Modifying Ratio Clayton Clerestory coaches

[Nick Lawson]

Cut and shut

 

In which I get diverted away from my main project for a week.

 

I was taken by the idea discussed in other threads of cut-and-shut options for Ratio coaches. One I fancied trying was converting a D499 brake third to a D500 brake third (One extra compartment at the expense of the lavatories and a reduced luggage facility). These coaches were originally produced for local traffic with short buffers for close-coupling. However Lacey & Dow P271 notes that the 30 carriages in Lot 518 'may have been intended for branch lines because the Lot Register notes that they were to be “the same as Lot 512 except long buffers”'. I thought that for my 1923 period I might get away with putting a D500 on one end of a rake.

 

With this in mind I had been looking out for scruffy coaches I might cheaply hack about. I recently bought a very scruffy D499 and D486 from the usual source. Anyone who wondered “which idiot bought that?”... um, well it was me. I had divined from the pictures before purchase that the coaches might be too damaged for the scheme above, but I had a fall-back plan, in part suggested by @Compound2632 in another thread:  "I'm toying with what else one could produce by cut'n'shut: the passenger end of the D499 third brake could make a D492 6-wheel lavatory third..."

 

On receiving the models, the D499 was indeed too far gone for “diagram reassignment” to D500, but still possible for abbreviation to D492. However, my first essay in cut-and-shut was the D486 (6 x 3rd compartments, lavatories and a luggage compartment) which I planned to cut-down to a 33'6” D491 (5 x 3rd class compartments) This means jettisoning the plastic bogies and acquiring a 6 wheel chassis.

 

The half-assembled kit came in three parts – floor & undercarriage; sides ends and some partitions; and the roof. The original modeller had snookered themselves by fixing the buffer beams too high to allow the body to sit on the floor as intended, which didn't matter to me as I needed to shorten the floor and reclaim the beams anyway. However they had also failed to remove all traces of the sprue while managing to blob glue here and there, so the clean-down took longer than hoped.

 

I managed to separate one side before damaging an end that was weaker than the glue holding it, so left the remaining end attached to one side. I've no idea what this kit has been through but the sides had acquired a pronounced sag downwards in the middle. They must have been softened considerably as they were also pushed in at the top either side of each compartment partition.

 

My cut-and-shut of the sides has removed the sag along the length of the remaining carriage; and hopefully the other distortion won't be too obvious when the roof is on.

 

I didn't attempt a precision engineering job on the sides. I marked them and cut them freehand oversize, and then gently filed the pieces down afterwards. I followed the received wisdom of cutting down the sides along the door frames for the pieces ending in a door. The corresponding pieces with a compartment window I cut out such that there was a remaining sliver of window frame to glue against the door frame.

 

I had to remove the luggage compartment and cut it down to provide the two new ends to the shortened sides. This wasn't too bad although some redundant detail had to scraped off, particularly a commode handle.

I didn't fancy my chances of keeping everything lined up nicely while waiting for Mekpak to go off so I resorted to an old tube of Revell Contacta abandoned by my son when he left home. This seemed to do the business. Afterwards I cut out and glued in some plasticard reinforcements which hopefully won't be too obvious.

 

As I said earlier, I need to source a chassis to build this coach up on (maybe Brassmasters). The roof is going to be another bit of fun. While the sides bellied downwards the roof arches upwards in the middle. (What is it with these roof pieces that they do this?) As the clerestory appears to be glued firmly in place I may have to resort to hot water to flatten this down.

 

Anyway this has been an interesting diversion and at least demonstrated to me that chop-shopping is sufficiently practicable that in future I might risk the outlay on a new model to cut about (saving faffing about undoing somebody else's modelling).

 

However, I think I'd only want to do it where I can't buy a specific kit. I see Mr Branchlines sells a D491 along with three other 33'6” models. Oh yes and a D500. (And many other interesting kits too!)

 

Actually, there is one possible exception to the above resolution. In my unstarted projects stash there is a Slater's D530 full brake, which I was disappointed to discover is a full 2mm under scale length. As a result  I also have Highland Miscellany's brass D530 kit (which he created when he made that discovery). I had intended to sell on the Slater's kit, but suspect I may find myself inserting a couple of extensions into each of its sides. This of course would be the easy part. Whereas with the D491 I have been shortening the parts, The D530 would also need the floor and roof to be extended.

 

Oh well back to my unfinished D486!

 

[Nick Lawson]

@Compound2632 as well as suggesting the D492 Ratio cut-down as an alternative to the Slater's kit, had elsewhere noted that the Ratio kits all follow the earlier 13'3" height design with the taller, narrower clerestory. For completeness: the Slater's kits model the later 13'1" height with the lower, wider clerestory; so the modeller can have both.

     Also, the Slater's sides have the earlier style door windows, while the Ratio kits all have the later door ventilators. A  modeller of an earlier period (mentioning no names!) with their hands on both kits might even be able to combine the earlier sides with the earlier roof?

[Compound2632]

6 minutes ago, Nick Lawson said:

A  modeller of an earlier period (mentioning no names!) with their hands on both kits might even be able to combine the earlier sides with the earlier roof?

 

It's a thought. Another thought I have had but not (yet) acted upon is to speak to Worsley Works to see if they would do sides without ventilators for the various 48 ft diagrams. 

 

Not sure where that leaves one with the roof. I think, though, that the clerestory was the same width for all the Clayton carriages; it was only that the clerestory roof was flattened by 2" quite early on. Later, in Bain's time, the clerestory was made narrower: Lacy & Dow, Vol. 2 p. 191. Dimensions "A" for the clerestory height and width are, I think, the same as for the Clayton clerestories.

[Nick Lawson]

17 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Another thought I have had but not (yet) acted upon is to speak to Worsley Works to see if they would do sides without ventilators for the various 48 ft diagrams.

That would be interesting.

 

17 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Later, in Bain's time, the clerestory was made narrower:

I should have known it wasn't that simple! Thanks for the info.

[Compound2632]

On 10/10/2021 at 17:03, Nick Lawson said:

Slater's D530 full brake, which I was disappointed to discover is a full 2mm under scale length.

 

Not having looked at my two incomplete ones, started in my teens when the kit was current, for many years I'd never noticed that. I've just been and checked and so it is. That got me worried; I ran the ruler over the arc-roofed 6-wheelers which are the right length. Odd, since I had assumed they used the same underframe mouldings. Evidently not.

 

The Ratio clerestories are also a bit short - by about 1 mm. The Branchlines instructions say to pack the headstocks out from the ends of the solebars, their 48 ft etched sides being the proper length.

[Nick Lawson]

A couple of relevant bits of product information:

 

1. I see http://www.ambisengineering.co.uk/ are working up flush glazing for the Ratio kits. I asked how this was coming along & Alan Austin says maybe another year before there is a usable product.

 

2. Coach seating. As neither the Slater's nor Ratio coach seats are suitable, I was interested to spot the Comet INT5 kit - carriage interiors for non-corridor stock, including seating. Sadly the kit just incorporates strips of the Ratio seating.

[Compound2632]

Embedded links to Midland Railway Study Centre online catalogue thumbnails of DY 2277 [Item 65002]

 

 

and DY 2276 [Item 65001]

 

 

both showing 50 ft brake composite No. 3636 of Lot 528, built in 1902 - the last before Bain took over from Clayton [see also R.E. Lacy & G. Dow, Midland Railway Carriages Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1986) Figs 195A & B]. The MRSC caption notes "The bar across the drop-light was introduced in 1906 but taken out again soon afterwards"; unfortunately the entries in the Derby Registers are undated, with adjacent photos dated 1904 to 1909. Otherwise, I believe these photos show the standard finish for compartments in the non-corridor square-light clerestory stock. The shape of the seat backs, with prominent lumbar support but no separate headrest, unlike the Ratio seating:

which doesn't look like anything I can find by Googling and looks darned uncomfortable too. The Slater's seats are advertised as MR/GWR but I can't find a good photo showing their profile and a quick rummage through my box of 6-wheeler parts suggests I haven't got any. 

 

As for reproducing buttoned upholstery:

et seq.

 

[t-b-g]

More often than not I make my own seating for carriages. A few strips of plastic sheet cut to length, perhaps a touch with a file to introduce a slight curve and then arms added for the posh seats. It only takes a few minutes but you can get them just the right height, size and shape for whatever carriage you are making. They are all but invisible in most carriages anyway. It is more a case of having something in there rather than nothing.

[jwealleans]

I'm experimenting with not putting seats in compartment vehicles at all, just a printed representation of the pictures, reading lights and luggage rack.   I can always add them later if I decide it's not good enough.

 

If you want more accurate seats, especially for open carriages, this ebay seller has done a few different LNER types. They're very open to doing other types or different bundles: I had a pack of these D30 seats made up to suit an RTO (almost twice as many seats) and they turned that round very quickly, at reasonable cost and on a Sunday.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, jwealleans said:

If you want more accurate seats, especially for open carriages, this ebay seller has done a few different LNER types. They're very open to doing other types or different bundles: I had a pack of these D30 seats made up to suit an RTO (almost twice as many seats) and they turned that round very quickly, at reasonable cost and on a Sunday.

 

Those LNER Restaurant Car seats would pass muster for Midland ones.

 

 

[Nick Lawson]

I have in fact been experimenting with building my own third class seating modeled on the DY2276 image furnished above by @Compound2632 starting by fixing panels to the coach side to replicate the upholstered  ends, (which therefore has implications for the fitting of the glazing); and then bodging seats from a mixture of materials. I'll write this up in a bit, but sadly non-railway related DIY has been getting in the way.

 

As I'm quite new to all this I'm starting by pushing things as far as I can to discover my limits. However, I have started to feel the nagging "who will ever see this?" doubt, particularly as I'm not intending to fit working lighting. It may well be that my next coach interior will be much simpler! I like the first suggestion by   @jwealleans and may give that a go. Love your work btw Jonathan. And as you're there - I've been interested by your comments in your blog on fixing carriage sides to roof rather than floor. I like this idea but am not sure how practicable it would be for these coaches with pronounced tumblehome and full width partitions?

[t-b-g]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Those LNER Restaurant Car seats would pass muster for Midland ones.

 

 

 

They are not a million miles off the ones for GCR Barnum open saloon carriages either.

[jwealleans]

On 09/12/2021 at 13:41, Nick Lawson said:

I've been interested by your comments in your blog on fixing carriage sides to roof rather than floor. I like this idea but am not sure how practicable it would be for these coaches with pronounced tumblehome and full width partitions?

 

You have two choices - trim the partitions so that the sides will slide over them (the gap is unlikely to be visible, but it depends on the degree of turnunder) or build the partitions into the body and decorate the compartments from underneath.   I've done both and there's little real advantage in either, unless you need the partitions to give strength to the body shell.

 

 

[Nick Lawson]

@jwealleans Mmm, yes these plastic kits do need the partitions to keep the shape. I think I will stay with building the sides onto the floor; inserting partitions & seats and then see if I can screw down the roof through the lavatory compartment which is fairly central.

[Nick Lawson]

Happy New Year!

Picking up from where I left off regarding better seating for my Clayton clerestory coaches:

 

I didn't mention that Stephen Williams, whose book has at least partially guided me in this saga, fitted out his coach with Phoenix/BSL seats. I looked but this product is currently not available.

 

Taking into account my suspicion that I was trying too hard; together with comments by other contributors about not fitting stuff that you can't see (wot no plumbing in the lavvy?!) and practicalities of permanently fixing body to roof rather than floor; I backtracked a bit from the scratch building of full seating which I'd been engaged on. Here firstly is my minimal solution:

 

The bulk of the required seating is third class. This covers the D499 & D486 seating completely (and half of the composite. I see Phoenix/Precision do whitemetal castings for 1st class seats btw).

 

Jenkinson & Essery's “Midland Carriages – an Illustrated Review” p107 contains a view of a 3rd class compartment from a Clayton 50' brake 3rd (D523) - linked above by @Compound2632. From this it can be seen that the upholstered seats consist of a seat base that curves front to back; a lumbar support and an upper back. The most visible part is this upper back which stretches from slightly below the base of the main window approximately 2/3 of the way up the window, and reclines slightly with a concave curve.

 

I reproduced this top section with a strip of 20 thou plastikard 7mm deep, padded out with a 20 thou strip behind the bottom edge. This can be glued to the partition before fitting. Bonus points if one manages to impart concavity into the seat back while it's softened by solvent. See Picture 1. (I've mislaid my lump of blutac - so apologies for the Thumb of God in the pics)

 

If the remainder of the seat is assumed to be invisible it can be bodged from whatever is to hand - for the unfortunate passengers to be glued onto. Following @jwealleans advice above, this doesn't need to fit flush to the sides, so could be fastened to the floor with clearance of tumblehome allowing later separation of body and floor for maintenance. (Memo to self: don't fix passengers leaning on the window frame).

 

I want to add internal weight to the carriages, so this may form the bottom layer of seating.

 

Take 2.

 

Initially focused on seating, I hadn't even considered furnishings above like pictures as suggested by @jwealleans. As an experiment I just stuck a couple of strips of plastikard in the general position of the carriage interior pictures in D & E. These are obviously more visible through the windows than the rest of the seating. (Picture 2 for an exaggerated white on black effect). Jonathan, I'm converted to your printing idea.  Have you covered this technique in your blog yet?

 

Take 3.

 

Back to the seating.

 

Referring back to the picture in J & E you can see that the carriage sides are upholstered to the height of the seat back. Arguably this would be visible if you peered through the opposite window.  This can be easily simulated by sticking a further strip of plastikard to the carriage side between the appropriate pairs of windows.

 

The kit as supplied contains partitions which fasten to the sides top and bottom, but with a gap in the middle to take the glazing strip. This means that the “upholstery” strip should fit between partition end and side in place of the glazing, but this would then in turn require the glazing strip to be cut into sections and glued between the extra plastikard strips which would be fiddly and possibly not result in a nice, secure finish. In picture 2 I also have clad the sides under the windows - but this is a leftover from my earlier attempt to make fully fitted seating.

 

 

Take 4.

 

Independently of whether the coach sides are “upholstered” or not, another possible mod is to fit the lumbar support below the seat back; if still feeling pernickity that viewer might squint down through windows and notice lack of proper seating. (In another generation I expect serious modellers will have endoscopes that they will poke through any open carriage windows ).

 

The height of the seat in the prototype picture is approximately half the height of the door paneling under the window. The lumbar support stretches from the top of the seat to the bottom of the window.

 

As I had inadvertently ended up with another load of Ratio seats from the Comet interior kit, I found that the headrest section can be usefully sliced off and repurposed as these lumbar supports. I turned the piece upside down and padded out the thinner bottom edge with 30 thou strip, which gives a rough approximation of the prototype. This again can be fixed to the partition before assembly of the body without affecting the ability to keep the body detachable from the base.

 

My current plan is to use my chop-shop D492 6-wheeler body as a test bed for the above ideas and then retrofit whatever works best into the other half-built Claytons languishing in the C & W works.

 

New Year's Resolution: get some passenger stock running this year!

 

 

[Compound2632]

One way forward might be to build an exhibition sectioned carriage with full internal detail, to get it out of your system.

 

Then you would be in a better position to judge what's worth doing on the layout stock.

[Nick Lawson]

@Compound2632 Thanks for the thought but I really am trying to back out of this rabbit hole! Don't tempt me to go on! My goal for last year had nothing to do with coaches at all; and that all went to pot.

[Nick Lawson]

Having last been going on about compartment interiors I have in fact wandered off back to underframes and bogies.

 

Firstly one of those annoying little things where you spot a detail on a drawing just after you have done it the wrong way: In following Stephen Williams' "4mm coach - Part one" I duly cut the plastic trussing off the solebars and replaced with brass, set just inside the solebars. Having just completed this manoeuvre for a second coach, I finally spotted from a prototype drawing that while the diagonals are bolted to the inside of the solebars, the king post itself is evidently mounted on the bottom of the solebar, with a reinforcing t-bracket, reproduceable with some plastic strip. I referred back to Williams and saw that the nice big drawing on p36-7 includes this detail, but hides it in the binding.

[Nick Lawson]

Earlier I described assembling Brassmasters CCU bogie framing and fastening the Ratio plastic bogie sides on cosmetically. I didn't attach the footboards at the time. I originally intended to just stick the supplied plastic footboards on afterwards, but this was foiled by managing to break off at least one of the legs while separating the part from the sprue; so I had to go for replacement brass supports. This is of course something that would have been easier to measure up and  fit if done before fixing the plastic bogie side to the brass chassis. Hey ho.

 

If pursuing this approach, note that the plastic legs for the footboards are not placed symetrically - they are nearer one end than the other; which appears to be a defect of the kit. Also, while the Ratio bogie sides are slightly under scale wheelbase, I think the footboards are the correct length. The footboards model the gap in the centre of the backboard  originally intended to clear the transverse springs that were fitted to the prototype in their early years (but removed before my period). I'm sure I've seen pictures of coaches retaining this now-unnecessary cut-out.  When measuring up to fit new legs try to get this cutout centred against the bogie side. My results are variable!

 

To fit the legs to the footboards, I eventually settled on drilling holes diagonally down through the back board and bottom of the footboard, threading brass wire down through and bending up to sit flat against the footboard & backboard and securing with superglue. As my hands are wavery this technique gives me a fair chance of ending up with the wire stuck where I want it.

 

Having "footboarded" both pairs of Brassmasters bogies, I then turned my attention to the Comet 8' bogies I have for a third coach. I have in fact only fitted the cosmetic side to one bogie as I have discovered that the other pair of sides is grievously under scale length, which I understand is a hazard with whitemetal casting. I haven't yet decided how to cut and fill to get around this. Any suggestions gratefully received!

 

However, as the cosmetic kit does not include footboards, but I have various bits of scrap brass etch, I had a go at soldering up some brass footboards and filing out the necessary cutouts for the wheels. Again measuring for this would have worked better if I had unassembled components on the bench, so some of my cutouts are a bit off-centre; but overall I'm pleased to have managed the soldering. I'm afraid I started out spacing the legs a bit rough-and-readily before finally noticing (duh!) that while the Comet cosmetic kits do not include footboards, they do model where the footboard legs attached to the sideframes, so there really is no excuse for placing them incorrectly. (Ahem).

 

(Huh, wha'? Camera memory stick on blink. Pictures later... maybe.)

[Compound2632]

If the Ratio bogie sides are being used cosmetically rather than structurally, is it possible to cut'n'shut them to make a passable 8' bogie side? ditto footboards. 

 

I haven't looked at drawings or photos to find out what the catch might be! (It might only work for a clayton 8' bogie, not the Bain ones fitted to these carriages?)

[Nick Lawson]

Ooh err, I'm going to be caught using the wrong ones aren't I?! Well the Comet 8' bogies are "Midland Railway 8′ Wheelbase Riveted Carriage Bogies" https://www.wizardmodels.ltd/shop/carriage/bm4c/  , designer unspecified. 

 

They seem to generally agree with the Bain 8' diagram  in Jenkinson & Essery's Illustrated Review P23, but I admit not knowing what the Clayton 8' bogies look like.

 

The  Bain bogies have leaf springs which are about 5' long as compared with the Ratio Claytons with springs around 4' long, which would be the most obvious difference, apart from the horizontal bracing bar between the  two hornguides.

[Compound2632]

10 minutes ago, Nick Lawson said:

Ooh err, I'm going to be caught using the wrong ones aren't I?!

 

No, now that I've looked in my books (Jenkinson & Essery is better in this respect than Lacy & Dow) and drawings (scans from the Midland Railway Study Centre collection) I'm you are OK. Those Wizard ones are the Bain type, with deeper frame and 5' springs; these, I'm sure, would be what went under the 48' Clerestories - they're certainly the type under the Sheffield District 48' Bain suburbans. 

 

My suggestion could work for Clayton arc roof bogie carriages though, since the 10' bogies were based on the 8' bogies under these. But Wizard should have both types since they have kits for Bain 54' clerestories and for Clayton 43'/45' arc roof carriages.

[Nick Lawson]

A couple of posts back I reported scratching some footboards for the Comet 8' Bain bogies. (

)

Fortuitously I didn't get as far as posting pictures. Since then "the Memsahib" has got me a new phone  - a nasty new-fangled swipey thing - but much better camera!

 

I see I've already rubbed the paint off the corners. Since then I've acquired a spray can of black etch primer which hopefully will stop this in future.

[Nick Lawson]

Jumping about again:

 

A while back I tried a cut-and-shut to produce the body of a 6W D492 from a scrap D499 Bk/3rd. I claimed I would fit a Brassmasters Cleminson chassis underneath this. In fact I have used a Bill Bedford 6W chassis kit (from Eileen's). I had previously put one of these underneath a Slaters D516, with reasonable success.

 

These kits have 6 sprung W irons all fixed to the floor; the outer pairs taking a conventional wheelset. The centre pair allow lateral movement by mounting the wheels on a length of brass tube through which a 1mm axle passes. The kit doesn't include either inner or outer axle, nor any wheels. The brass tube is easy to acquire, but the modeller then comes up against the information that an Exactoscale 1mm axle is required. These have been out of production for some years. (A kind gent gave me one a while back, but I'm saving that for a more deserving model)

 

There not being any alternative product the only option is to make your own. Short lengths of 1mm bright steel are available online. Model engineers with lathes, or with friends so equipped, might turn pinpoint axles on said lathe. Not having either I considered the school of thought that as the outer tube axle turns on the inner one, it is unnecessary for that inner axle itself to turn; but I thought the centre wheelset might turn less freely as a result. I resorted to putting a length of steel into my electric drill and presenting a file at an angle approximating the pinpoints on available wheelsets. While not exactly champion engineering, this actually worked quite well.

 

One advantage of making your own axle is that you can make it to whatever length you like. The sharpest curve on my layout (“compromised EM”) is around 32” radius. To cope with this, I wanted as much sideplay on this wheelset as possible. While the normal wheelsets for these W irons are 26mm long, I found that a 26.5mm axle will work without splaying the W irons noticeably. I probably could have got away with a longer one still with splayed W irons hidden behind cosmetic components.

 

The other aspect is that the wheels themselves can be mounted on the tube slightly under gauge, again giving a bit more leeway. I found also that it is important to allow a minimal length of tube to protrude at either end to form a bearing surface against the bearings in the w irons. Otherwise when the axle slides fully to one end the wheel itself may jam against the W iron.

 

Having assembled the wheels, I found that al variation in the angle of the individual spring wires caused derailments; but that slight tweaks to equalize them fixed this.

 

Floor

 

Because I was salvaging somebody else's (badly) made kit, I cut down the floor/sole bars to length; reclaimed the buffer beams and fixed them back on with plastic angle reinforcements. As I have gradually cut more and more of the under moulding away it might have been quicker to start with some fresh plastikard and build a new floor from scratch. Reusing the existing solebars meant that the strapping was in the wrong places. I initially tried sticking plastikard strips in place, but then spotted the Mainly Trains rivet etch (from Wizard) which gives a better effect. Both approaches appear in the pics below – I still have more to do.

 

Brakes

 

The W iron etches include fold-down brake hangers. I was probably doing something wrong, but these seemed out of position. I therefore cut them off and grafted them onto lengths of scrap to get them to hang lower.

 

The separate brake block etches require a 3-layer lamination onto the above hangers. My soldering technique isn't really up to this and some of the resulting blocks don't bear close examination.

 

The etch sheet included fold up yoke pairs, which I eventually managed to understand and fit. However I ended up without the mounting on the underbody which should support the lever that works the yokes. I couldn't see how these should fit, particularly as I had faked up rodding from the yokes back to a brake cylinder assembly.

 

On a previous build I had followed Stephen Williams' example and replaced the Ratio cylinder with a whitemetal casting. This time I reused the Ratio cylinder. Initially I managed to improve it by cutting away enough to fit it against the central W iron assembly; drilling the lever to accept a brake rod; and rounding the square piston rod. Unfortunately I then blew it, firstly by managing to separate the cylinder from the cover and gluing it back askew; before an untimely waver with a hot iron melted the other side of the cylinder. Wah! However, I think that the rather nasty Ratio moulding can in principle be fettled up into something which is a more suitable size than the whitemetal alternatives.

 

Cosmetic axleboxes

 

The drawback of fitting sprung wheelsets is that you then need to attack the inside surface of the cosmetic axleboxes to allow the brass bearings to rise and fall. I have whitemetal axlebox & spring castings and have gingerly gouged out one of them. Five more to go.

[Nick Lawson]

a pleasing bit of skinflintery:

 

At the outset of this saga I bought a pack of Wizard whitemetal Clayton gastanks for these kits, to replace the half-hearted plastic representations.  However I don't have enough for the expanded fleet now contemplated. As I now have a number of discarded plastic tanks, "for the craic" I tried sawing the "legs" off a couple, grinding the remainder on some emery until approximately semi-circular in section and then glueing the pair together. This was quick to do & worked quite well. I stuck an additional plastic strip band round the middle, but this is more prominent than those moulded near the ends, so I perhaps should have ground them off and replaced to match.

 

I'd also been trying to salvage the plastic brake cylinders and have now managed to fit a pair without unwanted customisation by a hot iron. (woo hoo!) They still need a bit more fettling, but arguably aren't any wonkier than some whitemetal alternatives.

 

Furthermore, I spotted that the unwanted cranked end to the chassis that supports the hook and bar coupling had useful-looking ends that I could cut down to make  mounting brackets for the brake cylinders. (They don't really show in the picture though)