Ruston's Industrial locomotive and wagon workshop thread.

[Ruston]

14 minutes ago, Sandhole said:

When you say Vanguard, I thought you meant the later Thomas Hill 0-6-0 loco that is the rebuild of the Sentinel 0-6-0.
The Mike Edge kit.
Chris.

 

It's the 4-wheel chain-drive diesel. The sort that were rebuilds of Sentinel steam locomotives.

[Sandhole]

I figured that, thanks.

[Michael Edge]

2 hours ago, Sandhole said:

When you say Vanguard, I thought you meant the later Thomas Hill 0-6-0 loco that is the rebuild of the Sentinel 0-6-0.
The Mike Edge kit.
Chris.

 

Our kit isn't for a rebuild, they were mostly new built locos although I think some Sentinels have been fitted with TH cabs. Only the earlier Vanguard 4w locos were rebuilds of steamers (the ones with a c suffix rather than v in the works number), most of these were new builds.

[Ruston]

An evening's work produced an almost running chassis from the RT Models kit.

 

The motor provided is longer than the one shown. I want to try to save as much space as possible for weight and DCC gear, so I used a smaller one from my own stock. The screw holes don't line up with the gearbox on this one so I soldered it on.

 

 

Edited April 2, 2022 by Ruston

[Ruston]

More on the Thomas Hill.

 

This is a very easy kit to build and all of the bodywork, so far, has been done in just one day. It still needs the detailing of handrails, window surrounds etc. adding, and the cab roof fitting, but it's still been a quick build with no problems.

 

The cab and engine casing are not yet fixed to the rest of the body. As with the Yorkshire, I will need to paint the window frames and glaze the windows before paint as the cab must be soldered on and will not be removable after that. I could fit the cab, paint everything and then put the roof on afterwards but I had some trouble with the cab roof on the last one of these that I built, so I'd rather fit the roof whilst everything is accessible from the inside.

 

[Kevin Johnson]

This is progressing nicely Dave.

[PenrithBeacon]

What is the wheel base on that model, please. I ask because I have a partially completed Sentinel that has a wheelbase of 19mm with a track of 18.83! I plan to extend the wheelbase to 20mm 

[Ruston]

14 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

What is the wheel base on that model, please. I ask because I have a partially completed Sentinel that has a wheelbase of 19mm with a track of 18.83! I plan to extend the wheelbase to 20mm 

I haven't measured it but I'm sure it will be 19mm as the Sentinels that the prototypes these were rebuilt from had a 4ft. 9in. wheelbase. Why would you want to extend it when it's already as it should be?

[PenrithBeacon]

Because the difference between 18.83mm and 19mm ie 0.17mm is too slight. It's ok if you model in 00 because the difference between 16.50mm and 19mm is easily achieved.

Also the fold up style of chassis that RT has adopted doesn't lend itself to P4 IMO. I didn't, when I bought it at a Scaleforum, realise just how impractical it all was for P4 or at least beyond my skills.

I've already attempted one scratch built chassis for it but made a mess of it. I'll go again when I can muster up the enthusiasm but for now it languishes it its box. The body BTW is very good indeed; excellent. 

[Ruston]

21 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Because the difference between 18.83mm and 19mm ie 0.17mm is too slight. It's ok if you model in 00 because the difference between 16.50mm and 19mm is easily achieved.

 

I don't model in P4, so I don't understand why the wheelbase must be so much greater than the gauge. I thought P4 was all to finer tolerances, so if the real thing had only half an inch greater wheelbase than it did gauge, then why can't P4 run with the same?

[PenrithBeacon]

Not all P4 modellers are hugely skilled craftsmen! This one certainly isn't!

As I said earlier the difference between 18.83 and 19mm is 0.17mm or about 0.008". Add tolerances to that and you are talking about very highly skilled work to toolmaker's standards, way beyond my capabilities particularly using hand tools only.

I decided that the best way forward was to move the wheelbase from 19 to 20mm to give me a little more to play with. I think it was the right thing to do,  then and now. I'll get to it again sometime. 

[cctransuk]

13 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Not all P4 modellers are hugely skilled craftsmen! This one certainly isn't!

As I said earlier the difference between 18.83 and 19mm is 0.17mm or about 0.008". Add tolerances to that and you are talking about very highly skilled work to toolmaker's standards, way beyond my capabilities particularly using hand tools only.

I decided that the best way forward was to move the wheelbase from 19 to 20mm to give me a little more to play with. I think it was the right thing to do,  then and now. I'll get to it again sometime. 

 

It seems that Ruston is not the only one who fails to understand your reason for needing to increase the wheelbase, and how this relates to the gauge - I too am mystified.

 

Please explain why the wheelbase needs to be greater than the gauge.

 

John Isherwood.

[Mark Saunders]

19 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

It seems that Ruston is not the only one who fails to understand your reason for needing to increase the wheelbase, and how this relates to the gauge - I too am mystified.

 

Please explain why the wheelbase needs to be greater than the gauge.

 

John Isherwood.

Strange how the GWR managed wagons with a wheelbase shorter than the gauge on broad gauge!

[Ruston]

I'm going to say that it's another one finished.

It weighs in at 133g, which is plenty for the short trains it needs to handle. I fitted a Zimo MX648 decoder, Kungfu stay alive and a Youchoos S7 speaker. The sound project is Paul Chetter's, for a Rolls-Royce.Sentinel. These 25-ton Thomas Hills did use Rolls-Royce engines but I think they had fewer cylinders and weren't turbocharged. The loco that was recorded for the project does have a turbo. It's still near enough and a high-speed engine, with a twin-disc torque convertor transmission, so it'll do for me. I think the turbo was added in the Shelby Group workshops.

Edited April 2, 2022 by Ruston

[Michael Edge]

On 25/04/2021 at 17:23, PenrithBeacon said:

What is the wheel base on that model, please. I ask because I have a partially completed Sentinel that has a wheelbase of 19mm with a track of 18.83! I plan to extend the wheelbase to 20mm 

The High Level "Rustler" which we use in our 48DS kit is just over 20mm wheelbase in its normal configuration. I say normal because by angling the motor part away from horizontal the wheelbase can be altered. Don't forget that the wheelbase of all chain drive locos is purely nominal, all are adjustable to cope with chain stretch.

[Ruston]

I asked Andy to merge my "A Ruston What if?" thread with this workshop thread so as to keep everything in one place as I have an update. The original thread can now be found on page one of this thread; thanks, Andy.

 

I have done some bits of work on the Ruston LSSE project but the lastest is a great step forward. The Heljan chassis has been stripped bare - only the die cast block and the plastic overlays to the frames, with the pickups and brake gear, remain. It took some working out to see how the motor and gears could be removed but they were out of harm's way when I attacked the block with files and a milling machine.

 

The end of the block has been removed so that the plastic body can be shortened. There will still be enough space to fit a speaker.

 

Edited April 2, 2022 by Ruston
Typing without my specs on

[Ruston]

This is a 'what if' and not an actual prototype but what I am trying to build is as near an LSSH as I can but without a jackshaft. I have been studying prototype photos and have found small differences in LSSH that were built for the M.O.D. and the Coal Board. The only drawing that I have is from a Ruston brochure that shows details that neither of the aforementioned have, and it hasn't been possible to discover if there were any dimensional differences. I wanted to put a handrail across the front, as seen in a photo of an NCB loco, but the engine casing comes right up to the front on the 07 and on the MOD locos. The chassis block cannot be cut back because it has a hole into which the block that holes the motor in place fits.

So I will have to have handrails on the sides of the engine casing, as on the MOD locos.

 

The BR Class 07 buffer beams have all sorts of holes and slots in them. I have filled these in and have also removed the jacking brackets, to be replaced with plates, as on the NCB locos.

 

Nothing is fixed down yet but it is coming together.

 

I have had to cut off so much excess rubbish, and fill so many holes but without all the junk that British Rail insisted on fitting, they're quite a handsome engine.

 

 

 

 

[Corbs]

Looking great so far. I saw this on facebook and thought you might be interested - resembles an 0-4-0 version of the LSSH.

I believe it was in Italy.

[Ruston]

2 minutes ago, Corbs said:

Looking great so far. I saw this on facebook and thought you might be interested - resembles an 0-4-0 version of the LSSH.

I believe it was in Italy.

It is an LSSH. They built some as 0-4-0s. The only industrial LSSE that I know of was an 0-4-0 but, unlike the 0-6-0s built for BR, it  had a jackshaft drive.

[Ruston]

The LSSE is running again and equipped with DCC sound. The only place to put the stay alive is on the cab floor but it will not be seen once the cab is on and glazed. A driver figure will also block the view of it.

I have made and fitted a handrail at the rear and have fixed the motion for the oiler. This was broken when I bought the model. It was otherwise brand new but due to this small defect it cost £40 under retail price. I fitted a short length of copper tube and an etched brass wheel, on a short length of 0.5mm brass wire to fix it in place. 3-link couplings have replaced the Heljan screw couplings.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Ruston

[Ruston]

It might need a bit of weathering and it really ought to have hadrails at the sides, just at the cab rear. I may have to scratch the paint off and solder some on before I weather it.

 

[rope runner]

That has come out lovely Dave, nice one. 

 

Paul A. 

[Ruston]

On 08/05/2021 at 08:39, 1whitemoor said:

That has come out lovely Dave, nice one. 

 

Paul A. 

Thanks, Paul, I couldn't have done it without your input.

 

I have finished the LSSE, thanks to Mike Edge providing some nickel silver RUSTON plates and the RH plates for the cabside. The shunter, shunter's pole, and the brake stick are all from Modelu. More of Mike's Plates have also enabled me to finish the repainted 48DS Ruston.

There are more photos of the LSSE on my Charlie Strong's Scrapyard thread.

[Ruston]

Kit building is still on hold, due to the lack of High Level gearboxes, so I've dragged another RTR modification out of its box.

 

I started this one last year and got as far as stripping it down. It is a Hattons Andrew Barclay 16-inch 0-4-0ST. I have fitted sound to a couple of these but it's a faff. There is very little space and the decoder has to be literally crammed in sideways and fits in the body shell, along with a speaker that is stuffed into the smokebox. Getting the body back on, whilst keeping all the wires from getting trapped is a pain in the backside. There is also no space at all for a stay alive. This one is going to have a stay alive and it will also get some added weight.

 

There will be a couple of small cosmetic changes, too.

 

Everything was stripped from the chassis block and a section was milled out to accomodate the stay alive.

The motor has been replaced with a smaller one, so the decoder can fit above it. The speaker will go on the flats in front of the motor and it will all be a self-contained unit that allows the body to be easily fitted and removed. It also leaves the smokebox and spaces either side of the motor free to fill with lead.

Edited March 16, 2023 by Ruston

[03060]

Very neat Dave, can I ask what you use for the milling, please.

 

Regards,

Ian.