ScotRail 1987/88 Workbench

[jono26]

A couple of pictures of the two coaches being shunted on the layout to test the kadee spacing which worked fine. 

Jonathan

[dj_crisp]

They're looking proper smart! Fantastic modelling

 

Will

[jono26]

47651 and 47654
Some time ago I was working on two Heljan class 47 large logo bodies and under frames which have not had a lot of focus after problems with the first coat of gloss varnish. Having sourced new varnish these have now progressed to a finished state after several more weeks of effort. As this was a first full respray of large logo I am reasonably OK with how they turned out and learned a lot in the process ready for next time.
The motors, drive mechanism and bogies all got stripped down and cleaned. I removed the bogie mounted coupling pocket and made up a plasticard mount to fit behind the buffer beam ready to take a 146 (long) kadee. I chopped down draft box so it wouldn't foul the bogies which was then glued on to the new mounting point, (picture below) the lid was secured in place with a small screw. To get the kadee at the correct height I glued in a small strip of 1 thou /0.25mm plasticard on the forward edge of the lid to push up the 146 arm - spot on. With this set up I was able to add all the ETH sockets and pipe work to the buffer beams with no interference from the kadee in operation.

These are the first two Eastfield 47's for the layout both have long range tanks fitted and will complement the forthcoming sleeper rake. These are wonderfully smooth runners now compared to before thanks to the many hours stripping down the motor, gears and cleaning the wheels and pick ups.

These two locos will be the first recipients of weathering when I get the time so will make another work bench appearance sometime in the future.

 

Jonathan

[jono26]

Despite many hours pouring over photos and getting the two 47’s close to prototype I made one very large oversight. Either everyone is too polite or like me you hadn’t noticed but I am very grateful to a wise more experienced member of our forum community for setting me straight and his admission to making the same mistake. Anyway, here is 47651 now revised with the necessary corrections, 47654 is still on the work bench waiting on paint.

 

In case you are still wondering, it is the cut away buffer beam/lower cab side edge which I corrected with a 1mm plasticard section which was templated so I could reproduce 8 identical parts for the two bodies. 

This looks OK now so I can relax and move on to the next project

 

[turbos]

Like Eddie R, I hadn’t noticed, but I’m a bit face blind when it comes to 47’s. Nice work nonetheless.

Brian.

[55020]

I tried to spot the difference.  I think I know where you've modified things, but looking at these two photos of 651 and 654, is there actually a difference?
 

 

 

Not my photos, so credit due to Redhill Bull and Roddy MacPhee.

 

 

Steve

[GordonC]

1 hour ago, 55020 said:

I tried to spot the difference.  I think I know where you've modified things, but looking at these two photos of 651 and 654, is there actually a difference?
 

 

 

Not my photos, so credit due to Redhill Bull and Roddy MacPhee.

 

 

Steve

 

Its the base model that was used in the first place for those locos - it had been Crewe-cut along the lower edge the cabsides. Looks a very neat job to fill that in again!

 

[55020]

On 17/08/2020 at 17:31, GordonC said:

 

Its the base model that was used in the first place for those locos - it had been Crewe-cut along the lower edge the cabsides. Looks a very neat job to fill that in again!

 

 

That's what I figured we were talking about, but don't the photos show both locos with the subtle cut-away?  Therefore no filling was required.

 

 

[jono26]

Hopefully this should clear up any confusion over the cut away lower cab side.

My base model for these two 47's was 47805 in swallow livery which was a later variant with the cut away lower cab side and the buffer beam cowl removed. I used Heljan 47805 as this had the long range tanks and correct boiler Clayton Mk2 port/plates so I thought I only needed to replace the buffer beams with the cowl version. In my time period 87/88 47805 carried the number 47650 and was one of 16 47's based at Eastfield with long range tanks hence making a good base of 651/654. The picture on the right above is how the cab should look in 87/88, only a very small difference but stands out a mile when you know and when it is alongside other 47's.

 

Jonathan

[GordonC]

On 18/08/2020 at 17:59, 55020 said:

 

That's what I figured we were talking about, but don't the photos show both locos with the subtle cut-away?  Therefore no filling was required.

 

 

 

Those photos show non-cut away cabsides and bufferbeam cowling in place. The cut-away is much less subtle compared to below which have the cut-away cabsides and missing bufferbeam cowling.

 

 

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by GordonC
clarified reference to earlier photos and attached photo

[55020]

9 hours ago, GordonC said:

 

The photos show non-cut away cabsides and bufferbeam cowling in place. The cut-away is much less subtle

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for persevering, I see that now.

 

 

Steve

[tractor_37260]

On 18/08/2020 at 19:51, jono26 said:

Hopefully this should clear up any confusion over the cut away lower cab side.

My base model for these two 47's was 47805 in swallow livery which was a later variant with the cut away lower cab side and the buffer beam cowl removed. I used Heljan 47805 as this had the long range tanks and correct boiler Clayton Mk2 port/plates so I thought I only needed to replace the buffer beams with the cowl version. In my time period 87/88 47805 carried the number 47650 and was one of 16 47's based at Eastfield with long range tanks hence making a good base of 651/654. The picture on the right above is how the cab should look in 87/88, only a very small difference but stands out a mile when you know and when it is alongside other 47's.

 

Jonathan

 

Not an easy fix Jono, but looks like you aced it ! Top job.   The photo above of the Swallow 47's clearly shows the difference. 

 

Regards

Ken

 

 

 

 

 

 

[turbos]

 

[Grizz]

Afternoon all. Please forgive me if I am on the wrong thread for this but I need some advice as I can’t seem to find anything that relates to fitting Extreme Etchings Laserglaze. More specifically to couple of Lima BR MK2F coaches, one TSO in blue and grey, number 5940. The other used to be a Lima BR Scotrail liveried FO but is now a fictitious MK2 sleeper in Blue and Grey, but still needs to have the laser glazing fitted. Got the roofs of both without breaking them which was a miracle. 
 

The others are more straight forward as they are Airfix / Mainline / Dapol MK2Ds, variously painted in B&G, Intercity Exec, and Swallow. They just require a coat of gloss varnish for the transfers and then when all is sprayed over with Matt varnish they can be also fitted with the Laserglaze. Any tips or do’s or don’ts would be grateful appreciated.

 

[crompton 33]

I've got to fit Laserglaze to a class 73. What i've been told is that you use varnish to hold them in.

[billywhizz]

Hi, I have used “Johnson’s Klear” when fitting Laser Glaze to locos. You can also use gloss varnish or Deluxe Materials Glue n Glaze. 
if you look closely at the glazing for the coaches, you can see a very slight bevel around the edge so in theory the piece of glazing will only fit in one way. 
hope that helps. 
Regards,

Bill. 

Edited February 27, 2021 by billywhizz
Add further fitting info

[GordonC]

Laser glaze should be a pretty tight fit and if you look at the edges, they're not straight but angled. The glazing packs may be different between Airfix/Mainline/Dapol Mk2Ds and Lima Mk2Fs so that they do fit exactly.

 

Try test fitting the windows dry before using something like gloss varnish to secure in position permanently

[turbos]

Some recent photos of Jon’s ‘Finnsbay’ model railway are now up on its thread.

His widow Sue has decided ‘Finnsbay’ will be dismantled and most items sold.

 

Brian.