Jump to content
 

My First Austerity


Recommended Posts

Probably the most well-known and successful British industrial steam design ever and I've never owned a model of one before. OK, I have but they were N gauge so they don't count (sorry, N gauge folks but they weren't very good models in any way).

Last week I was looking at pictures of Austerities and thinking how great they are and looked into buying a model of one that could end up on an NCB line that I may or may not build at all. I was aware of the DJ models version but had heard bad things about the running qualities of some, and how the motors aren't very reliable. Not only that but the price tag put me off. Then I saw a bargain-priced Dapol version on ebay and bid on and won it.

I'd already bought it by the time I looked closely at the picture and found that despite it being a liveried and numbered as a WD engine that was never owned by the LNER or BR, it's got a ruddy great moulding for a BR number plate on the front of the smokebox! Did Dapol think no one would notice? I noticed and so I figured that it may be ready-to-run but it isn't going to be ready to run on any layout that I own.

Now I've got the thing in my hands I realise that it's a project in itself. The smokebox door has to go, the handrail knobs are huge, so they'll have to go, the injectors are on some plastic backing, so they require attention, the wheels are wrong, not to mention being bright nickel silver, so they'll have to be replaced...

It runs well but it's noisy. I could probably put up with it if it was just DC but if it's going DCC sound it'll be annoying, so I think it's a new motor and gearbox job, which I guess also means a new chassis.

I'm wondering just how much of the original model I'm going to be left with and if it wouldn't have been cheaper to just fork out for the DJ one to begin with!

 

Austerity-002.jpg.83ba91fa7d981000dcf570aa804c8414.jpg

The buffers are sprung but the bodies look too thick on the shank and the backing plate where they bolt to the buffe beams needs a good feed. They'll have to be replaced.

Austerity-003.jpg.0690c47ee9188550e506fa803da08c3c.jpg

This cover for the Kylpor exhaust doesn't sit right. I want to replace it with a standard chimney anyway. The smokebox hinge is a bit heavy duty!

Austerity-008.jpg.3cd2c7e811b727629bcdeea50fd2caca.jpg

I think the extra steps and handles on the tank are an LNER thing, so they'll have to get the chop. And there's that awful seam that I need to do something about.

Austerity-013.jpg.da80cb2f260f83acc72948f749198a0e.jpg

What's this sliding hatch thing? I've not noticed that on the Austerities that I've seen.

These are all the things I've noticed myself and I'm no expert on Austerities. I'm sure someone will be along to tell me more...

 

Buckle up, Warrington, it's going to be a bumpy ride! :butcher:

 

  • Like 7
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two Dapol ones from many years ago and keep trying to work out a way of loosing the join but retaining access to the motor but I keep coming to the conclusion major surgery was needed and hence they are sat oou/stored.

 

The only other thing I have purchased to improve looks is replacement wheelsets and rods from the Hornby version; they seem to be a direct replacement!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

I have two Dapol ones from many years ago and keep trying to work out a way of loosing the join but retaining access to the motor but I keep coming to the conclusion major surgery was needed and hence they are sat oou/stored.

 

The only other thing I have purchased to improve looks is replacement wheelsets and rods from the Hornby version; they seem to be a direct replacement!

I've just had a google search. The Hornby version's wheels do look much better but they're still not the proper spoke pattern. I'm told that the Dapol and Hornby wheels are only suitable for the few that were built, post-war, by the Yorkshire Engine Company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

I have two Dapol ones from many years ago and keep trying to work out a way of loosing the join but retaining access to the motor but I keep coming to the conclusion major surgery was needed and hence they are sat oou/stored.

 

 Well is just a case of filling the join in anyway ?

 Dapol austerity are getting old enough to be .....well old models and their isn't great value in them now,and the likelihood of replacing or getting a motor ? 

 Fill the join and enjoy the improved looks while it lasts. Filler isn't glue ! It will come apart if necessary for 

Edited by Graham456
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Graham456 said:

 Well is just a case of filling the join in anyway ?

 Dapol austerity are getting old enough to be .....well old models and their isn't great value in them now,and the likelihood of replacing or getting a motor ? 

 Fill the join and enjoy the improved looks while it lasts. Filler isn't glue ! It will come apart if necessary for 

 

That seems too much like throw away modelling to me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dave,

 

I've done a couple of these and have the bits for two more. If you're bothered enough to fill the join in the saddletank, you'll be bothered about the boiler which on the real thing has lots of daylight all the way along underneath it* and as noted, the wheels are ghastly. Bin the chassis and sort it out properly.

 

Gibson do the correct wheels, RT Models the chassis and a decent chimney and dome. [EDIT - Dave meant the hatch on the bunker for the mech. stoker, apologies, it's hot and I was tired] The door on the cab rear was hinged and probably intended to access the lamp iron (or perhaps to wave fire irons about). They all had it, even the Lambton cab examples. 

 

Adam

 

* The origin of the Bachmann brass model in O was clearly one of these: they copied the boxes and continuous footplate under the boiler exactly.

Edited by Adam
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hi Dave,

 

there's a page here on improving the looks of the Dapol / Hornby offering:

 

https://otcm.wordpress.com/2017/06/24/modifying-your-Hornby-austerity/

 

@Corbs also did the de-seaming bit on his thread here:

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/127789-hunslet-50550-from-j94-buildbash/&do=findComment&comment=2912551

 

Cheers,

 

Al.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

That seems too much like throw away modelling to me!

Why ! Who said throw it away, ! I did say filler isn't glue .

but unlike triang and the six million dollar bloke things of this period are not rebuilderable for ever

and if the join affends so much you can't bring your self to use it you might as well get a few years out of it with the aid filler and paint than leave it in the box unused

 

throw away modelling can't apply to me ! 

I still have my first loco, Nellie, from my childhood fifty four years of use

 

Edited by Graham456
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking out of turn as a 7mm modeller, that is  'orrible. Makes the Kitmaster offering look like a bespoke commission from the late Guy Williams. Not the worst however, that is reserved for the gauge one brass version that repeated the infilled boiler mistake!

A few months ago on another thread, there was a discussion about the cat flap in the cab rear. After much checking I concluded that they all had them regardless of original builder, although they may have been welded up or omitted by Colliery rebuilds. Given that they do not feature on the 50550 class or smaller standard Hunslets, they must have been a WD requirement.

Beware they are addictive, and despite a simple standard specification, almost no two are identical once in civilian hands. I look forward to seeing you make a proper job of it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a Dapol one when it became apparent the DJM effort was turning into a farce.  I came to the same conclusion as you about it and threw most of it away.  The loco cost me £56 and I think all I retained was about £5.60's worth of plastic.  The rest is a mixture of RT Models and scratchbuilt but it was quite definitely worth the effort.

 

P1010739.JPG.1b64a04e448b38ca59933ac06f5c6e15.JPG

 

I've now got another one to do, but this one should involve far less work and be much more economic because it is based on an Airfix kit that cost me a tenner!

Edited by mike morley
  • Like 8
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ruston said:

Austerity-013.jpg.da80cb2f260f83acc72948f749198a0e.jpg

What's this sliding hatch thing? I've not noticed that on the Austerities that I've seen.

 

That hatch is connected with the mechanical stoker, which was fitted to all the gas-producer locos.  A lot of them had the gas-producer boilers removed but retained the mechanical stokers, even though they didnt use them.  Apparently, if a loco with a mechanical stoker was left standing for a while the fire could creep back along it from the firebox and set the contents of the bunker alight!

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, mike morley said:

 

That hatch is connected with the mechanical stoker, which was fitted to all the gas-producer locos.  A lot of them had the gas-producer boilers removed but retained the mechanical stokers, even though they didnt use them.  Apparently, if a loco with a mechanical stoker was left standing for a while the fire could creep back along it from the firebox and set the contents of the bunker alight!

Perhaps. The hatch was there from 1943. The stoker's were a 1960s development as part of an attempt to comply with the Clean Air Act. Hunslet bought a number of locos back from the MOD / WD and refurbished them before selling on to the NCB. These locos had an extra inspection plate on the smokebox door. The stoker's fell into disuse probably because they required a dedicated supply of carefully graded coal. Driver's tended to take whatever was nearest.

My own guess is that when the specification was being drawn up, someone on the committee from Swindon pointed out the usefulness of the hatch on the pannier tanks. They do not feature on any other Hunslet engines and are sometimes seen welded up so appear to be non essential for Colliery operations. I have seen it suggested that they were there to allow the removal of the regulator without dismantling the cab, but I don't have enough technical knowledge to confirm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, doilum said:

Perhaps. The hatch was there from 1943. The stoker's were a 1960s development as part of an attempt to comply with the Clean Air Act. Hunslet bought a number of locos back from the MOD / WD and refurbished them before selling on to the NCB. These locos had an extra inspection plate on the smokebox door. The stoker's fell into disuse probably because they required a dedicated supply of carefully graded coal. Driver's tended to take whatever was nearest.

My own guess is that when the specification was being drawn up, someone on the committee from Swindon pointed out the usefulness of the hatch on the pannier tanks. They do not feature on any other Hunslet engines and are sometimes seen welded up so appear to be non essential for Colliery operations. I have seen it suggested that they were there to allow the removal of the regulator without dismantling the cab, but I don't have enough technical knowledge to confirm.

Ruston and Mike are referring to the horizontal sliding hatch at the bottom of the bunker and I think you are referring to the door in the middle of the cab back that is used to access the lamp iron (although it's pretty useless if you are using any lamp with a hint of a handle on it!).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, avonside1563 said:

Ruston and Mike are referring to the horizontal sliding hatch at the bottom of the bunker and I think you are referring to the door in the middle of the cab back that is used to access the lamp iron (although it's pretty useless if you are using any lamp with a hint of a handle on it!).

Ah, I see!!!!

I have never noticed that before. Excuse to review hundreds of photos of austerities. If it is to do with the stoker you would expect to find it on the other classes converted by Hunslet in the 60s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot find any example of a bunker "serving hatch". In particular I have looked at locos working in the 1960s which had been fitted with the stoker's ( identifiable by the large steel plate which prevented damage from the coupling chain). The stokers  were vulnerable to foreign objects which jammed the screw mechanism.

Looks like the model was based on a " one off" individual created by a shed fitter thinking outside of the box.

A left field idea: a few locos were converted to oil firing for part of their lives. Is the hatch a legacy of a previous bunker conversion?

Edited by doilum
Predictive text error
Link to post
Share on other sites

I always though the Kitmaster/Airfix kit looked a better loco, but probably only because of that seam and lack of daylight. If you do a new chassis you can sort the seam and still have access inside. On mine the tank/boiler/smokebox/firebox is a separate unit that threads over the motor, plugs into the cab front and is secured from underneath by a bolt. It's Airfix with a brass running plate, Perseverance chassis and Brassmasters boiler fittings, although I don't think Gibson did the right wheels when I did this !

 

WP_20160907_20_21_54_Pro.jpg.d8904c9df7d67f3f5a7cf982d9780bab.jpg

  • Like 12
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

If I was going DCC sound etc. and wanted to maximise room inside while keeping the original drivetrain, I would bin the large metal weight (after doing the saddle tank mod), put the gubbins in the vacated space, just glue the motor in place and use lead sheet for weight instead. I need to figure out a way to RC my 50550 but have glued the standard weight inside the tank :rolleyes:

 

I still maintain that this model is more fun than the DJM one though :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve been looking at photos of fairly new army ones, and the drawing given in the IRS article (Feb 1969), lately, and no sign of the little sliding door at the bottom of the bunker.

 

My surmise is that it goes with a mechanical stoker, to allow access to free it up if it jams, and lubricate a bearing, etc.

 

I’m impatiently awaiting delivery of an 0 scale coarse-wheeled one, in plain WD green, and I have to say that what ETS produce from tinplate looks vastly more like the real thing than the model under discussion here! The wheels are generic, so not the distinctive spokes, but they’ve caught the look overall very well. And, they run like a dream.

 

 

 

 

E25E448D-D62A-43D8-BE75-27605EE91662.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to visit the memory clinic! Seems I had previously noticed a bunker catflap on a Littleton loco on page 9 of the "70s industrial steam" thread. This appears to be a "one off" although there is a Welsh example with a welded up patch in a similar place. It is suprising how much variation there was in the bunker detail. Some have a top heading, most don't. Some have two external vertical braces whilst others have a row of craters where the bunker face was welded or riveted to internal supports.

I haven't yet decided if these are in service repairs or different approaches from wartime builders.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There used to be an exceptionally good webpage giving full chapter and verse on the gas producer system and how it was fitted to the Austerities.  I thought it was on the IRS website, but apparently not.  Is anyone able to point us in the right direction?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 minutes ago, mike morley said:

There used to be an exceptionally good webpage giving full chapter and verse on the gas producer system and how it was fitted to the Austerities.  I thought it was on the IRS website, but apparently not.  Is anyone able to point us in the right direction?

Martyn Bane's website has this one:

https://www.martynbane.co.uk/modernsteam/ldp/austerity/portaausterity.htm

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be putting new frames under it for sure. I was going to mill some frames but it's probably easier to buy the RT models frame kit.  I've ordered some wheels from Alan Gibsons and I've got a smokebox door from Mike Edge that's from his 16" Hunslet kit.

 

I've got a Portescap motor/gearbox that I've had for a while now but nothing I build is ever big enough to put it in, so I might see if it will fit.

  • Like 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...