Wagonmaster Posted September 26, 2020 Share Posted September 26, 2020 56 minutes ago, Barry O said: Very flat sided...and is it based on a particular version of the Fell?? Baz I think I have agree. Prototype photographs show a slight angling in of the side panels from the waistline. It's not much and the EP photographs might not show it properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted September 26, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 26, 2020 1 hour ago, 'CHARD said: Oh no, what are you suggesting - that it came in more than one guise? Doesn't tie up with a particular build standard ..it had various guises. Could be interesting to see its length and width. Baz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jessy1692 Posted September 26, 2020 Share Posted September 26, 2020 3 hours ago, Tim Hall said: Indeed. I'm sitting by the front door waiting until it arrives...... Oh, wait, it'll be a while Itl be here before we know Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted September 26, 2020 Share Posted September 26, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Wagpnmaster said: I think I have agree. Prototype photographs show a slight angling in of the side panels from the waistline. It's not much and the EP photographs might not show it properly. I have here before me the original drawings of 10100; (purchased on disc from the NRM); and they show a continuous curved profile to the body sides throughout the section between the cabs. John Isherwood. PS. I think that this curved profile can be detected in the model, immediately behind the cabs where the curve abuts the flat cab and bonnet sides - one can see the step tapering off at the top and bottom of the sides. Edited September 26, 2020 by cctransuk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wagonmaster Posted September 26, 2020 Share Posted September 26, 2020 33 minutes ago, cctransuk said: I have here before me the original drawings of 10100; (purchased on disc from the NRM); and they show a continuous curved profile to the body sides throughout the section between the cabs. John Isherwood. PS. I think that this curved profile can be detected in the model, immediately behind the cabs where the curve abuts the flat cab and bonnet sides - one can see the step tapering off at the top and bottom of the sides. Thanks for that John. Yes, you can see the curved bodyside behind the cab handrail clearly in that photograph. Maybe I was expecting a more pronounced curve. It looks a bit more pronounced in the advert photograph, but that is probably a combination of angle and light. I'm sure KR Models have got it right as they may have access to the same drawings as you. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jessy1692 Posted September 26, 2020 Share Posted September 26, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, Barry O said: Very flat sided...and is it based on a particular version of the Fell?? Baz Now that you mention it Baz it does.. Edit, subsequent have shown a curve is there, the grey probably has flattened it somewhat. Edited September 26, 2020 by jessy1692 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted September 27, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 27, 2020 Front on view would show it better.. the GA in the NRM is not a particularly good one though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted September 27, 2020 Share Posted September 27, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Barry O said: .. the GA in the NRM is not a particularly good one though. In what respect? John Isherwood. Edited September 27, 2020 by cctransuk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Michael Edge Posted September 27, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 27, 2020 The one that Barry is referring to (in the OPC microfiche collection) has no dimensions on it. The detail drawings of 10100 at the NRM do not include body profiles and the crank drawing is missing - in their catalogue but they can't find it. I spent a long time at the NRM studying all these drawings to produce our kit. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted September 27, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 27, 2020 GAs are not always "as built" either..which is why you need to spend a lot of time and money getting a true representation of a real item in scale form. How do I know this? Years spent in land/sea and air defence companies... Baz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted September 27, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 27, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Barry O said: GAs are not always "as built" either..which is why you need to spend a lot of time and money getting a true representation of a real item in scale form. How do I know this? Years spent in land/sea and air defence companies... Baz Agree absolutely (not that I worked in the defence industry) but railway company GAs have a nasty tendency to differ from what the works actually built as photos often prove. Of course the even greater problem with the Fell was the various mods it received over its life to try to deal with some of its problems - particularly those inherent to a multi-engined loco. Edited September 27, 2020 by The Stationmaster 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted September 27, 2020 Share Posted September 27, 2020 20 minutes ago, Michael Edge said: The one that Barry is referring to (in the OPC microfiche collection) has no dimensions on it. The detail drawings of 10100 at the NRM do not include body profiles and the crank drawing is missing - in their catalogue but they can't find it. I spent a long time at the NRM studying all these drawings to produce our kit. The chassis drawing that the NRM Search Engine sent to me is smothered in dimensions and is very detailed; (too detailed for modelling purposes)? It includes numerous sections, which extend to above the body waistline. The other drawing does not have dimensions and is, I assume, the GA to which you refer. John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted September 27, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 27, 2020 9 minutes ago, cctransuk said: The chassis drawing that the NRM Search Engine sent to me is smothered in dimensions and is very detailed; (too detailed for modelling purposes)? It includes numerous sections, which extend to above the body waistline. The other drawing does not have dimensions and is, I assume, the GA to which you refer. John Isherwood. It would be interesting to know if the chassis design was altered at any time (or modified in service)? The Fell equalled the worst minimum curving radius of any main line diesel loco built for BR (only equalled by the 'Peaks'/Class 44/45/46) and even the tight curve sensitive EE Type 4/Class 40 had a better minimum radius capability than the Fell despite its overall wheelbase being 19'11" longer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Michael Edge Posted September 27, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 27, 2020 1 hour ago, cctransuk said: The chassis drawing that the NRM Search Engine sent to me is smothered in dimensions and is very detailed; (too detailed for modelling purposes)? It includes numerous sections, which extend to above the body waistline. The other drawing does not have dimensions and is, I assume, the GA to which you refer. John Isherwood. That's from the Derby collection, I looked at everything they had from this. These are the dimensioned drawings which were normally used to set out the parts to build the loco, GAs were often just illustrations and have very much gone out of fashion more recently - they certainly didn't exist for the 325s when I was researching that job (as they were being built at Litchurch Lane). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Darius43 Posted October 2, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2020 (edited) Edited - old news. Edited October 2, 2020 by Darius43 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph benjamin Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 I'm pleased to see it has large and small fly cranks which some kit makers missed. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted October 19, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 19, 2020 23 minutes ago, joseph benjamin said: I'm pleased to see it has large and small fly cranks which some kit makers missed. not sure what you mean ? Baz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pre Grouping fan Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 37 minutes ago, Barry O said: not sure what you mean ? Baz There's 2 different sizes of flycrank, the two outside ones are smaller than the middle ones 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted October 20, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 20, 2020 could be interesting getting the cranks to work .... Baz 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted October 20, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2020 1 hour ago, Barry O said: could be interesting getting the cranks to work .... I believe there may be one or two on RMweb. 18 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted October 20, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 20, 2020 If the shape of the cranks is what you are talking about..yes the inner pair had more waisted cranks (could be to do with force balancing) at least when the middle coupling rods were removed. My eyes can't see that level of detail on the model..but you can get the cranks shape correct on the JE Model.. Baz 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Michael Edge Posted October 20, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 20, 2020 I think he means that the cranks on the inner axles are thicker, they are the same shape and obviously the same crankthrow. As I've mentioned before though the crank drawings were missing from the NRM, they were in their list but couldn't be located. You can alter the thickness with our kit by using fewer laminations for the outer axles. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Michael Edge Posted October 21, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 21, 2020 Apologies for this but it does seem that I made a mistake here. In the absence of the relevant drawing I drew the crank shape from a side on photograph, picking on one of the centre ones, and then simply repeated this without thinking. Looking at it again this morning the difference in size is very marked (they are thinner as well) so I've re-drawn them - we'll have to do a supplementary etch for this. 5 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted October 21, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2020 Ive not seen a picture of the fell with two panels and two grills on the nose at each end as per the EP. I know the fell had a number of mods at different times, can anyone confirm if its correct, or which period it was like this ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Steven B Posted October 21, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 21, 2020 (edited) 1951 if the caption on this photo (not mine!) is to be believed: 15227 and 10100 at Eastbourne for the 1951 International Timetable Conference by Charlie Verrall, on Flickr Although it looks to have only two horns on the cab roof rather than four on the prototype model. Stevnen B. Edited October 21, 2020 by Steven B 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts