East Barnet Joint Stock - a workbench

[Chas Levin]

A busy few days - the APOC tank wagon is finished:

 

I also found time to do a quick RTR enhancement, adding a guard with an LED lamp to a Roco SBB Sputnik Goods Brake Van - you can't beat a quick Continental staycation in these difficult times . I can't remember where I got them, but some years ago I picked up two or three HO European railway figures with LED lamps in their hands; at the time, I didn't know there were such small LEDs available so I thought they were amazing! Since then, I've bought and fitted even smaller LEDs myself, while these figures still sat in a drawer: about time to use one of them I thought. Getting inside the van proved a little more fiddly than I'd anticipated, and the contact strips for the factory fitted internal light go underneath the moulded interior, so that re-fitting the interior after soldering on wires for the new guard's LED was quite fun too - got there in the end though :

 

I've also started work on the Mousa GNR brake. Cleaning up the flash on these resin castings - not to mention detaching them from their sprues - is a delicate business as the material is quite brittle, but the detail is beautifully crisp. A useful discovery is that there is just enough clearance to fit the axleboxes once the waisted bearings have been fitted. This means that the bogie sides - with bearings - can be eased apart enough to clear the axles ends before the axleboxes are in place, as otherwise easing apart the completed assembly would also push outwards against the footboards, which I suspect might break them:

 

And finally, as the tank wagon's done, time to start on the next metal kit, the London Road Models LNER C12 4-4-2 tank:

 

This will be only my second loco and my first etched brass one so I thought it prudent to get a drawing too, as there's a little more room for error here. The first loco I built was a DJH whitemetal one (the J9/10 further up this thread) where there's not a lot of debate about how things go together.

Here's what we're dealing with:

 

As well as the LRM kit,  we have their motor mount and gears, a Mashima motor and Markits-Romford wheels. There is something very beautiful about the etches, the careful fitting together of all the parts, the knowledge that these flat areas will become a 3D self-propelled loco: fabulous!.

The other new area for me is that unlike the J9/10, this one will not be built as a rigid chassis... I've read a great deal about the pros and cons of various forms of loco suspension (including a recent debate on Tony Wright's RMWeb thread 'Wright Writes.....') and although for various reasons (most notably the coarse trackwork on my small layout) I suspect the benefits for me may prove to be minimal, it's something I'm still fascinated by, so I'm going to try and see what the enthusiasts are so keen about - and what the sceptics dislike - for myself...

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Chas Levin]

 A busy week's meant less modelling time, but I made a start on the C12 superstructure:

 

Bending the valances and keeping everything straight is not the easiest bend I've had to do, partly because of the large central cut-out and its thin border area and partly because the ends of the buffer beams protrude out too far to allow use of long bending bars. Actually, I use a Hold and Fold: highly recommended, not cheap but worth its weight in - well, silver, at any rate. In this case, inserting the valance as far as possible without engaging the buffer beam ends leaves it a little over a millimetre away from the fold: not the end of the world for the areas at each end with solid land behind them, but a different proposition for the middle areas. So, a little remedial work has been necessary to get things nice and straight, and a little more will be needed tomorrow, with a fresh eye. Amongst other tools, using a burnisher on such thin brass requires a gentle touch, but can be very effective... Doesn't brass look beautiful like this?

I decided to make a start on the body because I haven't yet decided how to build the chassis - what type of suspension to use. I find the idea of sprung suspension an interesting constructional challenge, the engineering principles behind it seem very sound and the idea of something that intricate working as designed (I'm nothing if not optimistic!) is very attractive, but I also realise that as a suspension newbie I shouldn't try to run before I can walk, so I'm inclining at this point towards a simpler compensation beam solution. Much of what would have been modelling time this week has therefore been spent reading Mike Sharman and Iain Rice (whilst trying not to spend too much time looking longingly at the CSB gallery on the Scalefour Society CLAG site). 

 

On the Mousa GNR coach, some more time spent cleaning up the flash, but nothing worth looking at yet. The kit as supplied was without the glazing mentioned in the instructions and it's not proved possible to obtain it, so I'm going to have to cut replacements. I'm thinking that the glazing material I have from Wizard should do very well as it's a similar thickness to the resin coach sides, but cutting all the panes sufficiently accurately will be something of a... pain.

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Jon4470]

A good looking prototype and the kit looks nice. 

 

I’ll be interested to see how you get on with compensation. I am currently having a debate ( with myself because I get more sense that way) about whether to try compensation on my next loco. Main reason is the same as yours - to try it out and see what all the fuss is about.

 

Jon

[Chas Levin]

9 hours ago, Jon4470 said:

A good looking prototype and the kit looks nice. 

 

I’ll be interested to see how you get on with compensation. I am currently having a debate ( with myself because I get more sense that way) about whether to try compensation on my next loco. Main reason is the same as yours - to try it out and see what all the fuss is about.

 

Jon

 

Yes, I get quite a lot of sense debating things with myself too.

One thing that troubles me about simple compensation using beams, with no springing, is the possibility of the loco wobbling, for instance when going over points. It seems to me that springing would prevent that as it should absorb unwanted movement of the loco body.

One of the main disadvantages you read about with springing is the difficulty of setting it up, but I don't mind some difficulty if the results are worth it...

I'm about to plunge into the CLAG page about CSBs, heavy going but it might help me make up my mind.

What type of system are you contemplating?

[Jon4470]

10 hours ago, Chas Levin said:

 

What type of system are you contemplating?

 

That’s a very good question!

 

I think I will go with compensation beams and Hornblocks. Mainly because that is what is described, and supplied, in the kit. (The kit is a D20 by the way).

 

CSBs look interesting but I don’t fully understand them......and I promised myself a nice straight forward build for the next kit!

 

Jon

 

[MarkNJ]

Hi there,

I find the main advantage of compensation is improved traction, this means I do not have to weight my locos, just balance them.

 

Cheers

Mark

[Chas Levin]

11 hours ago, Jon4470 said:

 

That’s a very good question!

 

I think I will go with compensation beams and Hornblocks. Mainly because that is what is described, and supplied, in the kit. (The kit is a D20 by the way).

 

CSBs look interesting but I don’t fully understand them......and I promised myself a nice straight forward build for the next kit!

 

Jon

 

Whose kit is it Jon? Very nice looking loco, the D20.

I agree about CSBs: I'll almost certainly go with beams this time too I suspect, just need to make my mind up to do it. Apart from anything else, trying the various different systems is also something I'm curious to do, and it must make sense to start with the less complex one I guess...

[Chas Levin]

1 hour ago, MarkNJ said:

Hi there,

I find the main advantage of compensation is improved traction, this means I do not have to weight my locos, just balance them.

 

Cheers

Mark

Hi Mark, that is a key point indeed, because weighting etched brass locos is something that concerns me. The first loco I built was whitemetal, but as I move forward with the superstructure of my first etched kit, being able to discount weighting issues would be - forgive me - a great weight off my mind! 

 

What type of system do you use, and what types of locos?

Edited September 8, 2020 by Chas Levin

[Chas Levin]

Basic footplate assembled today:

I'm never entirely happy sweating pieces together, because you can't see what's happening; you can see if things appear to be well mated at the edges but that's about it. It's far more difficult to judge when the joint's been made (let alone whether or not it's been made well) and therefore the danger of applying too much heat for too long is greater. everything seems pretty well joined though and I was able to keep it straight and level. I worked on it on a thick piece of paxolin (on the basis that it wouldn't draw heat as metal would and was more evenly level than wood) with several layers of flattened extra thick aluminium foil between the paxolin and the piece. The buffer beams are in fact perpendicular to the footplate - camera distortion!

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Jon4470]

11 hours ago, Chas Levin said:

Whose kit is it Jon? Very nice looking loco, the D20.

I agree about CSBs: I'll almost certainly go with beams this time too I suspect, just need to make my mind up to do it. Apart from anything else, trying the various different systems is also something I'm curious to do, and it must make sense to start with the less complex one I guess...

 

The D20 is a North Eastern Kit. On a north eastern area layout I think it is almost impossible to have too many 4-4-0s - one other vying for attention is a D17 kit, but that will probably be left for another day.

 

The Hornblocks are from HighLevel. I’m only going to start this kit when I clear the current “in work” projects though.....trying to keep tidy!

 

Edited September 9, 2020 by Jon4470
Added some detail

[Chas Levin]

12 hours ago, Jon4470 said:

 

The D20 is a North Eastern Kit. On a north eastern area layout I think it is almost impossible to have too many 4-4-0s - one other vying for attention is a D17 kit, but that will probably be left for another day.

 

The Hornblocks are from HighLevel. I’m only going to start this kit when I clear the current “in work” projects though.....trying to keep tidy!

 

 

Excellent; I have a North Eastern Kits A6 in my pile. It looks an excellent kit and Arthur K was such a pleasure to deal with. And I too have some HL hornblocks on order. I'm interested to have a look at a few different makers' hornblocks and associated parts, in hopes of learning some more about how things work. One thing is that I'm building in OO, so space between the frames will be at a premium. Therefore I am interested to see whether types such as the HL Spacesaver hornblocks might be useful.

[MarkNJ]

On 08/09/2020 at 13:13, Chas Levin said:

Hi Mark, that is a key point indeed, because weighting etched brass locos is something that concerns me. The first loco I built was whitemetal, but as I move forward with the superstructure of my first etched kit, being able to discount weighting issues would be - forgive me - a great weight off my mind! 

 

What type of system do you use, and what types of locos?

Hi Chas,

 

I model in various scales and gauges and I have tried various systems except CSB.

 

I find horn blocks are not an absolute necessity but make life a little easier. My O scale MOK 9F uses both springs and compensation beams and is a very smooth and powerful loco even around the 72" radius curves and points on my outdoor layout.

 

In 4mm scale I have a Gibson Jubilee which is fully sprung and once set up is smooth and pulls well. I also have a High Level  Andrew Barcklay 0-6-0 which has just compensation beams no extra weight and has better traction than my old K's J72 which is about twice as heavy.

 

My HO steamers are all fully sprung, but I think the springs are a bit too stiff to compensate properly.

 

I hope this is some help to you

 

Mark

[Jon4470]

19 hours ago, Chas Levin said:

 One thing is that I'm building in OO, so space between the frames will be at a premium. Therefore I am interested to see whether types such as the HL Spacesaver hornblocks might be useful.

 

Likewise, I model in OO. The space between the frames can get tight so the space savers maybe necessary. (I’m now resisting the temptation to get the kit out and start planning the build....I must finish other stuff first!)

It does seem sensible, though, to build the basic body up first, as you are,  ( maybe leaving boiler loose) and then start the chassis. That way the orientation of the gearbox and motor can be sorted out in the flesh (so to speak). I could envision some circumstances where the gearbox would get in the way of the pivots for the compensation beams. Of course, never having done any of this, I could be talking absolute rubbish.

 

I’ve built one of Arthur’s kits (J77) so far, which I enjoyed. I have a few others in the stash. As you say he is a pleasure to deal with.

 

I also have an A6, but mine is a Little engines kit. A good solid looking North Eastern engine.

 

Jon

[Chas Levin]

17 hours ago, MarkNJ said:

Hi Chas,

 

I model in various scales and gauges and I have tried various systems except CSB.

 

I find horn blocks are not an absolute necessity but make life a little easier. My O scale MOK 9F uses both springs and compensation beams and is a very smooth and powerful loco even around the 72" radius curves and points on my outdoor layout.

 

In 4mm scale I have a Gibson Jubilee which is fully sprung and once set up is smooth and pulls well. I also have a High Level  Andrew Barcklay 0-6-0 which has just compensation beams no extra weight and has better traction than my old K's J72 which is about twice as heavy.

 

My HO steamers are all fully sprung, but I think the springs are a bit too stiff to compensate properly.

 

I hope this is some help to you

 

Mark

Thank you Mark, yes, that is of help and very interesting.

 

"My O scale MOK 9F uses both springs and compensation beams and is a very smooth and powerful loco"

 

That's very interesting: it's occurred to me that this might be a good combination; too ambitious for the loco I'm working on currently, which will be my first with any type of suspension, but definitely something to try in the future. Most loco suspension I read about is one system or another, rather than a combination - though I realise I may simply not have found others' examples yet.

 

"In 4mm scale I have a Gibson Jubilee which is fully sprung and once set up is smooth and pulls well."

 

Do you mean that the loco requires setting up before each use?

 

"I also have a High Level  Andrew Barcklay 0-6-0 which has just compensation beams no extra weight and has better traction than my old K's J72 which is about twice as heavy." 

 

That is clearly one of the ones you were referring to in your comment on Tuesday that compensation negates the need for extra weight 

 

[Chas Levin]

3 hours ago, Jon4470 said:

 

Likewise, I model in OO. The space between the frames can get tight so the space savers maybe necessary. (I’m now resisting the temptation to get the kit out and start planning the build....I must finish other stuff first!)

It does seem sensible, though, to build the basic body up first, as you are,  ( maybe leaving boiler loose) and then start the chassis. That way the orientation of the gearbox and motor can be sorted out in the flesh (so to speak). I could envision some circumstances where the gearbox would get in the way of the pivots for the compensation beams. Of course, never having done any of this, I could be talking absolute rubbish.

 

I’ve built one of Arthur’s kits (J77) so far, which I enjoyed. I have a few others in the stash. As you say he is a pleasure to deal with.

 

I also have an A6, but mine is a Little engines kit. A good solid looking North Eastern engine.

 

Jon

 

I think I'm the opposite of those who struggle to complete project before starting others and have many in progress: I find it very difficult to work on more than one at once, or to start another before the current one has had every last little detail finished. I'm trying to train myself to work on two at once (one soldering, at the bench, one plastic, in front of the TV) but I keep ending up using each day's modelling time on just one, generally the metal one. Hence the progress currently on the C12, with less headway on the resin GNR coach!

 

As to building the chassis or the body first, I built my first loco chassis-first (because I'd read of that being a recommended order - Iain Rice, amongst others, said this if I remember correctly) but I had to pause the chassis at the unpowered rolling stage for precisely the reason you mention, in order to build the body and be able to determine the fit of motor and gearbox. This time, I started once again with the chassis but have paused it while awaiting the arrival of hornblocks, beam material etc, which will assist decisions on the chassis design. So no, I don't think you're talking rubbish at all .

 

I suspect that whichever you build first, there will be a stage where you want to have both, partially completed, for test purposes; so perhaps it's swings and roundabouts... One advantage though of building the chassis first is that I can watch it run to and fro on my test track while I build the body!

 

I know the NE Kits J77 from Arthur's forum thread, which had some lovely looking pictures of it.

[brossard]

Hey Chas, great that you are building a loco kit.  I started a fair few in my time but never finished any.  I did finish some chassis kits and got very good results by following Rice's methods.

 

I tried CSB on a loco kit (GEM Cauliflower) and it didn't work out.  Figuring out the spring spacing was a faff.  The biggest issue was trying to fit the gearbox between the space saver horn blocks.  You need a really narrow GB, esp. in 00.

 

All my chassis kits got beam compensation a la Rice and I found this easy and straightforward to do.

 

I do like HL hornblocks.

 

John

Edited September 10, 2020 by brossard

[MarkNJ]

Hi Chas,

 

The Jubilee just needed setting up once, after it was balanced.

 

All the best 

Mark

[Chas Levin]

On 10/09/2020 at 23:19, brossard said:

Hey Chas, great that you are building a loco kit.  I started a fair few in my time but never finished any.  I did finish some chassis kits and got very good results by following Rice's methods.

 

I tried CSB on a loco kit (GEM Cauliflower) and it didn't work out.  Figuring out the spring spacing was a faff.  The biggest issue was trying to fit the gearbox between the space saver horn blocks.  You need a really narrow GB, esp. in 00.

 

All my chassis kits got beam compensation a la Rice and I found this easy and straightforward to do.

 

I do like HL hornblocks.

 

John

Hi John, nice to hear from you again .

Thanks for the encouragement - in fact, the current loco build is not the first. You may have missed it earlier in this thread but I built a DJH J9/10 earlier this year, much easier though - rigid chassis, whitemetal body, DJH motor/gearbox, runs beautifully:

 

 

I've certainly learnt that figuring out CSB spring placement is a faff... Though I've ordered the High Level Kits CSB Jig to have a look at, as that appears to be a way of taking some of the pain out of the process...

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Chas Levin]

12 hours ago, MarkNJ said:

Hi Chas,

 

The Jubilee just needed setting up once, after it was balanced.

 

All the best 

Mark

Got you - sorry! I did think I must have misunderstood, but also thought perhaps it was a bit like one of those very complex radio controlled planes or helicopters, where each outing involves considerable setting up time...

[brossard]

4 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

Hi John, nice to hear from you again .

 

I've certainly learnt that figuring out CSB spring placement is a faff... Though I've ordered the High Level Kits CSB Jig to have a look at, as that appears to be a way of taking some of the pain out of the process...

 

That does look to be a fine locomotive.

 

I certainly agree that you should have a look at CSB.  Maybe you have the skills and patience that I lack.  I bought a lot of the materials incl. the jigs a few years back.   I'm sure that if done right it will produce a great result.

 

John

[Chas Levin]

Things are progressing on the C12:

 

Predictably, the smaller things - sandbox lids in this case - take longer than larger jobs. Still a little cleaning up to be done but not too bad so far.

The rearmost vertical piece of the fold-up visible in the picture (only posed on the footplate at this stage) is noted as being removable for the addition of weight, with an additional note that leaving it in place may aid positioning. I'm hoping it will be possible to have my cake and eat it, by leaving it in place long enough to aid alignment, removing it at the last possible stage to make adding weight possible if needed.

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Chas Levin]

Yesterday's work cleaned up and side tank outer skins made and cleaned - here's everything together, but only posed at this stage:

 

 

Everything's still in separate pieces:

 

 

The instructions advise fixing the beading on the side tanks before folding, but I was worried about possible stresses and distortion in bending the soldered beading, so I made a half bend, soldered the long length (plus the right angled section that lies on the same plane - it's all one piece), then completed the bend to 90 degrees, then bent the small remaining unsoldered length of beading to match the 90 degrees and then soldered it, which worked very well.

On the question of adding weight in the bunker and the removal of the rearmost vertical part of the cab foldup, I realised that one advantage of removing that piece is to allow soldering the bunker shell from the inside and the subsequent fitting of the cab foldup - the instructions suggest the cab foldup be fitted first... so it's that rear piece has been removed.

However, what I don't quite understand is how you can assess the need - or not - to add weight in the bunker, without being able to test the unweighted running characteristics first. For the time being therefore, I'm proceeding with various other work on the body with the intention of leaving the cab and bunker loose until such time as I have a running chassis, for test purposes. I'll get to a point soon where not much more can be done on the body without fixing the various sections properly in place, at which point I'll go back to the chassis construction. I usually build up one basic structure, but one nice aspect of this plan is that at some point following testing, it will not take a great deal of soldering to unite the sub-structures very quickly into something that looks suddenly loco-like . 

My thoughts on suspension are still inclining towards a non-sprung beam compensation for this build; I know one advantage of this system is that extra weighting shouldn't in fact be needed, but if things turn out to be a little nose-heavy, it might be useful to have the option. At some point - hopefully over the weekend - I'll spend some time examining and comparing hornblock systems from several different manufacturers, which looks like it will be interesting. The ability to drop out the axles seems a useful advantage for possible adjustments or maintenance; another thing that may prove important is how much space the different types occupy between the frames, as I'm working in OO... 

 

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Chas Levin]

A busy week has meant less time for the important things in life like models... I've been working on various further sub-assemblies for the body, such as these cleverly designed fold-ups for the in-cab splashers, which both start off as a single flat etch; the one in front was particularly satisfying to complete:

 

And today was my first try at boiler bands:

These two longer ones were made easier by the holes in the ends: I soldered small pieces of 0.3mm brass wide into holes beneath the boiler at the point where the ends meet so they could be anchored before sweating them on. The photo's a bit unflattering: they look much neater in real life!

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Chas Levin]

Cab roof mainly done and boiler banded using the bands supplied in the kit (excepting the stepped cab end one) - for some reason there is one less band than shown on the Isinglass drawing, so I've chosen the one that goes beneath the dome as the one I'll need to replicate from elsewhere, as it's the shortest length:

 

I've also started using 188 degree solder for some parts, where soldered sub-assemblies are to be themselves soldered further at a later stage. For these pieces, the smokebox wrapper and the cab beading were done using 188. In both cases, they're jobs I should prefer not to have to repair in the case of later movement...

Edited May 7, 2022 by Chas Levin

[Jol Wilkinson]

I model the LNWR in P4 and have only ever used compensation for locos. The 4-4-2 Precursor tank shown has a rigid rear driven axle and "pivoted" front axle. It picks up only on the driving axles (PB strip wiper pickups with brass contact pads against steel tyres) and will run properly all weekend at a show without needing cleaning. The 0-6-2 Watford Tank has a "rigid" rear driven axle and a compensating beam between the centre and front coupled axles. The rear pony truck is lightly "weighted" by a longitudinal wire spring bearing on it.

 

I've considered springing and CSBs over the years but was never happy about the former and often found that the the latter needed a redesign of the kit frames and spacer to accommodate it. Hence I stuck with compensation (although some of my locos combine compensated driving/coupled wheels with sprung bogies, radial trucks or pony trucks.

 

Although CSB are claimed to provide much smoother running, I have found that, provided the track is well built, then a smooth "ride" will result.