CXW's NER & H&BR (and Industrial) Workbench

[CXW1]

9 hours ago, micknich2003 said:

Chris, when the time comes for your next project let me know, there's a good chance I will have drawings and pictures.

Mick, I will get back to H&BR matters shortly.

 

The fact I haven't got a layout means that I have spent a fair amount of time making engines (no time spent on track and signals etc). If I were to build a layout it would probably be 'mid to late 1920s' hence the locos I make being in LNER livery rather than H&BR or NER. In terms of the H&BR locos that made it past grouping I have already built a J75, J80, N13, J23 and J28 (plus the N12 on this thread). I think that this probably leaves a choice of N11, D24 or Q10 to do next.

 

The curvy shape of the footplate has put me off the D24, and the fact that the Q10 is an 0-8-0 has also slightly put me off.  I am well within my comfort zone making inside cylinder 0-6-0s (or 0-6-2s) so perhaps it is time to expand my horizons. I have got the HMRS Hull and Barnsley book which has some line drawings of locos, and the RCTS books are useful for dimensions, but any pictures you have would be great when I decide which to do. 

 

Pictures of the J75 and J80 have already appeared on Tony Wright's thread some time ago but I'll post some pictures of them on here (plus the others) when I get a chance. In the meantime here is the J23 when it had a run out on Buckingham a year or so ago. Tony Gee took the picture so I hope he doesn't mind me showing it. 

 

Thanks

Chris 

 

[micklner]

J28 is that the Millholme kit ? Any pictures please.

[t-b-g]

39 minutes ago, CXW1 said:

Mick, I will get back to H&BR matters shortly.

 

The fact I haven't got a layout means that I have spent a fair amount of time making engines (no time spent on track and signals etc). If I were to build a layout it would probably be 'mid to late 1920s' hence the locos I make being in LNER livery rather than H&BR or NER. In terms of the H&BR locos that made it past grouping I have already built a J75, J80, N13, J23 and J28 (plus the N12 on this thread). I think that this probably leaves a choice of N11, D24 or Q10 to do next.

 

The curvy shape of the footplate has put me off the D24, and the fact that the Q10 is an 0-8-0 has also slightly put me off.  I am well within my comfort zone making inside cylinder 0-6-0s (or 0-6-2s) so perhaps it is time to expand my horizons. I have got the HMRS Hull and Barnsley book which has some line drawings of locos, and the RCTS books are useful for dimensions, but any pictures you have would be great when I decide which to do. 

 

Pictures of the J75 and J80 have already appeared on Tony Wright's thread some time ago but I'll post some pictures of them on here (plus the others) when I get a chance. In the meantime here is the J23 when it had a run out on Buckingham a year or so ago. Tony Gee took the picture so I hope he doesn't mind me showing it. 

 

Thanks

Chris 

 

 

No problem with that Chris. I am just happy to see your lovely locos reaching a wider audience!

[CXW1]

29 minutes ago, micklner said:

J28 is that the Millholme kit ? Any pictures please.

No - the J28 is scratchbuilt. I will take a picture of it later today when 'working at home' allows. The Millholme kit has always looked 'too dumpy' (if you know what I mean) on the few occasions that I have seen one - almost a cross between a J23 and J28 - and doesn't seem to quite catch the longer and slender proportions of a J28. I may be wrong and it could be dimensionally perfect of course. 

 

Thanks

 

Chris 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2020 by CXW1
Spelling

[micknich2003]

Chris, I have not personally checked but a good source tells me the Milholme kit is an "Hybrid"   

[CXW1]

7 minutes ago, micknich2003 said:

Chris, I have not personally checked but a good source tells me the Milholme kit is an "Hybrid"   

 

Perhaps it was originally designed to fit a Hornby Jinty chassis or similar? I seem to remember from when I built my J28 that it seemed to have a very long wheelbase compared to many other 0-6-0s. 

[CXW1]

Here are a couple of J28 pictures as promised. 

 

Scratchbuilt using my usual method of gearbox on the rigid rear axle with hornblocks on the middle and front axles. It has a High Level Loadhauler gearbox and a Mitsumi motor mounted vertically in the firebox. Coupling rods are Alan Gibson 'universals' and have been made up to fit - they were just long enough. I think I acquired the chimney from Stevenson Carriages (who own Millholme) at a show, so this is possibly the only part from their kit that I have used. 

 

Hopefully I have captured the long and fairly low profile of the prototype. 

 

 

[micklner]

6 hours ago, micknich2003 said:

Chris, I have not personally checked but a good source tells me the Milholme kit is an "Hybrid"   

Mick ,

        Is that similar to a Dogs dinner ? or what? I have never seen a photo of one.

[CXW1]

Spent an enjoyable couple of hours making a 3-D printed rectangular tar wagon. It's a bit small though.

 

It will end up living on Lauri2mil's impressive 2mm finescale Yeovil Town layout.

 

The tar wagon uses an etched underframe, wheels and buffers from the 2MM Association, and I believe that the 3-D printed body was an association member's own project from a few years ago - not sure of the full details. 

 

 

 

[t-b-g]

I hadn't realised that Laurie had roped you in/you had volunteered (delete as appropriate!) to do something towards Yeovil.

 

That looks fantastic. I didn't realise it was 2mm until I saw it next to the loco and read the words. The photo of it by itself doesn't give the scale away at all.

 

Tony

[CXW1]

Tony, Laurie more or less dumped the content of his gloat box on me a couple of years ago.....

 

 

[CXW1]

In all seriousness Laurie has given me a number of 2mm wagon kits to make, some are already on the layout and a few are still left to do. He kindly gave me a 2mm LSWR G6 kit to have a go at a couple of months ago but I haven't plucked up the courage to make a start on it yet. It will appear on here when I do. 

 

[CXW1]

I mentioned a few days ago that I would post a few more pictures of my Hull and Barnsley locos when I got a chance. So, in order from top to bottom are:

 

·        J75 (ex H&BR G3)

·        J80 (ex H&BR G2)

·        N13 (ex H&BR F3).

 

The J80 is 95% finished and still needs some coal in the back. 

 

There isn't too much difference between the J75 and J80 - the J80 wheels were 6 inches larger in diameter and as far as I can see, that was about it. I personally think that the larger wheels give the J80 a more graceful appearance. 

 

 

 

[CXW1]

Now, it’s all well and good making models of Hull and Barnsley locos but at the end of the day, and as interesting as they are, surely it was the North Eastern Railway that built the real classy-looking stuff?

 

Apologies – only joking but I am originally from the North East and I can’t help being biased, so here are a couple of ex-NER engines to address the balance.

 

On a more ‘workbench’ theme, the X2 single wheeler (which has previously appeared elsewhere on RMWeb) has been in the workshop for some tinkering. This has been a right sod to get balanced and it is still not 100% (think 0-4-4 tank engine but 10 times worse). The centre of gravity is towards the rear and it more or less sits on the bogie. The front wheel bears very little load.

 

The front wheels are in hornblocks and originally had some thin brass wire providing some downward pressure and very light springing on the axle. The problem with this was the loco tended to gently ‘nod’ when moving forwards (backwards was not as noticeable). So, yesterday I swapped the springy wire for a more solid fixed beam of 1mm brass wire and the front axle can now rock/pivot on this whilst appearing to bear more of the loco’s weight. The nodding has been reduced but it has taken hours of trial and error to get this point and I’m not in any hurry to make another single wheeler.

 

Finally, can anyone recommend a nice realistic-looking screw coupling? The X2 and F8 below both have Smiths screw couplings which are basically a flat etch with what looks like a Hornby track pin stuck through the middle. The Romford screw couplings are beautifully made but I think they look slightly too big. Can anyone recommend something else?

 

Just noticed that the lamp handle on the F8 has disappeared/snapped off.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

[micklner]

Would the X2 be better with a fixed front wheel ?. At least it then comes a sort of 0-4-4 Tank and would perhaps stop the nodding effect. 

 

I am still surprised that a kit of the X Class in particular Aerolite has never been made. One day perhaps , the same for H&BR locos.

[CXW1]

8 minutes ago, micklner said:

Would the X2 be better with a fixed front wheel ?. At least it then comes a sort of 0-4-4 Tank and would perhaps stop the nodding effect. 

 

I am still surprised that a kit of the X Class in particular Aerolite has never been made. One day perhaps , the same for H&BR locos.

 

With the benefit of hindsight, possibly yes.

 

A conversation with a few people before I started the X2 suggested that the weight distribution needed to be towards the back with the centre of gravity in between the driving wheel and the bogie. I was concerned that by sticking the weight at the back I could end up with the front lifting up. My thoughts were that a sprung front wheel with downward pressure would hopefully make sure that it was always in contact with the track, and I wasn't confident drilling a hole in the frame for a front bearing and getting the smaller fixed front wheel at exactly the same level as the fixed driver. Advice suggested that the rear bogie needed to be load-bearing (rather than an 0-4-4 where you can stick all of the weight up front and have the bogie 'float' a little). It was definitely a learning curve. 

 

The latest modification seems to have worked and I'm 95% happy with it. If I was to start again I would probably do things differently, but I'm in no hurry to make another one. 

 

With all of the non-mainstream things that RTR manufacturers are announcing and releasing I would have thought that Aerolite would be an ideal candidate given that it still exists and can be measured and photographed. It would go nicely with the NER petrol electric railcar.

 

Thanks

 

Chris  

 

[CXW1]

While we are the subject of getting 2-2-4s, 0-4-4s and 2-4-2s to balance, the F8 (which runs pretty well) is set up with a gearbox and motor on a fixed rear driving axle.

 

The front driving wheel and the smaller leading front wheel are in High Level hornblocks with a compensation beam. The smaller trailing wheel is a pony truck to help it go around corners. I found that it was OK to have the front wheel in hornblocks with no side play because the wheelbase of the front three wheels is no longer than an 0-6-0 tank engine. In reality the the F8 has the same set-up as the 0-6-2 loco above - but on the F8 only the 2nd and 3rd axles are coupled. 

 

I'm not sure if this set-up for a 2-4-2 is meant to work, but it appears to. 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by CXW1
Spelling

[micknich2003]

Chris, here's a challenge for you, build a Class K in 4mm scale, the Kitson valve gear will be interesting. I have the Springhead drawings, so no excuse. As  the mood takes, I'm building one in Gauge 1, 1/32 scale

[CXW1]

10 hours ago, micknich2003 said:

Chris, here's a challenge for you, build a Class K in 4mm scale, the Kitson valve gear will be interesting. I have the Springhead drawings, so no excuse. As  the mood takes, I'm building one in Gauge 1, 1/32 scale

 

The class K would make a lovely model but I don't like the thought of that valve gear in 4mm scale - probably a fiddly job even in Gauge 1. I look forward to seeing your progress. Am I correct in thinking that the 'side tank' isn't a side tank and was something to shield the valve gear?

 

Also, do you have any pictures of the H&BR horsebox as sold by London Road Models? I started to make one last night. The instructions suggest that very little information is known about the prototype and only a couple of photographs exist. I have started to build mine with LNER clasp brakes (assuming they were fitted after the LNER took over) but the kit includes a more basic earlier brake. I was a little surprised that the kit as supplied can only be built rigid. I expected that it would have a rocking axle. However, it seems to be nice and square so I will leave it as it is. It is something to run on the layout that I haven't started yet. 

 

Here is a picture of progress to date.

 

 

 

 

[micknich2003]

Chris, yes, the Class K is actually a Well Tank, the "Tanks" are there to cover the motion. Nearest surviving example is the 0-4-0ST at Didcot, there is also a Tram version here in Hull.

 Attached, photo' of H&BRly Horse Box, only one I have on file. Yours, Mick.

[t-b-g]

2 minutes ago, micknich2003 said:

Chris, yes, the Class K is actually a Well Tank, the "Tanks" are there to cover the motion. Nearest surviving example is the 0-4-0ST at Didcot, there is also a Tram version here in Hull.

 Attached, photo' of H&BRly Horse Box, only one I have on file. Yours, Mick.

 

Not much help there with brake detail! I am struggling to see any at all. There is clearly a pipe but no sign of anything else. I am guessing that they were built with a primitive single block handbrake on the far RHS wheel, invisible in he photo, plus through pipes. No doubt this would have had to be upgraded later.

 

I did build one of these kits many years ago but I don't know where it is now. I recall it was shot down from a 7mm kit and many of the slots were not adjusted for the different metal thickness and ended up too big.  

[CXW1]

Mick, Tony - many thanks. There is a single block brake in the kit and it is suggested that this would have been fitted as built with an assumption that the LNER would have fitted something more modern, but no pictures of this modification exist. I haven't encountered any problems as yet other than the locating holes for the brake hangers (if fitting clasp brakes) were slightly too near the wheels - easily dealt with.

 

The etch says 'MSE' if this gives any clues away as to its origins. The W/M castings are good and the vacuum formed roof is the correct profile, so hopefully there won't be too many problems. The instructions suggest that the small grill on the bottom left corner is a 'dog box'. 

 

Not sure what colour it should be in LNER days. Info suggests they were all gone by the late 1920s so possibly just left as they were or painted brown? 

 

 

 

[t-b-g]

The MSE refers to Model Signal Engineering which is now part of the Wizard Models "empire" but the kit dates back to the days of the originator of the business, Derek Mundy. I believe they were done from hand drawn artwork as the go back a long time to pre CAD times.

 

I can't imagine that the brakes would have stayed as originally built and would have been upgraded either by the H&B or the LNER. As for colour, I have read comments that it could depend on the condition of the timber. If they were in good condition, wooden vehicles could remain varnished wood colour. If they had lots of repairs that would show up if just varnished, they got painted "teak brown". That was a general comment  and not about any specific vehicle.

 

So by the 1920s yours could be either but most likely painted a teak brown colour. They would not be painted the red oxide/brown that was used on fitted freight stock. I did a horse box that colour once and got put right very quickly!

 

[CXW1]

I've read a few debates on here about 'teak brown'. Let's not start another one.....

[t-b-g]

2 minutes ago, CXW1 said:

I've read a few debates on here about 'teak brown'. Let's not start another one.....

 

That is why I said "a teak brown"! I think there were many versions and modellers arguing about which one was "right" is quite funny.