RMweb Premium DLT Posted November 15, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 15, 2015 My first reaction was that that's a massive heavy flywheel, and will need supporting. Then I remembered of course its 2mm scale, so that flywheel is I guess, 6mm diameter at the most? Cheers, Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold queensquare Posted November 15, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 15, 2015 Bit more progress today. I got the cab floor and fall plate in place. The latter, unlike the prototype is soldered to the front of the tender and rests on the loco. This is adjusted to give the correct ride hight and, more importantly transfer some of the weight of the tender to the rear of the loco, a really useful technique on a 4-4-0 The second picture is of a Q6 chassis nearing completion which shows my normal UJ on a loco - very simple and means the drive shaft doesn't get lost. Jerry 14 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 15, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 15, 2015 Bit more progress today. I got the cab floor and fall plate in place. The latter, unlike the prototype is soldered to the front of the tender and rests on the loco. This is adjusted to give the correct ride hight and, more importantly transfer some of the weight of the tender to the rear of the loco, a really useful technique on a 4-4-0 image.jpg The second picture is of a Q6 chassis nearing completion which shows my normal UJ on a loco - very simple and means the drive shaft doesn't get lost. image.jpg Jerry Well that simplifies one end at least. Not being able to fall out if loco and tender are separated is a big plus too. Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentin Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Hi Jerry, I am following with great interest your progress with the 3P. The worm holder (is it called "cantilever"?) is part of your chassis etch design or is it cut from one of the Association's / Fence House's chassis and soldered to the 3P's one? Regards, Valentin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium CF MRC Posted November 16, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 16, 2015 Interesting questions raised by your flywheel Jerry! Mechanically the UJs may wear a bit quicker because the motor is trying to shift the inertia of the flywheel via the drive shaft. Assuming the flywheel is dead true, there may not be a problem with vibration. However if the back bearing begins to wear, which it will, then the vibration from the precessing flywheel may become an issue. Easy enough to re-engineer if it doesn't work, and, as my father used to say "He who says it can't be done is liable to be passed by someone doing it!". Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold queensquare Posted November 17, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 17, 2015 Valantin, the gear box is from a test etch of Bob Jones' and is simply soldered on to one side of the chassis,all very crude really but it is a bit of an experiment. I think it comes from a 9F, I happened to have it so thought I would use it. It's only the bracket for the worm shaft which drives directly onto a 38 tooth gear. 38:1 is quite adequate for a passenger loco and will allow it to roll along at a scale 60 or so without the motor revving too fast. Normally I would have a bracket with two bearings for the worm shaft to run in (I'll post a picture of one later) and did think of putting another bearing toward the rear to support the shaft on this but three bearings in a row, unless perfectly aligned, is liable to be noisy so I opted for the flywheel. Tim, the flywheel is as true as my machining skills and little Unimat will make it. I have thought about vibration but under test so far it seems ok. Wear would certainly be a problem on CF where locos run actual miles over time but I don't think it will be a problem on Bath, we shall have to see. I now have the loco tender coupling done as well as the UJ for the front of the motor so will be able to try it under its own power in the not too distant future. If it doesn't work then stripping it out and fitting a more conventional shaft isn't a major problem. I like your fathers saying. John G said to me that it's a good job he doesn't know what he's doing or he would never have done it! Jerry 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Copleston Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 John G said to me that it's a good job he doesn't know what he's doing or he would never have done it! Jerry "John G said to me that it's a good job he doesn't know what he's doing or he would never have done it!" Perfect, Jerry! This describes the approach of the modest Mr Greenwood to a "T". And look at his inspirational results... 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Tim Dubya Posted November 17, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 17, 2015 WOW! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Re6/6 Posted November 18, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 18, 2015 I was captivated by this piece of John's work some years ago. I could've believed such a thing in 4mm but not in 2mm! All this before (I believe) the Faller road system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium DavidLong Posted November 18, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 18, 2015 I don't normally post pictures of customers layouts but thought this shot was appropriate. I snapped it on the phone whilst working on Paul Stephens layout earlier in the week and whilst there is still much to do I think this shot of the Exmouth Cleethorpes leaving Devonshire Tunnel and dropping down the bank into Bath behind a 4F and 7F really captures the location. This really demonstrates the potential of N gauge. image.jpg Jerry Jerry, Nice photo. There's a four page article on the Exmouth - Cleethorpes in the December issue of Back Track. I hadn't realised that it only ran for three years, 1960 to 1962. Judging by the photographs there were some truly amazing carriage formations with all manner of Gresleys, Thompsons, Bulleids, Mark 1s and probably a few more that I can't recognise but then I get a bit hazy if a vehicle has more than four wheels and carries people . . . David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisveitch Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 I don't normally post pictures of customers layouts but thought this shot was appropriate. I snapped it on the phone whilst working on Paul Stephens layout earlier in the week and whilst there is still much to do I think this shot of the Exmouth Cleethorpes leaving Devonshire Tunnel and dropping down the bank into Bath behind a 4F and 7F really captures the location. This really demonstrates the potential of N gauge. image.jpg Jerry What's the track, Jerry? It looks very fine for N and doesn't look like their fake Code 55 (but I might be wrong). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAustin Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 (edited) "John G said to me that it's a good job he doesn't know what he's doing or he would never have done it!" Perfect, Jerry! This describes the approach of the modest Mr Greenwood to a "T". And look at his inspirational results... Yes, it's quite a piece of work that crane (and the associated vehicles). I once helped John out at a show (many years ago), and I think I spent more time operating the crane (after word got about) than running trains, and I believe there was one show where he ran a train up at the start, used the crane all day, and then ran the train back---only two train movements in a whole day. Mark A "John G said to me that it's a good job he doesn't know what he's doing or he would never have done it!" Perfect, Jerry! This describes the approach of the modest Mr Greenwood to a "T". And look at his inspirational results... Yes, it's quite a piece of work that crane (and the associated vehicles). I once helped John out at a show (many years ago), and I think I spent more time operating the crane (after word got about) than running trains, and I believe there was one show where he ran a train up at the start, used the crane all day, and then ran the train back---only two train movements in a whole daye. Mark A Edited November 23, 2015 by MarkAustin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold queensquare Posted November 23, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 23, 2015 What's the track, Jerry? It looks very fine for N and doesn't look like their fake Code 55 (but I might be wrong). It's easitrac. N stock will run quite happily on it and there is no pointwork on this section. I'm currently doing the Windsor Hill area for him and that is done with the new FiNetracks (apologies if incorrectly spelt) which is 9mm gauge. They also do pointwork although I have done the two custom points on that section in PCB. Jeryy 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Copleston Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 (edited) I'm currently doing the Windsor Hill area for him and that is done with the new FiNetracks (apologies if incorrectly spelt) which is 9mm gauge. Hi Jerry, I believe it is spelt "fiNetrax", available from 'British Finescale' (whoever they are), but their website is currently down with this notice http://www.britishfinescale.com, which is a bit weird and doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. Edited November 24, 2015 by Phil Copleston Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killybegs Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Working OK at the moment! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Copleston Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Yes, it's quite a piece of work that crane (and the associated vehicles). I once helped John out at a show (many years ago), and I think I spent more time operating the crane (after word got about) than running trains, and I believe there was one show where he ran a train up at the start, used the crane all day, and then ran the train back---only two train movements in a whole day. Hi Mark, Yes, the 2mm scale working gantry crane and moving road vehicles are amazing in themselves. But what would otherwise be just a novelty, to my mind is not really the revolutionary aspect of John Greenwood's layout 'Wenford Bridge Goods Depot'. When I'm operating, these two additional features transform a fairly ordinary branch terminus into a real functioning railhead with loads transhipped from road to rail and vice versa, giving the layout a realistic purpose. This completely changes the emphasis and makes the whole into a far more satisfying model of a railway. As you rightly point out, the correct slew and hoist operation of the crane and positioning of the road vehicles for loading/unloading is just as fascinating as the train movements themselves. Indeed, one can easily hold an audience for some ten or twenty minutes without any rail movements at all. Which rather puts a lie to the old exhibition adage that "you have to keep the trains moving at all times to maintain interest". What nonsense! So look out for 'Wenford Bridge Goods Depot' at forthcoming exhibitions in 2016. Settle in front of it, and give it time to watch and study this little gem. You won't be disappointed! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Collier Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I believe it is spelt "fiNetrax", available from 'British Finescale' (whoever they are), but their website is currently down with this notice http://www.britishfinescale.com, which is a bit weird and doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. Nowt to be concerned about. Wayne is a regular contributor to the N Gauge Forum and pre warned us the site would be down for a few days for a make over. His range is continually growing and he is very responsive to customer suggestions etc. http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=3280.780 Gareth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 24, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 24, 2015 fiNetrack and easitrac are very similar the main difference being the track gauge and the finer flangeways of easitrac. There is of course the question of whether N gaugers are interested in building trackwork Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Collier Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 fiNetrack and easitrac are very similar the main difference being the track gauge and the finer flangeways of easitrac. There is of course the question of whether N gaugers are interested in building trackwork Finetrax has been around a while now and if no N gaugers were interested in building track I doubt Wayne would be continually investing more of his money in it and continually increasing the range. Gareth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold queensquare Posted November 25, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2015 fiNetrack and easitrac are very similar the main difference being the track gauge and the finer flangeways of easitrac. There is of course the question of whether N gaugers are interested in building trackwork Don Bit patronising Don. Quite obviously the difference is one is N, the other is 2FS. There are an increasing number of N gauge modellers using fiNetrack. I'm using it on a customers layout and my next exhibition layout, early 1970s blue diesels in N will make use of it. Jerry 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold roundhouse Posted November 25, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2015 I plan to use the finer N scale track and components on my next N scale layout which will be 1960's South Western. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
2mm Andy Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 fiNetrack and easitrac are very similar the main difference being the track gauge and the finer flangeways of easitrac. There is of course the question of whether N gaugers are interested in building trackwork Don The two systems are very similar for several reasons. Wayne approached the chaps who developed Easitrac with the 2mm Scale Association, and he was given contact details for the toolmaker and advice from the Easitrac team. The rail used for Finetrax is the same as Easitrac. I suspect only Wayne could answer your last question, but as Gareth has said, why would he be investing more money in developing the system further if he wasn't getting a reasonable return on it? Anyway, I'm sure Jerry would like his thread back (especially when there is already a thread for Finetrax elsewhere on the forum - see http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/65617-finetrax/page-9 ), and I want to hear more about that Midland 3P and the Q6! Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold queensquare Posted November 25, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2015 Anyway, I'm sure Jerry would like his thread back (especially when there is already a thread for Finetrax elsewhere on the forum - see http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/65617-finetrax/page-9 ), and I want to hear more about that Midland 3P and the Q6! Andy Thanks Andy, although I don't mind a bit of a diversion now and again! The Q6 doesn't really belong here either as I've built it for Fence Houses although I am going to get a Q5 from Bob for myself as they were originally turned out in lined NE green - that will get an occasional run out on Bath when nobody is looking! The Midland 3P won't be making any more progress until after Warley although I will be taking it up to the NEC along with about a dozen other Bath locos, some stock, the station building, roof and a selection of maps, photos and other research material. I'm on stand A62 in the "turning dreams into reality" section(!) attempting to demonstrate how to research and model a prototype. If you want to have a closer look at some of the models in this thread then do come along and say hello. Jerry 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuartM Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Bit patronising Don. Quite obviously the difference is one is N, the other is 2FS. There are an increasing number of N gauge modellers using fiNetrack. I'm using it on a customers layout and my next exhibition layout, early 1970s blue diesels in N will make use of it. Jerry I've used it as well for an ngauge layout and its exactly like the new Easitrack turnouts that the 2mm association is now making available; and as someone who helped trial the associations Easitrack turnouts I can say the only difference is the gauging. 2mm looks nicer because of the closer gappings between rails and check rails, however the FiNetrack turnouts are so much nicer than peco code 55 turnouts. As to who wants to build them, well that would be fools like us. Moving on... I am very much looking forward to seeing your 1970's diesel layout, corporate blue rules imho Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold queensquare Posted November 25, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2015 Moving on... I am very much looking forward to seeing your 1970's diesel layout, corporate blue rules imho Thanks Stuart, it's pure indulgence, my home town of Warminster as it was when I was a spotty spotter, from about 73 to about 78. There is a link in my signature to the Warminster thread and I will be starting a new one when I start work on the layout. Most of the diesels we used to see are now available RTR so sticking with N on code 40 makes sense really. Jerry 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now