Hick - Up (and running)?

[Weekday Cross]

I keep looking at this photo and longing to have a go at building the loco. It would really be the cream on the cake for my tiny model of Liverpool Lime Street.

 

Photo courtesy Dave Pennington

 

It is a "John Hick" 2-2-2-2 Webb Compound locomotive. The shot is on the very turntable I have recently been modelling. The problem is I have never built a model of a steam loco in 2FS before (ignoring a few false starts - and the less said about those the better!).

 

I can see a number of problems over and above the normal experience of 2mm scratch-builders - not the least being the danger of the driving wheels not touching the rails on anything other than perfectly level track! On the other hand, if I allow lots of play on the front and rear wheels, the loco is likely to bounce around a lot due to the long underframe and the short wheelbase of the driving wheels.

 

On the plus side, the 2mm shop supplies the buffers ready made - and I suppose the lack of coupling rods means I don't have to worry too much about accurate quartering!

 

Here is a drawing of the full loco and tender

 

So, how should I go about building a loco chassis for this beast? I am not too worried about haulage power, as my diorama only really has room for locomotives, not whole trains. One idea I had was to build the front and rear pairs of axles as bogies, for example - but the more experienced loco builders might tell me that is an unnecessary elaboration! Another idea is to mount 2 Nigel Lawton motors in the tender - one to power each driving axle. Alternatively, I could fit one of the motors inside the huge centre low-pressure cylinder, so obvious in the front elevation on the drawing. I don't mind crazy ideas, as long as they work.

 

Does anyone put there have any clever ideas - or is it best to abandon the project, before I even start?

[Kris]

Just use a single motor in the tender.

[queensquare]

Does anyone put there have any clever ideas - or is it best to abandon the project, before I even start?

 

I don't think you need to do anything particularly out of the ordinary. I would build it as a regular 2-4-2 with the motor in the tender driving via a gear box in the firebox a la normal 2mm practice. As there are no coupling rods I would gear the drivers to ensure they both turned and would lightly spring the leading and trailing axles and perhaps try to arrange an extra bit of sideplay. Haulage shouldn't be too much of a problem as there is plenty of room for weight in the boiler, particularly if you arrange for the tender weight to rest on the rear of the loco.

 

Jerry

[Nigelcliffe]

I'd be tempted to look at a rigid set of frames throughout (ie no bogies flailing around), with, as Jerry suggests, just light springing on the two un-driven axles.

 

I suppose if you wanted wheel slip, or one set going backwards, you could arrange for two motors (one in loco boiler, one in tender, plus two DCC decoders and some nifty programming), but I'd not bother and stick to Jerry's suggestion of geared drive to the two driving axles.

 

The low tender shouldn't be a problem with the better small motors now available; the Lawton 8mm, the new small rectangular motor from the Association shop. Something a little larger might also fit.

 

Most awkward bit might be sourcing the front driving wheels which need to be without a crank boss. This might be best as a scratchbuilt wheel. Taking a leaf out of Tim Watson's singles: I'm sure someone could turn up the core parts of rim and centre, leaving you to fret out to leave two or three spokes in the solid wheel, then add the other spokes from plasticard.

 

Main issue with weight is to keep it over the driving wheels, and not have it shifting the balance onto the leading or trailing wheels. I'd try to keep as much weight as possible near the centre of the loco and only weight the ends of the boiler and frames if absolutely necessary.

 

- Nigel

[Guest Natalie Graham]

Definitely go for it. It will be perfect on your little layout. You could drive both driving axles with worm gearsets on one shaft, or use one worm gearset and link the wheelsw with spur gears, with a spur reduction in the firebox to put a shaft beneath footplate level and another to take the drive from the motor in the tender to the shaft. You could lightly spring the carrying wheels in continuous frames or, if you feel that you will need the loco to negotiate tightish curves in the future then split the frames behind the cylinders and the tyres of the rear wheels and put the carrying wheels in two radial trucks. There's a good overhang of the boiler both ends ot the coupled wheelbase so you should be able to get plenty of weight in the right place. As to the wheels without crankpins I think I would simply put a thin disc over the centre of a standard wheel and file away any extraneous bits of crankpin boss that stick out round the edge.

 

 

Apart from the ouitside cylinders it shouldn't be too complicated a loco, it's nearly all boiler, and should be a lovely model when it's done. I quite fancy a go at one of these too. Anybody know if they ran through Tipton when they were new?

[backofanenvelope]

gets a from me.. looks like a dooable project

Tom

[Weekday Cross]

Apart from the ouitside cylinders it shouldn't be too complicated a loco, it's nearly all boiler, and should be a lovely model when it's done. I quite fancy a go at one of these too. Anybody know if they ran through Tipton when they were new?

 

Wow! I wasn't expecting competition, Natalie, not that I mind. Before you know it there may be enough demand for a kit to be produced

 

Have you got the definitive book on LNWR locomotives, "An Illustrated History of LNWR Engines" by Edward Talbot? That is indispensable for this kind of thing. There were only 10 John Hicks built though, so even if they did pass through Tipton they would have been swamped by everything else.

 

Thanks everyone for your replies, which have given me plenty to think about. The consensus certainly seems to be solidly for a rigid chassis, with one motor. In a way, it takes some of the fun out of the project, but it does sound like the sensible approach.

 

As for the leading driving wheels, I hope I can fudge it by gently filing away the crankpin boss, but may change my mind.

 

The idea of 2 motors and 2 decoders, so that I can run the wheels in opposite directions, really would be fun though. Something to amuse myself with towards the end of a show

[backofanenvelope]

<snip>The idea of 2 motors and 2 decoders, so that I can run the wheels in opposite directions, really would be fun though. Something to amuse myself with towards the end of a show

 

Then you would have the inevitable "I don't believe they would do that! etc" comments, would be funny to watch though.

Tom

[Weekday Cross]

Then you would have the inevitable "I don't believe they would do that! etc" comments, would be funny to watch though.

Tom

 

Ah, but everyone knows it did happen - even though it probably didn't happen anything like as often as everyone thinks. Truth is, the front driving axle was fitted with a slip eccentric, to automatically reverse the valve gear when the loco changed direction. So, momentarily, the front drivers might go the opposite way round to the rear ones, when a loco had just backed onto a train, for example. They would only contnue to go in opposite directions if the slip eccentric didn't do its job. Allegedly, drivers would use a pinch bar to manually operate the slip eccentric whilst the locos were still stationary, just in case. Overall, it must have worked, as many 3-cylinder compounds were only fitted with the slip eccentric after first being fitted with a conventional manually-operated reversing rod.

[bertiedog]

I did a Greater Britain the "Queen Empress", the slightly bigger LNWR 2222 sister class, in 4mm with two motors, but in 2mm scale, the boiler space is needed for traction weight, a nearly solid boiler helps, with a drive shaft, with worms, driven from a motor in the tender. The shaft could be lowered with spur gears to get under the footplate. It will need small universal joints made or sourced for the shaft. Many easy to make designs exist.

 

Electrical pickup is easy, loco wheels to tender wheels, with a small insulated joint in the drive shaft, no wheel picks, no drag or wear.

 

I would treat the chassis as a large 040, the chassis built without springing, but with the lead axle rigid to the locomotive main frames, the trailing axle able to pivot very slightly. The lead and trailing wheels should very lightly sprung, to keep the weight centred on the drivers.

 

The pivot point of the trailing axle, can be arranged to run on the axis of the drive shaft so that the gear mesh remains constant, although separate gearboxes could be used, with a bit more complexity.

 

The frames can be slimmed down in width in front of and behind the drivers to allow a bit more sideplay.

 

If 2mm Association fine scale track is used with large radius track and long points, then no bogies or trucks would be needed.

 

Driving wheels might be scratchbuilt, but would require lathe work to finish silver soldered blanks, made as disks, with spokes soldered into a recessed front, then the back machined away to leave a spoked wheel. Other than that, then Association Wheels etc, with mods to the lead wheels centre.

 

Other than the drive arrangements it is a useful sized loco, and a quite rarely modelled prototype.

 

Stephen.

[bertiedog]

On the reversing problems on all the Compounds, Webb had arranged bypass steam valves to allow the rear wheels to have set the motion before the exhaust steam was sent to the compound cylinder, so that in theory it was a driver mistake to get the wheels opposing themselves.

It is recorded though that it happened, especially in manoeuvring in terminus stations when running light, it is often forgotten that Webb's intentional theory was that the rails act as the coupling rods, but on greasy rails and light load the more powerful rear wheels tended to grip.

The big problem was few dare contradict Mr Webb, he was stubbornly autocratic on engineering, and expected the drivers to comply exactly with his methods which in day to day running was difficult.

 

Stephen.

[queensquare]

The shaft could be lowered with spur gears to get under the footplate. It will need small universal joints made or sourced for the shaft. Many easy to make designs exist.

 

No need to go to the complication of dropping the drive shaft below footplate level. The thin wire shafts used in 2FS are all but invisible, particularly when spinning.

 

 

Electrical pickup is easy, loco wheels to tender wheels, with a small insulated joint in the drive shaft, no wheel picks, no drag or wear.

 

Split axle pickup is standard in 2FS and all Association wheels are designed with that in mind using a stub axle and an insulated muff. No need for an insulated joint in the drive shaft. The UJ's are made from two bits of tube on the motor/worm shaft with a slit on the inner one forming a pocket for the drive shaft to sit in. The latter is made from thin wire bent to resemble a dogs bone which is trapped between the UJ's

 

 

Jerry

[bertiedog]

I very well know that split frame is considered the best by the 2 mm Association, but it can cause issues in practical designs, forcing the use of a type of framing, insulation etc., that imposes a system method in the same way that was also tried with early P4.

 

Many builders do not like to use a system, however well thought of by the designers, but in the case of the 2mm association it has firm routes in easing problems with small mechanisms.

 

The wheels mount on sleeves, quartering is easy etc, but it does require gears to drive the sleeves,and the accuracy has to be good. Live frames also require insulation from the body to be provided,and split cylinders and valve gear, electrically confined to each side.

 

With respect there are many ways to build a chassis, and with a tender loco the logical approach that allows for all ways of building a chassis is to use the tender as electrical return, you don't have to, but it is the easiest way. A solid chassis can be used easier with conventional axles, or the association wheels can be drilled out to take ordinary axles should you wish.

 

I have used split frame in 2mm for all non tender locos I have made, usually with conventional frames, with perspex frame spacers, securing with 16 BA screws. each frame is brass and directly connected to the motor.

 

For tender locos the tender acts as return, with one set of the wheels insulated, in the case of using association wheels these would have to be rim insulated on one side , this requires lathe work to do it, and may be out for most builders.

 

If the Association parts and methods are used then the split frame may well be better to use, especially for a first time builder as so much help is available for using the parts.

 

On universal joints there are many designs, I try to specify types that require no lathe work, and discourage any that use flexible tubes, terrible waste of power etc with that type. Simple T bar and tube can be made accurately without a lathe, as can Hex tube types,which make good sliding universals. Very small telescopic hex tube is available quite easily that will fit over 16 BA nuts,drilled out to fit the drive shafts. There are lots of other designs.

 

It really should not be necessary to have an exposed drive shaft, but it is the easiest way to do it, but I think like a lot methods of the past it has had its day and these days a hidden drive would be better. But it is up to the builder in the end.

 

Stephen.

[queensquare]

Hi Steve, I'm afraid, with all respect, I would disagree with much of this,

 

The wheels mount on sleeves, quartering is easy etc, but it does require gears to drive the sleeves,and the accuracy has to be good. Live frames also require insulation from the body to be provided,and split cylinders and valve gear, electrically confined to each side.

 

I don't see that accuracy has to be greater than any other method. As for cylinders, valve gear, brake gear etc being live to its particular side of the chassis it has many advantages not least being the fact that you never get any mysterious shorts due to wheels touching something. Isolating the chassis from the body requires nothing more sophisticated than some 5 thou plasticard or a layer of superglue soaked fag paper on top of the spacers.

 

With respect there are many ways to build a chassis, and with a tender loco the logical approach that allows for all ways of building a chassis is to use the tender as electrical return, you don't have to, but it is the easiest way. A solid chassis can be used easier with conventional axles, or the association wheels can be drilled out to take ordinary axles should you wish.

 

This may be simpler in the larger scales but in 2FS has a number of disadvantages. Firstly, you end up with pickup on just one side, unless you fit wiper pickups on the other side which is best avoided if possible due to drag - the whole point of split axle in the first place. In 2FS you want every wheel possible picking up. Secondly, drilling out Association wheels to 'take ordinary axles' is not realy practicle and I can't for the life of me see why you would want to. It simply adds a lot of work to end up with a poorer result.

 

 

For tender locos the tender acts as return, with one set of the wheels insulated, in the case of using association wheels these would have to be rim insulated on one side , this requires lathe work to do it, and may be out for most builders.

 

No ammount of lathe work would allow association wheels to be 'rim insulated', they are an all metal wheel with an integral stub axle.

 

It really should not be necessary to have an exposed drive shaft, but it is the easiest way to do it, but I think like a lot methods of the past it has had its day and these days a hidden drive would be better. But it is up to the builder in the end.

 

Dropping the drive shaft below footplate level is not neccessary and simply adds noise and extra complication. I don't know of any experienced builder of locos in 2FS that does this and the idea has certainly not 'had its day'. Indeed, the superb Association kits for the 9F and Black 5 designed by Bob Jones of Fence Houses, the Jubilee and Duchess kits designed by Nigel Hunt and I presume the 22xx kit designed by Chri Higgs all use fine wire shafts passing through the tender coal hole/firebox door. As I said before in 2FS they are all but invisible. This may well be different in the larger scales.

 

Jerry

[bertiedog]

There is obviously a difference of opinion on methods, but please get the facts right, it is completely feasible to rim insulate the Association wheels, the tyre is removed and replaced with an insulating slip. and new tyres. I have done this dozens of times to these wheels and other similar types in all scales, not just 2mm..

 

Also I did make it quite clear I use split frame where it is best employed, with tank locomotives

 

On the insulating sleeves, I am sure they are accurate as supplied , but any sleeve adds to tolerances, and I have experienced problems with them in the past.. Personally I replace the sleeve with tufnol, bored through, with a steel outer sleeve added , and then turned between centres to run true. but this is my way,and will not suit others who have not got lathes, and I fully expect most users will get good accuracy without bothering.

I did say the drive shaft was up to the builder, but many builders I knew even forty years ago did not like using exposed drive shafts, and it was carefully stated that this was a personal position,

 

Having a tender return on a loco may mean wheels not picking up on all, but the dividend is simplicity , no insulated frames, no split parts to insulate, but the penalty is insulated rims, beyond most builders.

 

Over the years I have had more people comment to me on this than any other 2mm subject, but often taking the 4mm anti split frame position and carrrying it into 2mm, quite unnecessary, as I said before split frame is excellent, it works fine, but is said to be complex to do for first time builders by lots of people,and tends to put the newcomer off..

 

On the drive shaft on the John Hicks, looking at the wheel size and small14:1 gears, the drive shaft could go under the wheels anyway, and travel hidden to the tender, with either 2:1 gears or 3 :i belt drive to raise the shaft line to the motor. 28:1 or 42:1 would work with the LNWR loco.

 

But as a first loco it could well pay to stick with the association methods, there is plenty of experience available using the parts.

 

The only 2mm I have not completed and awaits work is a LMS Flatiron, this has split frames, but was started long before modern small motors and uses the structure to contain the motor, which is homemade. It has earlier 2mm association wheels, but these are modified with hollow bored axles, and a fibre glass core for insulation, leaving no sleeve, just a plain normal axle. The split is offset to allow the normal brass gear to fit the centre without shorting out.

 

Just mentioned to show there are other ways to crack a nut.....over the years I think I built about 25 2mm locos in all, plus producing N gauge for others.. I don't follow 2mm so closely due to arthritis making handling the small components more difficult these days.

 

Stephen.

[bertiedog]

Just for reference........ there are two ways the 2mm association wheels can be modified if insulation is needed, both need a lathe, they cannot be attempted any other way.

• First is to chuck, (preferably in a precision collet), the wheel on the stub axle and turn off the tyre completely and glue with hard epoxy an insulation strip of thin envelope paper on the rim,and then add a new tyre, and machine the new tyre true.
• The second way is to chuck the tyre of the wheel in a split collet or sized collet,and drill out the entire stub axle, fit a Tufnol or Bakelite bush and bore to take a normal plain steel axle, 1.5mm or 2mm to suit the gears available.

If the second way is ever used, never grip any wheel by it's tyre in a three jaw chuck, the pressure will distort the whole wheel.to a triangular shape.

 

If you have a lathe then making the wheels from scratch is not to difficult, plain disk wheels are made in nickel silver, the front is recessed to the depth of the spokes,less a tiny bit, and spokes make from nickel wire are fitted into the recess and spaced out . If cut carefully they "jam" into place, the inner ends have to be filed to fit around the boss evenly and tight.. A.motor tool and abrasive disks make the filing easy........

 

The whole lot is then heated and silver soldered, and then the back is machined in the lathe to expose the spokes,and the tyre finished as usual with any model engineering wheel. The lot is then fettled and filed to finish and the wheel re-bored in a collet to fit the axle or an insulating bush. The centre bush is then jig drilled for the crankpin.

 

Looking forward to seeing the John Hicks, with whatever methods are chosen, as I said it is a choice for the builder, I like 2mm very much, the whole scale appearance is so much better than OO, and larger formations possible are very attractive.

 

Stephen.

[queensquare]

Just for reference........ there are two ways the 2mm association wheels can be modified if insulation is needed, both need a lathe, they cannot be attempted any other way.

• First is to chuck, (preferably in a precision collet), the wheel on the stub axle and turn off the tyre completely and glue with hard epoxy an insulation strip of thin envelope paper on the rim,and then add a new tyre, and machine the new tyre true.
• The second way is to chuck the tyre of the wheel in a split collet or sized collet,and drill out the entire stub axle, fit a Tufnol or Bakelite bush and bore to take a normal plain steel axle, 1.5mm or 2mm to suit the gears available.

If the second way is ever used, never grip any wheel by it's tyre in a three jaw chuck, the pressure will distort the whole wheel.to a triangular shape.

 

If you have a lathe then making the wheels from scratch is not to difficult, plain disk wheels are made in nickel silver, the front is recessed to the depth of the spokes,less a tiny bit, and spokes make from nickel wire are fitted into the recess and spaced out . If cut carefully they "jam" into place, the inner ends have to be filed to fit around the boss evenly and tight.. A.motor tool and abrasive disks make the filing easy........

 

The whole lot is then heated and silver soldered, and then the back is machined in the lathe to expose the spokes,and the tyre finished as usual with any model engineering wheel. The lot is then fettled and filed to finish and the wheel re-bored in a collet to fit the axle or an insulating bush. The centre bush is then jig drilled for the crankpin.

 

Looking forward to seeing the John Hicks, with whatever methods are chosen, as I said it is a choice for the builder, I like 2mm very much, the whole scale appearance is so much better than OO, and larger formations possible are very attractive.

 

Stephen.

 

 

Hi Stephen,

thanks for your interesting response - we will have to agree to differ on this.

Whilst I concede that it is possible to rim insulate Association wheels (albeit with a lot of work) I still fail to see that carrying out all the work outlined above, arranging for the loco tender coupling to be insulated, the UJ to be insulated and loosing 50% of your pickups into the bargain is somehow simpler than popping a bit of insulating material on top of your PCB frame spacers to insulate the chassis from the body. However, as you say, the choice is up to the builder.

 

I do, however, fully agree with your closing comment re. 2mm modelling generally.

 

I shall leave the floor to others to offer their views on the debate,

 

regards Jerry

[Nigelcliffe]

If wanting to follow Stephen's methods, then approach the Association shop for a price for unfinished wheel castings. It will be far cheaper than finished wheels, and will save wasting the time of the hard-pressed Association wheel assembly team. The assembly team find it hard to keep up with demand, and its stupid in the extreme to have their work immediately dismantled by the customer.

 

I'd use Acetal (Delrin) for the insulation at an axle, not Tufnol. I have done this on wheels to replace the Farish N wheels in an 04 diesel shunter.

 

 

There are risks of short circuits with the half-half pickup advocated by Stephen. The obvious one is from loco to tender. The less obvious is via the buffer beam of either end, then through stock buffing up and to the track. I've known of this to happen in 4mm scale and anneal the spring wire in a train of wagons with AJ couplings, the entire rake required new couplings fitting.

 

 

- Nigel

[Weekday Cross]

I quite fancy a go at one of these too. Anybody know if they ran through Tipton when they were new?

 

According to a couple of quotes in "The LNWR Recalled" by Edward Talbot, compounds were a very rare sight in Birmingham New Street - and therefore i guess in Tipton also. They tended to stick to the Trent Valley main line.

 

Model Manchester London Road if you want the lot - as even the one-off compound tank locos were a regular sight there - on Buxton locals. The loco servicing area to the south of the station would make almost as nice a model as my subject, Liverpool Lime Street - and is far better recorded in photos.

[bertiedog]

Just notes..........

 

The issue of shorts to stock applies as much to split frame as any other method, all stock buffers beams should be insulated if live stock wheels are fitted, but most wagons will have a totally insulted body from both sides of the track if normal bush insulated wheels are used. If one side is left in contact, even reversing stock could cause shorts, not a good idea.

 

As a rule most split frame chassis would have an insulated buffer beam anyway, otherwise there is a short. The metal buffers would be set into the insulating material, srb board or fibreglass or my favourite Bakelite. There is no reason to have the buffers "Live" and the insulated material buffer beam can usually support the couplings, leaving them electrically "dead".

 

Best rule for all stock is fully insulted wheels on everything, the only exception would be coaches with split bogies to pickup power for lighting.

 

Current should not flow from either type of loco frames via couplings, as here should be nowhere for it to go.

On Acetal plastic for bushes, try, if your new to this, to get a hard "filled grades", if a rod, try flexing it, and see how far it bends. Some "unknown" acetal sold on ebay is very soft, and makes very poor bushes. Perspex clear and coloured grades are generally OK.very easy to machine and take epoxy well as a glue.

 

Try never to buy surplus plastic and find out the bar in Nylon, wonderful material, but not for model railway uses, will not glue!!!!! At model shows I have often seen surplus nylon bar sold as acetal.plastic.

 

Tufnol is generally hard, but difficult to find these days in rod, except surplus material of unknown grade. If you can get it, then Bakelite sheet is very good, crisp and machinable. It is still made, for electrical aerial insulation etc.

 

The Bakelite 8mm sheet is perfect for split frames, brown or black colours, hard, crisp,machines and files well, perfect insulation,and about as indestructible as any plastic material. It takes tapped BA holes easily. and epoxy glue adheres perfectly after cleaning the Bakelite with thinners.

 

Old fashioned material, but works. If you can find the black stuff, it requires no painting at all, sandwiched into brass outer frames, Fortunately a sheet goes a long way with 2mm frames, a lifetimes supply from a couple of square feet.

 

All of this 2mmFS is tempting me to find the Flatiron and finish it!

 

Stephen

[Weekday Cross]

Many thanks for the technical advice, everyone. I expected there to be several ways of building a beast like this. The options have given me plenty of food for thought.

 

A couple of minor observations before I try and fully absorb everything that has been said ....

 

a. LNWR tenders of the era I am modelling had little but daylight below footplate level. Dropping the drive shaft below the footplate would probably be very conspicuous - far more so than on most other designs.

 

b. My tendency would be to use Association wheels and muffs with split-frame construction - there are specially-made muffs for gears that are supposed to be concentric.

 

The worst I could do would be to frighten myself into thinking I have to achieve absolute perfection, or that there is only one way of building it and nothing else will be good enough. At worst (I hope), the loco may limp slowly backwards and forwards - but that is all it needs to do anyway. Even a static model would be better than nothing at all, provided it looks the part.

 

In fact I could easily visualise a static scene where the driving wheels are rotating in opposite directions, but the loco is not moving - with lots of spectators standing around scratching their heads. The wheels could be rotated from under the baseboard. I could even funnel smoke and steam into the model from under the baseboard I am supposed to be modelling a diorama, after all, not a fully-working layout.

 

No, I will try and build a fully-working loco, I promise

[2mm Andy]

 

All of this 2mmFS is tempting me to find the Flatiron and finish it!

 

Stephen

 

Stephen,

 

Interesting to read of your previous 2FS projects.

 

It would be nice to see photos if you have any, especially of the flatiron - I can think of a couple of 2FS modellers on here who are interested in the Midland Railway.

 

Andy

[bertiedog]

This was the arrangement I suggested assuming Lawton 14:1 or 15 :1 gears and a 2;1 belt drive from the smaller Lawton coreless or equivalent.. Nothing shows bar the drive shaft and its under the footplate at water pipe level. The area shown for motor is best estimate, it has to clear top of flanges and be under the top plate. The length would be tighter than shown, given the practicalities of mountings and the plate and bearings for the lower pulley, which would be mainly out of view behind the lead wheels.

 

All applies whether split or other pickups are used.

 

As I mentioned, try to treat the whole thing as an 040 for balancing,and add the other wheels only with very light springing, lead axle rigid, and trailing sprung or pivoted. The springing needed is so slightly would barely disturb the gear mesh, whilst pivoting would not alter the mesh at all.

 

No surviving photos of the 2mm layout or stock, it was up to forty years ago now, and a lot of locos were built for others.

 

Stephen.

[Stoker]

I really hope you go ahead with this, it's a fascinating loco, and I must admit to having somewhat of a soft spot for early steamers. The absence of con-rods is a big ol' brucy bonus, the thought of scratchbuilding that sort of thing gives me all sorts of nervous shakes.

 

Best,

Scott.

[Guest Natalie Graham]

According to a couple of quotes in "The LNWR Recalled" by Edward Talbot, compounds were a very rare sight in Birmingham New Street - and therefore i guess in Tipton also. They tended to stick to the Trent Valley main line.

 

Model Manchester London Road if you want the lot - as even the one-off compound tank locos were a regular sight there - on Buxton locals. The loco servicing area to the south of the station would make almost as nice a model as my subject, Liverpool Lime Street - and is far better recorded in photos.

 

I like Tipton as a subject to model because of the link with the canals as well as the railway. It was thinking of modelling an interchange basin on the BCN that got me interested in model railways again. It would be nice to get a compound or two on there though, maybe I need to find a date when the Trent Valley line was closed for engineering work and model diverted trains. .

 

I'll have a look at the loco service area at Manchester though, something like that, or a loco shed would be a good model to put the locos on as I build them and would be something I could work on while I wait for my house movbe to progress. (I could probably model the whole of the LNWR system before that happens if things carry on as they are ) I don't fancy Manchester London Road as a layout though, I have no idea how I would work the bizarre goods yards for one thing, if the contemporary OS maps are accurate.