Jump to content
 

Copenhagen Fields


CF MRC
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Siberian Snooper said:

 

It's no good in the tank, it needs to be in the boiler.

Ah, but if there is none in the tank, then they can't keep the boiler topped up!

 

On one of the last runs in the races to Aberdeen the CR crew had been frugal with the water between Carlisle and Stirling and decided not to make the water stop at Stirling in order to save time.  When they arrived at Perth, where there was a loco change, they pulled forward off the main line, dropped the fire and then called for a pilot to take them to the shed.  The tender was dry and the boiler dangerously low, but they had saved some 10-15 minutes by not making the stop.

 

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

Ah, but if there is none in the tank, then they can't keep the boiler topped up!

 

On one of the last runs in the races to Aberdeen the CR crew had been frugal with the water between Carlisle and Stirling and decided not to make the water stop at Stirling in order to save time.  When they arrived at Perth, where there was a loco change, they pulled forward off the main line, dropped the fire and then called for a pilot to take them to the shed.  The tender was dry and the boiler dangerously low, but they had saved some 10-15 minutes by not making the stop.

 

Jim

 

Doesn't the ECML have troughs? I thought there was one near Stevenage.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I was lucky enough to be able to walk the railway from Holloway through Copenhagen Tunnel and the length of Belle Isle yesterday (on an official basis) and it is remarkable not only how much has changed, but how messy and untidy the whole section is now.  If only we could go back to the days documented by the layout!  Staggering how much of the original infrastructure still remains, specially on the Eastern side of the cutting.


Rich

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I suspect that getting a model of one of those Q tanks to work properly might prove a bigger problem than building its train. Even in 4mm scale getting one of them to balance properly is a nightmare, for some reason they are much worse than their H class successors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 minutes ago, bécasse said:

I suspect that getting a model of one of those Q tanks to work properly might prove a bigger problem than building its train. Even in 4mm scale getting one of them to balance properly is a nightmare, for some reason they are much worse than their H class successors.

No worse than a Kirtley well tank, David. 
 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 31/12/2019 at 19:59, Lacathedrale said:

Any reason why the Q's are harder, other than being smaller?

 

As I am sure you are aware, all 0-4-4T locos are difficult to balance in such a way that sufficient weight is carried by the four driving wheels to provide adequate traction, and the smaller the scale the worse that problem is. The problem is also worsened as the boiler diameter gets smaller and the tanks start further back relative to the position of the rear driving wheel. The SECR Q (and, as Tim has reminded us, the MR Kirtley's) are particularly awkward in this respect. I seem to recollect that Tim once waived his magic wand over an MR Kirtley and came up with a 2FS model which not only worked but worked well, so a Q should be practical but I seem to recollect a 4mm modeller, as competent in that scale as Tim is in 2FS, giving up on a fine scratch-built Q because of insoluble balance problems, and the problem should have been a lot easier to solve in 4mm scale.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The Kirtley WT solved the weight problem by mounting the Portescap 1212 motor on the last wheels of the bogie and a universal Joint to the worm. The front wheels of the bogie went along for the ride.   It was written up in a very very early MRJ. 

No longer really a problem with small diameter coreless  motors available.   They are relatively lightweight, which also accounts for the poor load hauling capacities of Farish locos with motors in the boiler. 

Tim

Edited by CF MRC
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Nice job on the signal Tim. One of ours has been clobbered a couple of times so far and the etched ladder is usually the thing that is most difficult to put right again. I'm not sure that plastic ladders would work for us because I usually send the current feed for the lamps up the ladder but I'd still be very interested to know more about your plastic laddering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/02/2020 at 16:32, CF MRC said:

The BI Up Home gantry is now pretty well complete, apart from bedding in and connecting up the mechanisms. 

You now need a signal box from which it can be operated!  :D

 

Jim

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...