Items of commercial interest for British H0

[whart57]

9 hours ago, Andy Reichert said:

 

What seems to be a much worse world wide problem is people not understanding wheel and track "standards" and altering them willy-nilly.

 

Andy

 

Not helped by the NMRA having proposed a wheel profile recommendation that proved impossible to manufacture to. RP25 has now been revised but the version that was up on their website for many years could not be made and still fit their own wheel standards. How many manufacturers described their wheels as RP25 during that period though.

[Andy Reichert]

10 hours ago, whart57 said:

 

Not helped by the NMRA having proposed a wheel profile recommendation that proved impossible to manufacture to. RP25 has now been revised but the version that was up on their website for many years could not be made and still fit their own wheel standards. How many manufacturers described their wheels as RP25 during that period though.

 

I've been out of the NMRA for several years, so I'm not sure of the issue. Could you explain this a little more please.

 

TIA
Andy

[whart57]

On 05/02/2020 at 19:27, Andy Reichert said:

 

I've been out of the NMRA for several years, so I'm not sure of the issue. Could you explain this a little more please.

 

TIA
Andy

 

It's quite arcane really, until you try to specify something for a non-railway modeller to make something.

 

The NMRA has standards for wheels and rail dimensions, and these are published on their website. It also has Recommended Practices or RPs which are also published. One of those RPs is RP25, which most of us will have heard of, which recommends a wheel profile. Now one might assume that the profile recommended by RP25 would fit the standards recommended elsewhere. And one would be wrong. The old RP25 described the profile in terms of radii at various points. The trouble is there were no dimensions that would fit both RP25 and the track and wheel standards. So clearly none of the manufacturers who stated their wheels were RP25 had checked.

 

How did this come about? Well I suspect it is because it is almost impossible to measure those radii without specialist equipment such as a shadow graph machine and until recently wheel manufacture used form tools to turn the profile. Then computer controlled lathes came along with the ability to shape metal accurately following a profile. Having tried to specify such a profile in terms of the parameters a computer requires I concluded it was impossible. And the NMRA revised RP25 shortly after though not through any action on my part.

Edited February 7, 2020 by whart57

[Andy Reichert]

On 06/02/2020 at 01:39, whart57 said:

 

The trouble is there were no dimensions that would fit both RP25 and the track and wheel standards.

 

 

 

This is the bit I don't understand. All standards, including the NMRA use the ""effective flange", which for better or worse, defines the flange width needed fit with proper clearances within the flange way.  The profile (for that standard and wheel size) either fits that or not, Once you have that determined, then the shape of the profile most on;y affects the possibility of rail climbing.

 

What am I missing?

 

Andy

 

 

 

 

[rocor]

On 30/01/2020 at 13:04, rue_d_etropal said:

Artitec arenot cheap, butmany of their models can be bought either kit or ready built. I wonder how much you would have to pay someone for a  scratchbuilt one to be made?!! look at prices for Langley OO scale vehicles(all kits) and Artitec prces don't seem too bad.

Woth while checking out old Lesney Matchbox commercial vehicles as they vary in size from 2mm up to 4mm scale. Just got a few, some are suitable for HO , some forTT3.

I have done some Scammells for HO a while back

http://www.rue-d-etropal.com/3D-printing/vehicles/3d_printed_vehicles.htm

 

I was looking through an old matchbox catalogue the other day (1967 edition),  In their catalogues they used to state the scale of each vehicle. The scales were very variable  (they had a limited number of standard size boxes). Quite a few of the commercial vehicles were around about HO scale though.

 

No.2 Dumper 1:86

No.3 Bedford tipper truck 1:85

No. 4 Stake truck 1:86

No.7 Ford refuse truck 1:85

No.11 Jumbo crane 1:85

No.13 Wreck truck

No.14 Ambulance 1:86

No.23 Trailer caravan 1:87

No.25 B.P. tanker 1:85

No.37 Cattle truck 1:86

No.39 Pontiac convertible 1:86

No.47 Ice-Cream van 1:85

No.48 Dumper truck 1:85

No.54 Cadillac ambulance 1:87

No.62 TV service van 1:86

No.67 Saladin armoured car 1:86

No.70 Grit spreader 1:85

 

These would provide a selection of vehicles for any HO modeller of the early Rail Blue era.

[whart57]

On 07/02/2020 at 18:21, Andy Reichert said:

 

This is the bit I don't understand. All standards, including the NMRA use the ""effective flange", which for better or worse, defines the flange width needed fit with proper clearances within the flange way.  The profile (for that standard and wheel size) either fits that or not, Once you have that determined, then the shape of the profile most on;y affects the possibility of rail climbing.

 

What am I missing?

 

Andy

 

 

 

 

 

The bit you are missing is that RP25 as was didn't define itself in that way. It defined itself as a set of radii, a fillet radius where the tread met the flange and then two radii for the top (or bottom) of the flange, one inside and one on the outside. What we found when trying to define a wheel profile for a turner who had no previous experience in making stuff for railway modellers is that if these radii were big enough to create an adequate flange depth the flange was too fat and if set for a maximum flange width the flange was not deep enough.

 

 

[47137]

 

 

I was looking through an old matchbox catalogue the other day (1967 edition),  In their catalogues they used to state the scale of each vehicle. The scales were very variable  (they had a limited number of standard size boxes). Quite a few of the commercial vehicles were around about HO scale though.

 

No.2 Dumper 1:86

...

No.70 Grit spreader 1:85

 

These would provide a selection of vehicles for any HO modeller of the early Rail Blue era.

 

 

Thanks for this.

 

I have a list of British road vehicles here, might be useful:

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blogs/entry/20284-british-road-vehicles-for-187-scale/

 

- Richard.

Edited July 28, 2021 by 47137

[Killian keane]

Ive done a ho E1 to fit a Dapol terrier chassis if that's any use

https://www.shapeways.com/product/8CTRJZ4WB/h0-scale-lbscr-e1?optionId=144975080&li=shop-inventory

[47137]

16 hours ago, Killian keane said:

Ive done a ho E1 to fit a Dapol terrier chassis if that's any use

https://www.shapeways.com/product/8CTRJZ4WB/h0-scale-lbscr-e1?optionId=144975080&li=shop-inventory

 

This looks a great deal easier than cutting and shutting the Hornby/Dapol body to make an E1 :-)

 

Would your E1 body fit the chassis of the new Hornby Terrier? This would make for a better-running model with a DCC socket too.

 

- Richard.

[Killian keane]

1 hour ago, 47137 said:

 

This looks a great deal easier than cutting and shutting the Hornby/Dapol body to make an E1 :-)

 

Would your E1 body fit the chassis of the new Hornby Terrier? This would make for a better-running model with a DCC socket too.

 

- Richard.

It wont fit the new one,  the fixings and what not being for the Dapol,  but if the new chassis is small enough to fit,  one should only have to cut off the mounting plugs on the print to make it fit 

[Allegheny1600]

Great news!

Lorenzo Ricotti has released his class 47 body-shell on i materialise;

https://i.materialise.com/en/shop/item/class47-shell-m1b1hb1?designer=lorenzo-ricotti&sortBy=mostResent&pageNumber=1&pageSize=9&index=0

 

To quote the site itself:

"This model represents a British Railways Class 47 shell in 1:87 / HO / H0 scale.

 

It represents a locomotive in a modern condition, with the high-intensity front light, the original 4-digits route code blanked out (slightly recessed variant) with two front light, front marker lights and the side steps for boiler roof access still in place."

 

Bogie side-frames, fuel tanks and other parts will be released separately in due course.

[47137]

Quote copied across from my layout thread (here):  

 

On 08/04/2020 at 12:40, Ian Simpson said:

... but that does remind me that Giles Barnabe converted the Dapol L&Y Pug into a very nice H0 industrial saddletank a few years ago. I think he just lowered the cab a bit.

 

Ian you are giving me ideas. I've bought a Hornby B2 Peckett, this model is almost H0-size out of the box. It will be a better runner than the Dapol pug.

 

Supposing I gave it a smaller cab with a longer bunker and shortened the chimney a bit, I think it would look very pleasing with a rake of H0 wagons. I may be stretching things a bit to write this but not too different to some Avonside locos.

 

Maybe we can see other possible conversions? 

 

- Richard.

 

[47137]

Two more photos of the B2 to show its innards and its size relative to a Hornby J94. The chassis includes a casting of the bottom half of the boiler (much like the Bachmann J72) so I suggest the B2 is a model to be rebuilt for H0, not merely cannibalised for its chassis.

 

- Richard.

 

 

[47137]

Scale Link are advertising the final batch of the USATC S100 kit by Alexander Models:

https://www.scalelink.co.uk/acatalog/Alexander_Models___HO__scale___Maquettes.html

 

Just the thing if you can't find quite enough satisfaction from a Fulgurex, REE or Rivarossi ready to run model :-)

 

- Richard.

[47137]

Modellbahn Union released some models of the German Railways 'Tcef' steel-bodied ferry van a few years ago. I bought a pair at the time and they are fine models.

 

There is a discussion of them on the RMweb here:

 

 - Richard.

[47137]

ArtiTec are a high-end manufacturer from the Netherlands, some British prototypes such as a bailey bridge:

https://www.aandhmodels.co.uk/ekmps/shops/aandhmodels/artitec-1870140-bailey-bridge-plastic-kit-57782-p.asp

 

I rather fancy one of these as a river crossing for my next layout.

 

- Richard.

[Ian Simpson]

I'm not sure whether an H0-only print of a London, Brighton and South Coast Railway van really counts as "an item of commercial interest". But Javier at Barm Model Productions has just produced a brilliant print of a LBSC 8 ton van: https://www.shapeways.com/product/WAB8K32EQ/lbscr-8-ton-covered-goods-wagon-ho-scale-only?optionId=163322813&li=shops  and I had to sing its praises somewhere.

 

I ordered the mid-range "Smooth Fine Detail" option and I was very impressed with the crisp, clean print that arrived:

 

There's no floor, roof or buffers. I used stiff plasticard to build up a mini-floor at each end so that I could attach Kadee couplers:

 

Wheels are Alan Gibson's 10.5 mm 8 spoke wagon wheels, which can be supplied on H0-friendly 24.5 mm axles. As the underframes are glued to the bottom of the van body, it was fairly easy to glue them in place so that the axles fit well and a very smooth-running vehicle is produced. The paint, which needs a second coat, is Phoenix Southern Railway Goods Brown, the roof is a piece of visiting card cut to shape, and I still need to source or make suitable buffers:

 

In summary, a wonderful print that really was a pleasure to build, and many thanks to Javier for such a marvelous item! Javier also does other LBSCR models in H0 options.

 

The Carringtons wagon behind the van in the last photo is a 2D print. I scanned a Merco sheet of 00 wagon sides (from Freestone Model Accessories at http://www.freestonemodel.co.uk/page25.htm), printed them out on white card at 87% and wrapped a set around a Lima 7 plank open. 

 

Edited August 5, 2020 by Ian Simpson
Edited for teh inevitable typo. All seems okay now ...

[47137]

I am glad the roof worked out ok, I especially like the reference to "H0-friendly axles".

 

I have seen Ian's "Charrington" wagon in the flesh, and the 3-D look fooled me until I actually touched it. 

 

- Richard.

Edited August 6, 2020 by 47137

[Andy Reichert]

 

 

 

I have no idea how close to scale and accuracy the Playcraft coaches are, but changing the wheels transformed the appearance.

 

Andy

[PatB]

1 hour ago, Andy Reichert said:

 

 

 

I have no idea how close to scale and accuracy the Playcraft coaches are, but changing the wheels transformed the appearance.

 

Andy

Nor have I, but, for what it's worth, the body looks like a Mk1 to me , whether accurate in detail or not. The bogie centres look a bit odd though. Did Playcraft squeeze them up a bit to make the model happier on their <R1 curves?

[Moxy]

5 hours ago, PatB said:

Nor have I, but, for what it's worth, the body looks like a Mk1 to me , whether accurate in detail or not. The bogie centres look a bit odd though. Did Playcraft squeeze them up a bit to make the model happier on their <R1 curves?

 

Yes it is supposed to be a Mark1.  The scaling of these is a bit variable.  I can't find my notes at the moment & the coaches are packed away, but from memory the height of the side is correct at 1:87, but the length of the side is to about 1:96 scale, so it's too short.  This was quite common amongst toy train manufacturers of the time.  While we will probably never know for certain why Playcraft did it, it was normally done, as you suggest, to get the coaches round train set curves.

 

Having said that it's too short, Playcraft have been quite clever in the way they have done it. They reduced the gap between each window by a small amount, making all the window spacings in the correct proportion for a Mark1, and from normal viewing distances on a layout it looks OK.  The problem comes when you try to mix them with the other range of British H0 coaches, made by Lima.  These are closer to scale length (although still not exactly to scale), mixing the two in the same train does show up the length deficiencies of the Playcraft coach! 

[47137]

The Playcraft Mk1 coaches have the guard's periscope on the brake vehicles, missing on the Lima models.

 

Unfortunately, everything else is better on the Lima models.

 

- Richard.

[HSB]

I picked up a Playcraft coach a few years ago but found the plastic had gone brittle. One of the bogie sides snapped when I was springing the wheels out!

 

[BernardTPM]

They're rather wide too, more or less 00 width. Back in the late '70s I did have a go a converting them into freelance Irish 1930s-50s style coaches where the prototypes often were 10 foot wide.

Edited August 12, 2020 by BernardTPM

[Ian Simpson]

I think the Playcraft coaches are a scale 57' long, which means they might work with Worsley Works' Mk 1 suburban (non-corridor) sides - http://www.worsleyworks.co.uk/1-87/1-87_Coach.htm?LMCL=r6eDwA

Totally agree with Andy, the wheels look amazing. Are they P87?

Edited August 12, 2020 by Ian Simpson