximising your radius of curvature should give you the best running, but something around the edge of up drum to stop anything leaping into the void below definitely advisable. It’s a neat idea if you can get it to work. I can think of a few avenues to explore depending on how much time/effort/resource you want to invest. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 11, 2020 Author Share Posted December 11, 2020 57 minutes ago, mpeffers said: It should definitely be possible. Whether it proves practical, particularly for the purpose of a test track/running in circuit, is probably more the question. Two considerations from my brief, (semi-)related experience trying to get a similar radius of curve to work reliably in N gauge: I believe flexitrack tends to experience a bit of gauge tightening if you try and bend it through quite a harsh radius - essentially the sleepers splay out slightly away from perpendicular to the rails. This is the opposite of what you want in this scenario - if anything, a bit of gauge easing would be better to accommodate the relatively large angle of attack between the fixed-wheelbase wheels and the outer running rail. It’s also difficult (although not impossible) to achieve a nice constant radius of curvature which would improve running. Derailments will almost invariably be to the outside of the circle - intuitive really. Maximising your radius of curvature should give you the best running, but something around the edge of up drum to stop anything leaping into the void below definitely advisable. It’s a neat idea if you can get it to work. I can think of a few avenues to explore depending on how much time/effort/resource you want to invest. It'll be more of a static thing really, I doubt the railway bit will get used that often. The plan is to have the top surface as a table, with the circle of track underneath with a bit of scenery round it to make it look nice. Kind of like a shelf diorama, but circular - though I may as well make it able to run! I didn't show it in the video, but a Pug runs fine on it too, which is the biggest thing I'm likely to use on it, and also has fairly chunky flanges which I guess would be more likely to derail on harsh curves than smaller modern ones. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 20, 2020 Author Share Posted December 20, 2020 I've had to dig out tiny bits of wire embedded in my fingers more often than I would have liked today, but I think the result was worth it... 10 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted December 20, 2020 Share Posted December 20, 2020 That is amazing! Damned noisy though. 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 20, 2020 Author Share Posted December 20, 2020 2 hours ago, Ruston said: That is amazing! Damned noisy though. It is rather. It's not as bad in real life, but still loud - when I first assembled it it was about the same as any RTR loco, but I inadvertently messed up the mesh while adjusting the quartering. Rather than disassemble and start from scratch I added a bit of a bodge. Annoying, but I can live with it! 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 25, 2020 Author Share Posted December 25, 2020 Merry Christmas all! I was supposed to add a nice festive green and red loco here, but I didn't quite make enough progress on that front... 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 30, 2020 Author Share Posted December 30, 2020 (edited) Motivation for real modelling has been a bit lacking lately, but I've done some CAD - while it was literally modelling done while sat on an armchair, I feel it doesn't quite fit the normal definition of 'armchair modelling'. Edited December 30, 2020 by TurboSnail 8 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfaZagato Posted December 30, 2020 Share Posted December 30, 2020 Don't let the nonsense coming from the Pugbash thread of late drag you down. What you're doing is still real modelling. 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 30, 2020 Author Share Posted December 30, 2020 12 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said: Don't let the nonsense coming from the Pugbash thread of late drag you down. What you're doing is still real modelling. Thanks! That sort of thing doesn't bother me too much really, I'm happy doing what I'm doing. But on that note, I do find that CAD modelling and physical modelling require different moods to do. I find CAD modelling more of an active thing, where I can do lots of background research, think about the engineering challenges and develop my skills. Physical modelling tends to get done when I feel more relaxed and want to get the satisfaction of making something with my hands. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted December 30, 2020 Share Posted December 30, 2020 2 hours ago, TurboSnail said: Motivation for real modelling has been a bit lacking lately, but I've done some CAD - while it was literally modelling done while sat on an armchair, I feel it doesn't quite fit the normal definition of 'armchair modelling'. Is that based on anything in particular? It reminds me of Boulton's water tube boilered 0-4-0ST. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboSnail Posted December 31, 2020 Author Share Posted December 31, 2020 13 hours ago, Ruston said: Is that based on anything in particular? It reminds me of Boulton's water tube boilered 0-4-0ST. It is indeed one of Boulton's, plan 7 in the Sharman drawings book. There will be a few errors here and there as all I've got to work from are the chassis dimensions (3ft wheels, 5ft 6in wheelbase) and that one side-on plan. But if I've got it close enough that you can recognise it, I think that's a promising start! 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted December 31, 2020 Share Posted December 31, 2020 39 minutes ago, TurboSnail said: It is indeed one of Boulton's, plan 7 in the Sharman drawings book. There will be a few errors here and there as all I've got to work from are the chassis dimensions (3ft wheels, 5ft 6in wheelbase) and that one side-on plan. But if I've got it close enough that you can recognise it, I think that's a promising start! Excellent! Before you finalise the design, and print it, I think the boiler backhead may need a little alteration. I seem to have misplaced my copy of The Chronicles but there is some infomation about the boilers in there and I think that the firebox and backhead arrangements were different to the norm. Perhaps someone else with a copy can advise? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relaxinghobby Posted December 31, 2020 Share Posted December 31, 2020 Boulton's water-tube boiler. Is that his own patent design he came up with to make DIY boilers to fit into his modified and adapted second hand loco's ? Something he could build in his own yard and save the expense of buying Stephenson fire tube boilers from the big manufacturers? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted December 31, 2020 Share Posted December 31, 2020 I found it and have photographed the relevant drawing. You need flange and and end plate with a circular row of rivets around the edge and four stays, two either side of the regulator. Then a smaller circular row of smaller rivets that hold the flue in. I don;t know for a fact but I suspect the firehole doors may have looked more like the set up on a Lancashire boiler than the usual locomotive boiler doors that you have given it. No firebox. These drawings may have been for one of the other water tube boilered locomotives, so the scale may not apply. 3 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