Wright writes.....

[gwrrob]

 

couplings 01.jpg

 

couplings 02.jpg

 

 

In the February 2014 issue of BRM I describe fully (once more, but there are always new readers) how I make these couplings in a piece explaining how I 'improve' Hornby's latest Mk.1s.

 

Sorry for the protracted length of this reply, but I hope it all makes sense, and, please, hijack away!   

 

Oh contrary Tony.I love detailed replies.Thanks very much.It will very much do for me.

[brossard]

Darn, I missed post 525 because of the page change.  Those couplings look very neat.  I also like that they are not flush with the bottom of the buffer beam, sometimes the bogie can foul in that position.  I shall bear this in mind in future.

 

John

[Tony Wright]

Thanks Tony.

 

This discusses corridors and couplings, a couple of particular bugbears for me:

 

  http://preview.tinyurl.com/k4m6z68

 

Oh and yes I know you can get black paper but when the muse struck, I didn't have any.  I didn't do the vacuum pipes at this time.  Later on I did do them and here's the result: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Side view which really shows how effective this simple idea is.

 

These couplings really do work although I did have to do some adjusting to ensure that the hook length was optimum.  The method helps with propelling as well.  For corridors, the coaches push each other on the gangways, not the bogies.  For non-corridors I added an extra wire on the loop for the hook to push against - this prevents buffer lock.

 

Apologies for the hijack Tony, I hope you are heartened that some folk do take heed of your advice.

 

John

John,

         I'm delighted that you've used my idea and the results of your work look superb in side profile. Your carriages together do look most realistic and I also like the idea of adding a representation of the dynamo belt. I suppose I was after trying to create an impression as the carriages roll by, as yours have done most admirably. 

 

I too find the flexible gangways aid in propelling stock (mine come from Modellers Mecca) and, like you, I also put a goalpost wire between the buffers of non-gangwayed stock for propulsion purposes. I know this is anathema to the purists but it does result in perfect propelling over quite tight radii. If painted matt black, with a representation of the pipework (and a dummy screw link hanging down if you wish), for layout coaches it works perfectly; particularly so for exhibition layouts where operation is paramount and it doesn't take hours and hours to couple rakes up. 

[brossard]

Thank you so much for the kind words Tony.  It's very encouraging to know one is on the right path and coming from you they mean a lot.

 

John

[gwrrob]

If I glue the copper clad strip to the underframe as shewn using Devcon, when I solder the .5mm wire and 30 amp fuse wire cause it to come unattached or won't it affect it if I'm quick with the iron ? Just a thought on the order of doing it.

[Tony Wright]

If I glue the copper clad strip to the underframe as shewn using Devcon, when I solder the .5mm wire and 30 amp fuse wire cause it to come unattached or won't it affect it if I'm quick with the iron ? Just a thought on the order of doing it.

Rob,

 

The copper-clad strip support is usually made of Paxolin, which is non-conductive of heat (to an extent), so soldering won't cause it to become detached from the base of the coach, especially if you've used epoxy.

 

Where you might have a problem is in previously-soldered joints coming undone, or, if you delay too long with the iron, the copper strip becoming de-laminated. One trick is to use pre-cut sleeper copper-clad strip, which has a gap in the middle (so you only have solder-heat one side at a time). I use continuous strip (it's much cheaper), cut to length and glued in place. It might be an idea to tin it all first, then solder the goalpost in position. Then, using plenty of phosphoric acid flux, solder the 30 AMP fusewire in place - in and out with the iron, mighty quickly, again with lots of flux. I use 145 degree solder with the iron (50 Watt) cranked up to 300 degrees. Because the fusewire is pre-tinned it solders instantly. I don't pre-tin the copper-clad, but if you're less experienced, it might be an idea. You'll see from picture C that the fusewire is left over-long before being bent and cut to length.

 

I was saving the following pictures for the magazine, but there are a lot more than these.............

 

I hope this helps.

 

 

 

 

[gwrrob]

Thanks again Tony.I think the tricky part here will be guessing the length to stick the goalposts out so they don't cause bufferlocking on the coaches.

[coachmann]

Thanks again Tony.I think the tricky part here will be guessing the length to stick the goalposts out so they don't cause bufferlocking on the coaches.

You don't want the face behind the buffer heads or too much ahead. Just about in-line gives a smooth transition for adjacent buffers. Once I get the outside curves built on my garden section of railway, Tony's idea will be given some trials.

Edited December 10, 2013 by coachmann

[Tony Wright]

Thanks again Tony.I think the tricky part here will be guessing the length to stick the goalposts out so they don't cause bufferlocking on the coaches.

 

I tend to have the goalpost level with the buffer faces, with its full width just between the buffers. This gives a smooth transition on propelling, resulting in no buffer lock, even if the buffers touch. The distance apart between vehicles in towing is dictated by the length of the 'hook' from the headstock. That depends on the radius of your curves.

[Tony Wright]

Some latest models have just arrived for photography from Bachmann. 

 

Full reviews will be appearing in the February edition of BRM.

 

They look very good at first glance.

 

 

 

 

Any comments, please?

[davidw]

Glad I've got a J11 on order. Though the crest looks a little large easy fix. Any idea when it'll appear in shops?

 

Thanks for posting!

[Tony Wright]

Glad I've got a J11 on order. Though the crest looks a little large easy fix. Any idea when it'll appear in shops?

 

Thanks for posting!

It's interesting you mention the crest. Most of the J11 pictures I have in BR days show the early crest, especially the slide-valve engines (which this is). I've found a few with the later crest, but none (as yet) with the correct-facing lion on the offside. 64325 received this larger tender in August 1957, keeping it to withdrawal in 1960. I'm speculating, I know, but I'd be surprised that in 1957 it got the correct-facing crest and more surprised if it was ever corrected. However, Bachmann is known to do its research and usually works from prototype pictures. That said, might I surmise that correct-facing crests on the offside of J11 tenders were rare, especially on the slide-valve engines?

 

As for their being in the shops, 'very soon' I'm informed.

[coachmann]

They all look neat. Hornby-esk has infiltrated Bachmann's camp with the partially moulded smokebox door handle on the J11. Easily replaced though. Thanks for posting.

[Barry O]

Had an email from Hattons to say the J11 is due in between now and mid jan.... good as I want one for Herculaneum Dock. - but that BR totem will have to go - too late for the time period for me..

[Metr0Land]

It's interesting you mention the crest. Most of the J11 pictures I have in BR days show the early crest, especially the slide-valve engines (which this is). I've found a few with the later crest, but none (as yet) with the correct-facing lion on the offside. 64325 received this larger tender in August 1957, keeping it to withdrawal in 1960. I'm speculating, I know, but I'd be surprised that in 1957 it got the correct-facing crest and more surprised if it was ever corrected. However, Bachmann is known to do its research and usually works from prototype pictures. That said, might I surmise that correct-facing crests on the offside of J11 tenders were rare, especially on the slide-valve engines?

 

As for their being in the shops, 'very soon' I'm informed.

 

A 1960 pic albeit showing the other side of the tender

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/40052043@N03/5794901028/in/photolist-9Q5obG-aFnDXa-8aQPtR-8aQPje-8aU6YC-8aU6PW-8aU6Md-fkJs8u-8TtMAL-8TqGjv-ji3kk-8TqGj2-9i4VjU-gUaqRP-aaquR-9BitEz-eeqVN2-fcaKKw-8TtMyh-8TtMzL-8TqGk4-8TtMyC-8TtMzb-8TtMxE-wQcVg-wQcWr-wQcYW-wQd15-wQcTP-ji3kj-8TtSia-8TwXAw-8TtShP-8TwXy7-8TwXxE-8TwXys-8TwXAd-8TwXwL-5AjQuJ-8TwXxd-8TwXyS-a2weig-a5cfvZ-a5f7hm-8RGEWi-75FV7i-9mtrsg-4jZoKi-4jpzea-i2qLP5-d9F85S

[pete55]

Some latest models have just arrived for photography from Bachmann. 

 

Full reviews will be appearing in the February edition of BRM.

 

They look very good at first glance.

 

Bachmann DCC Class 40 01.jpg

 

Bachmann Dukedog 31-086 01.jpg

 

Bachmann J11 31-320DC 01.jpg

 

Any comments, please?

 

Hello Tony,

nice pictures there.

Would love to know the driving wheel axle diameters of the J11 and the Dukedog!!

 

Pete Hill

[Tony Wright]

Hello Tony,

nice pictures there.

Would love to know the driving wheel axle diameters of the J11 and the Dukedog!!

 

Pete Hill

Hello Pete,

                  I've not taken the keeper plates off, just measured the ends of the axles and they look to be 3mm. About right?

[pete55]

Hello Pete,

                  I've not taken the keeper plates off, just measured the ends of the axles and they look to be 3mm. About right?

 

Hello Tony,

thanks for that.....sounds about right to me!!

Just need to persuade a certain person to make the wheels now....

[Tony Wright]

A 1960 pic albeit showing the other side of the tender

 

 

I'm still looking, but I can't find a picture of the offside of the tender showing the correct-facing lion on the crest. Since the last J11s went in 1962, I imagine it's relatively rare. Another point of note is the style of '6' on the front numberplate. Pictures of J11s with the true Gill Sans '6' and '9' are also very rare.

I'm not necessarily asking for help in compiling my review, but the class is a little camera-shy. I'll keep searching.  

[Grafarman]

D211 Mauretania looks to me to be very purposeful, and although the gap above the bogie is still a bit high IMO it's just about 'right' in its shape particularly around the windows; I would like to think they'll now upgrade their N gauge tooling to match...

 

 

 

 

 

David

[robmcg]

Hi Tony,

 

First impression to me was the tragic shape of the coal on the J11..   rather hard to glue the real stuff over that, but presumably it will detach easily.

 

(Oh for the days when Hornby provided real coal as per Britannias....)

 

The Class 40 I cannot comment on but both steam engines looked fine, continuing an impression I get that Bachmann tend to use slightly softer plastics than some recent Hornby, but that might be photo effects.

 

Rob

[David32424]

9017 looks superb and as a Bluebell Rly member I can't wait to get my hands on it. Any idea when we might see the model in the shops please? Great to see it hasn't been fitted with those post-preservation Earl Of Berkeley nameplates, although I will say their are some in the Bluebell management that aren't best pleased its hasn't got them on. I suspect Bachmann have done research on this matter and found out that, with the exception of a few, the nameplates aren't exactly popular with the enthusiasts when the loco is in it's BR black livery. Overall a great looking model that has been worth the rather long wait to finally see it completed.

[Dunsignalling]

9017 looks superb and as a Bluebell Rly member I can't wait to get my hands on it. Any idea when we might see the model in the shops please? Great to see it hasn't been fitted with those post-preservation Earl Of Berkeley nameplates, although I will say their are some in the Bluebell management that aren't best pleased its hasn't got them on. I suspect Bachmann have done research on this matter and found out that, with the exception of a few, the nameplates aren't exactly popular with the enthusiasts when the loco is in it's BR black livery. Overall a great looking model that has been worth the rather long wait to finally see it completed.

It's in the "Next 60 Days" section on Bachmann's website, so not too much longer to wait.....

 

John

[gr.king]

For those who like details to be correct, I'll spoil some renumbering plans in advance by pointing out that the cab roof on that J11, and I believe on the other BR version, is correct only for the locos from the initial Neilson batch. If you want a "standard" cab roof then you'll have to add a very visible middle rib or wait another month or two longer for the third version, as will all of us who want one in a proper livery, and then do a bit more to the livery than merely change the number if you must portray the era of state ownership and relentless decline.

Edited December 14, 2013 by gr.king

[Tony Wright]

For those who like details to be correct, I'll spoil some renumbering plans in advance by pointing out that the cab roof on that J11, and I believe on the other BR version, is correct only for the locos from the initial Neilson batch. If you want a "standard" cab roof then you'll have to add a very visible middle rib or wait another month or two longer for the third version, as will all of us who want one in a proper livery, and then do a bit more to the livery than merely change the number if you must portray the era of state ownership and relentless decline.

 

Well spotted Graeme.

 

With regard to the cab roofs, both the BR-liveried ones are from the initial Neilson batch and have the less prominent central rib. The LNER version represents a Gorton-built example and has the more prominent roof rib. So, full marks to Bachmann for getting this right.

 

 I like your assertion that the only 'proper' livery (for any LNER-owned loco?) is LNER black. Those Methuselahs still amongst us might themselves assert that the only 'proper' livery for a 9J is lined GCR black. Me, I like them in the condition I saw them - BR black, around Manchester, Sheffield, Retford and Lincoln.

 

As for 'relentless decline', that started for many ex-GC locos before BR. In fact the War probably prolonged the lives of several pre-Grouping classes on the LNER.

And, ask any follower of the L&NWR railway about its locos' decline and you'll be told that was well pre-War. 

 

Yes, BR saw a 'relentless decline' with regard to steam, but wasn't that inevitable, if a little premature? However, before it did wasn't BR also responsible for the 'creation' of the finest steam locos ever to run in this country?

 

My list would include -

The A1s (admittedly LNER-designed but built by BR) - with everything taken into consideration, the 'best' express passenger loco ever to run in this country, and all their work done in BR days.

The fitting of all the Gresley Pacifics with Kylchap double chimneys, resulting in daily mileages and availability unheard of during the pre-War heyday. And, what about BR deciding that the A3s could be used extensively on no fewer than seven pre-Grouping railways, as top link motive power? The most you'd have seen them on pre-War is three. 

The rebuilding of many of the Bulleid Pacifics.

The fitting of double chimneys to the 'Kings' and many 'Castles'.

The 9Fs - the best heavy freight steam locomotive ever to run in these islands. 

The last developments of the 'Black Fives' - those with roller bearings giving the highest mileages between overhauls of any steam class. 

Some decline?

 

And, how about an appreciation of the BR Mk.1 coach?

 

These are the reasons why I 'must' model an era of 'relentless decline', including the running of BR-numbered J11s.

I imagine I'm not alone.