Jump to content

East Barnet Joint Stock - a workbench...


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

Hello again Chas. PB wire snapped quite easily when I tried to do the things with it that I happily do with N/S wire. I have sometimes wondered if there's a coating on N/S wire that needs to rub off, as the pickups work terribly at first, and then seem to bed in.

Yep, I had one PB wire snap and had to replace, but I realised that by planning the bends a little more carefully I should be able to avoid that! Not sure about NS wire bedding in though, that's interesting. I shouldn't have thought it had any coating if it's described simply as plain NS wire...?

37 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

Pivoted on the whatsit at the back is the right way to do it, so carry on!    

Excellent: thank you, will do :good:.

37 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

Re brake hangers/shoes, don't worry about compensation and play - they'll be OK. I think Morgan / Gilbert recommends a piece of thin card between wheel and shoe. Any more looks awful. You can chamfer the shoes on their rear edge. 

 

Many kits get the position of the holes for the top cross wire wrong, and hangers at the wrong angle can spoil the look of a loco. You can either fudge it by bending the wires fore-wards (as opposed to aft-wards), or make yourself a jig to drill the hole at the correct place. The jig would have to holes: one you insert a piece of wire though, and through the frames, and the second hole you drill through into the frames. Filing the blocks can sometimes work, as long as you don't lose the character of the blocks.    

What concerns me is that at maximum sideplay to one side on a tight curve, while the shoes may not touch the tyres, the backs of them may touch the fronts of the wheel flanges. It's a tough one because I know how poor it can look if the shoes are too far away, but I may have to accept a littel compromise that in the cause of better running.

 

Totally agree though that the wrong hanger angle can look bad and that's the priority I think, as that's the aspect of the brakes that's most prominent in normal viewing. I think it'll work with a combination of ever so slightly bending the wires fore-wards as you say, plus the shoe filing - I'd prefer not to start moving the top cross wires and their holes (and flanges) if possible, though the jig you describe is a very useful tip. On the character of the blocks: having filed two of them to where they can sit better, they now look more like those on the Isinglass drawing, where originally they look quite a bit wider.

 

Thank you for your help once again!

Edited by Chas Levin
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chas Levin said:

Yep, I had one PB wire snap and had to replace, but I realised that by planning the bends a little more carefully I should be able to avoid that! Not sure about NS wire bedding in though, that's interesting. I shouldn't have thought it had any coating if it's described simply as plain NS wire...?

Excellent: thank you, will do :good:.

What concerns me is that at maximum sideplay to one side on a tight curve, while the shoes may not touch the tyres, the backs of them may touch the fronts of the wheel flanges. It's a tough one because I know how poor it can look if the shoes are too far away, but I may have to accept a littel compromise that in the cause of better running.

 

Totally agree though that the wrong hanger angle can look bad and that's the priority I think, as that's the aspect of the brakes that's most prominent in normal viewing. I think it'll work with a combination of ever so slightly bending the wires fore-wards as you say, plus the shoe filing - I'd prefer not to start moving the top cross wires and their holes (and flanges) if possible, though the jig you describe is a very useful tip. On the character of the blocks: having filed two of them to where they can sit better, they now look more like those on the Isinglass drawing, where originally they look quite a bit wider.

 

Thank you for your help once again!

Good to hear, Chas - you don't want to start drilling new holes if you don't have to, though I wish more people would! 

 

It might be the sideplay that's the problem. Why do you need so much - or any? - this is a short wheelbase 0-4-0 with bogies - you shouldn't need any sideplay - do you? If you agree that the sideplay can be done away with, just file some slots in 1/8 washers so that you can insert them with the wheels on - or are you using [email protected]#fords?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

it's a bit of a job finding the right position for the second hole, but it's often 1mm away from the original!

Ha, yes, just seen your edit: that's what concerns me about trying to move those holes and wires: 1mm isn't a lot of distance, between two 0.7mm holes and trying to re-drill replacement holes so close can be a bit tricky - I've sometimes got into trouble, with wandering drills leading to inaccuracy in height, or the new hole 'bleeding' into the original one etc. I don't think it will visible if the wires are slightly bent fore-wards as it's under the footplate, and at the moment, although they're a little too far aft, they're accurate and at a uniform - and correct - height.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chas Levin said:

Ha, yes, just seen your edit: that's what concerns me about trying to move those holes and wires: 1mm isn't a lot of distance, between two 0.7mm holes and trying to re-drill replacement holes so close can be a bit tricky - I've sometimes got into trouble, with wandering drills leading to inaccuracy in height, or the new hole 'bleeding' into the original one etc. I don't think it will visible if the wires are slightly bent fore-wards as it's under the footplate, and at the moment, although they're a little too far aft, they're accurate and at a uniform - and correct - height.

Sounds good. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Daddyman said:

Good to hear, Chas - you don't want to start drilling new holes if you don't have to, though I wish more people would! 

 

It might be the sideplay that's the problem. Why do you need so much - or any? - this is a short wheelbase 0-4-0 with bogies - you shouldn't need any sideplay - do you? If you agree that the sideplay can be done away with, just file some slots in 1/8 washers so that you can insert them with the wheels on - or are you using [email protected]#fords?  

Ah... well... sideplay:rolleyes:.

I have plans for a layout that are gradually taking shape (as do so many people!) and that layout will be to modern standards and have sensible curves on it but currently, the only operational layout I have is one that my dad originally built when I was a kid and it has very tight curves - frankly, modern finescale thought would not be too impressed with it.

It's a double loop, with a couple of sidings and an overhead (raised) line going diagonally across it. I'm very attached to it and have been gradually updating its electrics, scenics, signalling, buildings and so forth, splitting the raised line into two sidings (including Heathcote Electronics shuttle and signalling boards, so a train comes from one siding down to the upper station, goes back, the points change and the train in the other siding comes out, while signals change - simple stuff to many on here I know, but it makes me happy:)) and adding a goods yard, work that pre-dates starting to build kits, but which has slowed down dramatically since building my first wagon four or five years ago, as I've spent almost all my railway time since then building rather than running...

So, anything I build currently I try, where possible, to be able to run on the layout. It's a bit like an obstacle course, and it adds another layer of requirements to the build, which adds to the challenge: if something I've built can get round that layout, it'll cope with anything!

And trying to hide any unavoidable compromises under something that looks reasonable by modern standards is in itself a challenge - hence the sideplay and, in the case of this loco, the radial truck for the rear carrying wheels, which is not prototypical but which I hope won't be very visible with the finished body in place.

This was also behind my efforts a little while back over the amount of sideways movement in the bogie and in its side springing and centre guide spring, things that still need some work.

And yes, I'm using [email protected]#fords, partly - once again - because of the layout, but partly because as an inexperienced loco builder, the attraction of ready-made quartering was just too tempting...

Edited by Chas Levin
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand Chas. I still build things for my dad's obstacle course too! You're sure you really need what seems like quite a lot of sideplay?  

Re quartering, you realise of course that you have done far harder jobs during this build? 

 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Daddyman said:

I understand Chas. I still build things for my dad's obstacle course too! You're sure you really need what seems like quite a lot of sideplay? 

I'm pleased to hear I'm not the only one with obstacle course thoughts!

Re. the sideplay yes, I'm sure. From the earliest stages of the chassis I spent a lot of time looking at this question. I too was surprised at what was needed. The solution I came up with is to allow quite a bit of sideplay on the compensated front driving wheels axle, maximum possible sideways movement on the front bogie, and the use of the little LRM etch radial truck for the rear carriers. This meant that I could have almost no sideplay on the driven (motorised) axle. As I'm relatively new to motors and gearboxes, I was keen to keep that driven axle as stationery as possible, in order to try and cut down on possible gear meshing issues.

I'm not entirely sure that having such uneven amounts of sideplay on the two driver axles is ideal because of the strains it may put on the con rods amongst other things, but that can of course can be altered and I may end up allowing a tiny bit on the motorised axle and reducing the sideplay on the other one. It ran very well for the most part in early testing but occasionally snagged a little from no obvious cause that I could find (and I spent plenty of time looking) so once the chassis is finished and it and the wheels have been painted and everything reassembled properly, lubed and run in a bit, I'll look again at the sideplay question.

11 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Re quartering, you realise of course that you have done far harder jobs during this build?

That's a very interesting point David: no, I hadn't really thought of that, but you're right, it must be true.

Another advantage with Romfords is the number of times they can be removed and replaced with no problem and again, because of my lack of experience I knew that would be useful.. and it certainly was! I really don't think I'd have been able to manage without that ability, given how much back-tracking and re-thinking I had to do! :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/02/2021 at 20:31, Chas Levin said:

I'm pleased to hear I'm not the only one with obstacle course thoughts!

Re. the sideplay yes, I'm sure. From the earliest stages of the chassis I spent a lot of time looking at this question. I too was surprised at what was needed. The solution I came up with is to allow quite a bit of sideplay on the compensated front driving wheels axle, maximum possible sideways movement on the front bogie, and the use of the little LRM etch radial truck for the rear carriers. This meant that I could have almost no sideplay on the driven (motorised) axle. As I'm relatively new to motors and gearboxes, I was keen to keep that driven axle as stationery as possible, in order to try and cut down on possible gear meshing issues.

I'm not entirely sure that having such uneven amounts of sideplay on the two driver axles is ideal because of the strains it may put on the con rods amongst other things, but that can of course can be altered and I may end up allowing a tiny bit on the motorised axle and reducing the sideplay on the other one. It ran very well for the most part in early testing but occasionally snagged a little from no obvious cause that I could find (and I spent plenty of time looking) so once the chassis is finished and it and the wheels have been painted and everything reassembled properly, lubed and run in a bit, I'll look again at the sideplay question.

That's a very interesting point David: no, I hadn't really thought of that, but you're right, it must be true.

Another advantage with Romfords is the number of times they can be removed and replaced with no problem and again, because of my lack of experience I knew that would be useful.. and it certainly was! I really don't think I'd have been able to manage without that ability, given how much back-tracking and re-thinking I had to do! :)

Your binding might be the sideplay. When I set my first chassis up to Bradwell standards (0.05mm clearance on the crankpins), it would roll beautifully, and then suddently bind with no rhyme or reason, in different places each time. I finally traced it to sideplay, which I hadn't yet paid any attention to; once I eliminated the play, it ran beautifully.

 

Re getting wheels on and off, people keep sets of [email protected]#fords for setting up the chassis, then put the decent wheels on when all is well. But if you make your next chassis with High Level hornblocks, you can drop the wheels in and out anyway - again, you've already done harder jobs on this build.  

 

Anyway, wrecking your first (or tenth) set of Gibsons is a rite of passage.   

 

Edited by Daddyman
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Your binding might be the sideplay. When I set my first chassis up to Bradwell standards (0.05mm play on the crankpins), it would roll beautifully, and then suddently bind with no rhyme or reason, in different places each time. I finally traced it to sideplay, which I hadn't yet paid any attention to; once I eliminated the play, it ran beautifully.

Yes, I think you may be right. Trouble is, I have to have some sideplay so it can't be entirely done away with. It must be possible to get working well though, because there are heaps of locos out there with - between them - miles and miles of sideplay, all running quite happily :rolleyes:. My previous build - the DJH J9 - is an 0-6-0 with rigid rods and enough sideplay to run quite happily round The Obstacle Course (as I shall now call it), so I'm not going to be defeated by a 4-4-2!

7 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Re getting wheels on and off, people keep sets of [email protected]#fords for setting up the chassis, then put the decent wheels on when all is well. But if you make your next chassis with High Level hornblocks, you can drop the wheels in and out anyway - again, you've already done harder jobs on this build.

Yep, already there: all the ons and offs up to the point of being reasonably happy were done using a set I picked up specifically for that purpose :good:. Actually, the MJT hornblocks on the compensated axle on this build can be dropped out as they have keeper plates secured with M14 bolts... but the driven axle is fixed.

Having tried compensation on this build, I'll try some form of springing on the next one I think :read:.

7 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Anyway, wrecking your first (or tenth) set of Gibsons is a rite of passage.  

Ha - well then that's something for me to look forward to in the future, when I eventually try them :D...

 

Actually, there's another reason in favour of the Romford system for me: the possibility of quartering slipping later, in use. I know it's not common and that it should be perfectly easy to prevent, but the fact that Romfords totally remove the faintest possibility of that happening is, I must admit, attractive...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chas Levin said:

Yep, already there: all the ons and offs up to the point of being reasonably happy were done using a set I picked up specifically for that purpose :good:. Actually, the MJT hornblocks on the compensated axle on this build can be dropped out as they have keeper plates secured with M14 bolts... but the driven axle is fixed.

Ah, well you've done all the hard stuff already then.  

1 hour ago, Chas Levin said:

the fact that Romfords totally remove the faintest possibility of that happening is, I must admit, attractive...

Yes, but they are not! (attractive) ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Yes, but they are not! (attractive) ;)

Well, so far in my building career, I'm happy with the look of them... Though when I look back on some of the things I used to think were fine and now consider awful, I shouldn't be surprised if I end up agreeing with you... and re-wheeling. It's funny how our tastes and standards change, isn't it? A bit like lots of other things in life, really: think of some of the things we adored at one time and now abhor: candy floss, flares, BBC3...

Still, it'll give me another thing to keep me busy in my old age: you never know, I might even have decided to move to P4 by then too ;).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And today's Best Thing Since Sliced Bread Award for the Tool You Can't Imagine How You Did Without goes to:

 

825153166_Ceramictweezers.jpg.fe2911efef5d605cd77aa611abe065f6.jpg

 

  • Ceramic tweezers! :yahoo:

 

If you haven't tried these, get a pair (not much more than a fiver on Ebay) and try them. The ceramic tips are unaffected by temperatures far above anything we use in soldering and solder isn't remotely attracted to or by them. So you can hold two items together before, during and after the soldering and then lift the tweezers away, without any problems.

I've been persevering for years with various different stainless steel or titanium tweezers and solder picks, cocktail or lolly sticks and had endless trouble. Although solder doesn't bond well to stainless steel or titanium, it often sticks a little, enough to leave a mark in the solder surface or - if I try to move things too soon to avoid the bonding - dislodge things. Cocktail sticks soak up the flux and soften and move just at the wrong moment.

These ceramic tipped ones can be held firmly in place right through the cooling, lifting cleanly away each time. They're a decent weight too, not flimsy: perfect! :)

It'll be interesting to see what sort of lifetime the ceramic tips have - they show no signs of being affected by 12% flux so far - and apparently you can also buy replacements...

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A nice discovery: I finally thought of looking at the section about the C12 on the GNR Society website and read, in the opening section on the first batch of ten locos built : "As originally built, Nos. 1009 and 1010 had ordinary rigid axle boxes to the trailing wheels, whilst the rest were provided with radial axle boxes in order to secure greater flexibility of wheel-base."

 

I am so pleased about this: I'd incorporated a radial box to help with tight curves and felt it was a rather significant non-prototypical compromise, but it turns out it's entirely original! :dancing:

 

I also found a couple of photos of examples of the class with the handrails along the boiler sides terminated at the smokebox sides and a short, straight horizontal handrail on the smokebox door, rather than the far more common arrangement of the handrail in one continuous length from one side tank front all the way round to the other, curving round the top of the smokebox front. Although the Isinglass drawing shows this arrangement in one place and mentions that some locos had it, I'd so far failed to find any photos :).

Edited by Chas Levin
  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Chas

 

I’d just like to pitch in with some thoughts, if I may?

 

I’ve enjoyed the conversation between you and David over the last few weeks. There have been useful tips and ideas shared.....I will endeavour to remember them for my next builds!

 

There have been other discussions which are about the attitude to modelling. I found these of interest.

 

First thing that I should say is that I think you are doing a cracking job on the current build - great attention to detail. And very neat!. I should also say,  that I have always admired David’s model making skills ( on here and also in the NERA magazine). I admire especially his determination to get things absolutely correct.

My approach is to aspire to that level of detail while accepting that my skills are not always there....neither is my patience/ determination:rolleyes:. I therefore tend to view each model as a learning experience- even if not perfect it must be better than the previous one. With each build my skills and experience grow and, one day, I will produce that “perfect” model!

Partly, if I’m really honest, I adopt this attitude because I’m a bit lazy,but also (and I like think mainly) because I want to avoid the paralysis that can come with over thinking and over researching. There have been times when I have not started something because I’m not sure if it is correct. Sometimes that can go on for weeks and months. I now work on the principle that it is better to have a model with some inaccuracy/ missing details rather than no model at all. Of course part of me then says “ can do better”.......

 

Just a few rambling thoughts.

 

Keep up the good work!

 

Jon

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/02/2021 at 20:33, Chas Levin said:

And today's Best Thing Since Sliced Bread Award for the Tool You Can't Imagine How You Did Without goes to:

 

825153166_Ceramictweezers.jpg.fe2911efef5d605cd77aa611abe065f6.jpg

 

  • Ceramic tweezers! :yahoo:

 

If you haven't tried these, get a pair (not much more than a fiver on Ebay) and try them. The ceramic tips are unaffected by temperatures far above anything we use in soldering and solder isn't remotely attracted to or by them. So you can hold two items together before, during and after the soldering and then lift the tweezers away, without any problems.

I've been persevering for years with various different stainless steel or titanium tweezers and solder picks, cocktail or lolly sticks and had endless trouble. Although solder doesn't bond well to stainless steel or titanium, it often sticks a little, enough to leave a mark in the solder surface or - if I try to move things too soon to avoid the bonding - dislodge things. Cocktail sticks soak up the flux and soften and move just at the wrong moment.

These ceramic tipped ones can be held firmly in place right through the cooling, lifting cleanly away each time. They're a decent weight too, not flimsy: perfect! :)

It'll be interesting to see what sort of lifetime the ceramic tips have - they show no signs of being affected by 12% flux so far - and apparently you can also buy replacements...

Just bought a pair off eBay thanks 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/02/2021 at 20:33, Chas Levin said:

And today's Best Thing Since Sliced Bread Award for the Tool You Can't Imagine How You Did Without goes to:

 

825153166_Ceramictweezers.jpg.fe2911efef5d605cd77aa611abe065f6.jpg

 

  • Ceramic tweezers! :yahoo:

 

 

I understand that these things may be bought from shops catering for those who vape.

 

Chris

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jon4470 said:

Hello Chas

 

I’d just like to pitch in with some thoughts, if I may?

 

I’ve enjoyed the conversation between you and David over the last few weeks. There have been useful tips and ideas shared.....I will endeavour to remember them for my next builds!

 

There have been other discussions which are about the attitude to modelling. I found these of interest.

 

First thing that I should say is that I think you are doing a cracking job on the current build - great attention to detail. And very neat!. I should also say,  that I have always admired David’s model making skills ( on here and also in the NERA magazine). I admire especially his determination to get things absolutely correct.

My approach is to aspire to that level of detail while accepting that my skills are not always there....neither is my patience/ determination:rolleyes:. I therefore tend to view each model as a learning experience- even if not perfect it must be better than the previous one. With each build my skills and experience grow and, one day, I will produce that “perfect” model!

Partly, if I’m really honest, I adopt this attitude because I’m a bit lazy,but also (and I like think mainly) because I want to avoid the paralysis that can come with over thinking and over researching. There have been times when I have not started something because I’m not sure if it is correct. Sometimes that can go on for weeks and months. I now work on the principle that it is better to have a model with some inaccuracy/ missing details rather than no model at all. Of course part of me then says “ can do better”.......

 

Just a few rambling thoughts.

 

Keep up the good work!

 

Jon

Thanks for your kind words, Jon. I thought from your avatar you had an NERA look about you! 

 

I accept that my attitude to modelling is violently extreme, and sometimes I think about trying to do something about it. I thought for a moment I was going to let myself off with the smokebox wrapper 0.1mm shorter on one side than the other on my current build, but alas, no - off it came! 

 

I'd just dispute one thing in your post - the idea that skill has anything to do with it: I can't see how holding things and moving tools near to them (which is all that modelling is) requires any skill. I accept, though, that holding things can cause difficulties (which is why Chas' ceramic pliers are such a good idea), and indeed I'd suggest that's the main reason things go wrong on models - something slips, or something was held awry (supporting Jol's case for RSUs). (It could also be that the kit is rubbish, of course.) Jigging the hell out of things is the only way to ensure they go on right.

 

I don't think it's lack of "skill" that produces bad models, but the willingness to undo and redo things certainly produces better models. But that has to be weighed against the "paralysis" you rightly mention, and there I do not have the balance right. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jon4470 said:

Hello Chas

 

I’d just like to pitch in with some thoughts, if I may?

 

I’ve enjoyed the conversation between you and David over the last few weeks. There have been useful tips and ideas shared.....I will endeavour to remember them for my next builds!

 

There have been other discussions which are about the attitude to modelling. I found these of interest.

 

First thing that I should say is that I think you are doing a cracking job on the current build - great attention to detail. And very neat!. I should also say,  that I have always admired David’s model making skills ( on here and also in the NERA magazine). I admire especially his determination to get things absolutely correct.

My approach is to aspire to that level of detail while accepting that my skills are not always there....neither is my patience/ determination:rolleyes:. I therefore tend to view each model as a learning experience- even if not perfect it must be better than the previous one. With each build my skills and experience grow and, one day, I will produce that “perfect” model!

Partly, if I’m really honest, I adopt this attitude because I’m a bit lazy,but also (and I like think mainly) because I want to avoid the paralysis that can come with over thinking and over researching. There have been times when I have not started something because I’m not sure if it is correct. Sometimes that can go on for weeks and months. I now work on the principle that it is better to have a model with some inaccuracy/ missing details rather than no model at all. Of course part of me then says “ can do better”.......

 

Just a few rambling thoughts.

 

Keep up the good work!

 

Jon

Hello Jon, thank you for your thoughtful and encouraging post - what a nice start to the day :).

No need to ask if you may pitch in - the wider the discussion, the more interesting the results.

I'm very glad you've found some interesting and possibly useful tips and ideas: I'm aware that plenty of questions I ask - and that David and others very kindly and helpfully take the time to answer - may be of limited interest to a lot of other people (especially if I'm asking about things that lots of other people have already worked out for themselves) so it's nice to know we've turned up some useful stuff in the process.

Thank you for the kind words on my current build; I too admire David's skills very much, though I hadn't seen anything until just the other week, when I came across his thread on the Scalefour forum on 'Carriage Ride Height and Springing' which has a couple of stunning photos at the foot of the first page of a rake of three NER carriages.

And yes, his determination to get things right is helping to keep me on the straight and narrow ^_^.

 

Your point about what we might call 'Perfectionism Management' is an excellent one. That's sort of where I aim to be too. I like the idea of adding some detail that's not included in a kit - in particular, things that are quite noticeable in photos, such as the vac and steam pipes that run along the valances each side of the C12 - and that gives a sense of satisfaction from trying to do something more than a straight out of the box assembly, but I sense there's a line to draw, a point I've reached with various builds where it feels like 'enough'; otherwise each build would take far too long and I don't know about you but I do find that I get to a point where I'm looking forward to having it finished...

I agree 100% with your view that each build is a learning experience and must exceed the previous one's standards (which ties in with my previous point, because if you spend too long on each build, that progression would be unbearably slow). For this reason, some of the more advanced kits in my stash are pencilled in for some years' time, when my skills will hopefully have been improved to a point far beyond where they are now...

 

This C12 is heading in that direction I think: when it's finished, it will have some inaccuracies and some missing details, but it will also have some good points about it and overall, from normal viewing distance, I'm hoping it will look quite good. And I'm trying to keep on top of how long I spend on particular details of features so as not to delay the completion unnecessarily.

 

One thing I have got better about is time management: for instance, if I have some time that can be spent actually working on a model, then that's what I go and do. Research, or online searching for parts, I keep for sitting in front of the TV (which rarely engages my whole attention). Another thing is to find another part of the build to work on if the section I was dealing with is held up for parts or research reasons - it's always nice to find you've already completed a section some time ago that would have held up a later assembly :good:.

 

And as to your thoughts being 'rambling' Jon, it would be appallingly hypocritical of me - one of worst ramblers I know - to do anything other than disagree: I thought you were perfectly succinct!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chrisf said:

I understand that these things may be bought from shops catering for those who vape.

 

Chris

Ohhh - is that to do with removing hot parts of a vaping machine (is that the term - never used one!)? That might partly explain why they're so widely available, though I gather they're also used in some cosmetics applications.

Absolutely marvellous for us, whatever their origins :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, chrisf said:

Chas, I know nothing of vaping except thst it does not smell quite so disgusting as tobacco!

 

Chris

It’s very bizarre to pass a smoking area nowadays and smell such things as rhubarb and custard

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Thanks for your kind words, Jon. I thought from your avatar you had an NERA look about you! 

 

I accept that my attitude to modelling is violently extreme, and sometimes I think about trying to do something about it. I thought for a moment I was going to let myself off with the smokebox wrapper 0.1mm shorter on one side than the other on my current build, but alas, no - off it came! 

 

I'd just dispute one thing in your post - the idea that skill has anything to do with it: I can't see how holding things and moving tools near to them (which is all that modelling is) requires any skill. I accept, though, that holding things can cause difficulties (which is why Chas' ceramic pliers are such a good idea), and indeed I'd suggest that's the main reason things go wrong on models - something slips, or something was held awry (supporting Jol's case for RSUs). (It could also be that the kit is rubbish, of course.) Jigging the hell out of things is the only way to ensure they go on right.

 

I don't think it's lack of "skill" that produces bad models, but the willingness to undo and redo things certainly produces better models. But that has to be weighed against the "paralysis" you rightly mention, and there I do not have the balance right.

I think you're being a bit hard on yourself there David, if I may say so :). There is certainly a balance necessary in anything like this to stop things getting really excessive but you clearly get things built so provided you're happy, where's the problem?

 

There was some discussion recently on Tony Wright's thread about whether or not obsessing over detail is a good thing and I can't remember whether you were part of that chat or not (it was more about what details should be included in a build and what sorts of un-prototypical things should or should not be worried about, how much time should be spent researching them etc) but the - I think - generally agreed upon conclusion might be summed up as "if it makes you happy, it's fine", a finding to which I definitely subscribed. If a 1mm discrepancy irked you, then I'd say you're right to correct it. I'm assuming here that the feeling of satisfaction you get from looking at the corrected version afterwards is suitable compensation for the time and effort involved, in which case it's all good.

In the course of that other chat about this subject, I quoted that saying that we try so hard to get things to come out right in art, because it's so difficult in life: sounds like a typical flip remark by a certain well-known film-maker but I think it's absolutely spot on. You can look at that wrapper and know that it is right, even if other things in the world around you, things you perhaps cannot change so easily, are not and that's a very valuable thing I think. Of course, everyone has their own personal 'rightness threshold': for you, it's 0.1mm, for me, it's perhaps closer to 0.25mm and for some it's probably quite different.

 

As to whether it's skill or patience, I have to say I think it's a combination of both and that they're very inter-related: you develop skill through patience, but you also develop the skill of exercising patience...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chrisf said:

Chas, I know nothing of vaping except thst it does not smell quite so disgusting as tobacco!

 

Chris

Actually Chris, I find the opposite: I find the totally fake, artificially perfumed smell of vaping absolutely horrible - I'd rather smell tobacco any day; at least it's basically a natural substance...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Asterix2012 said:

It’s very bizarre to pass a smoking area nowadays and smell such things as rhubarb and custard

Trouble is, it smells so appallingly fake (to me it does, anyway), it's like the smell of bubble-gum. And there's always such an incredible concentration of it - a vaper only has to stand near you and you're completely consumed by the cloud: tobacco doesn't usually produce such huge amounts of smoke (well, except a fat cigar, but you do't usually meet them on the high street:D!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.