Wright writes.....

[thegreenhowards]

Some of you may remember my problems with car aerosols on my Graeme King W1 conversion way back in February (post 9114). Well thanks for all your advice and I'm pleased to report that I managed to sort it out with just a partial strip back and repaint. The finished article is now up and running. Thanks to Tony for the curly 6 for the front numberplate...and to Graeme of course for the excellent resin bits.

 

 

[davidw]

Some of you may remember my problems with car aerosols on my Graeme King W1 conversion way back in February (post 9114). Well thanks for all your advice and I'm pleased to report that I managed to sort it out with just a partial strip back and repaint. The finished article is now up and running. Thanks to Tony for the curly 6 for the front numberplate...and to Graeme of course for the excellent resin bits. P1030257.JPG P1030258.JPG

Far cleaner than my W1

[5050]

Of course, there are some locos that will never be produced as kits or ready-to-run.  Like the 1913 proposals for heavy freight locomotives for the L&YR and GCR, see below.

I remember an article by Dennis Allenden about building the Lanky 2-10-0 in Model Railways magazine in the late 70's (ish?).  Very impressive loco, pity they weren't built in reality.

 

What is the lower loco?  Looks like a USA  one around the cab.

[t-b-g]

I remember an article by Dennis Allenden about building the Lanky 2-10-0 in Model Railways magazine in the late 70's (ish?).  Very impressive loco, pity they weren't built in reality.

 

What is the lower loco?  Looks like a USA  one around the cab.

 

It was a Baldwin design 2-10-2 that Robinson of the GCR had a look at as a possible banker for a certain hill that ended up eventually with the LNER U1.

 

Robinson had visited the USA and had picked up a few ideas. I have seen a weight diagram type drawing somewhere but I can't recall just where.

 

Tony 

[gr.king]

I understood it to be part of one of Sam Fay's big ideas for modern, economical working, before the Great War, no doubt encouraged by discussions at Baldwins during the GC management tour of North America, to use such a really powerful loco and high capacity bogie wagons for bulk movement of export coal from Wath to Immingham Dock. The scheme is mentioned I believe in Dow's  "Great Central" volume 3, where an outline drawing of the Baldwin loco proposal appears, complete with four outside cylinders - one pair each side, one cylinder above the other, each pair of cylinders working in unison driving a common or yoked crosshead. An interesting way to get the kind of cylinder volume that was required within the tight UK loading gauge without recourse to inside cylinders and cranked axles.

Somebody else has a model, of a sort, of that loco too......

[Tony Wright]

With many discussions on-going about the future of kit-building (in any media), I thought, having finished construction of the etched brass D&S M&GNR Restaurant Car, I'd finish the construction of the Isinglass 3D-printed Gresley shorty Brake Third. What one gets are the sides (in four pieces), two ends, gangways, droplights and a roof (in two parts). All the other bits have to be sourced from elsewhere. 

 

 

I made the floor pan from 30 thou Plastikard, the solebars from Peco O gauge rail, the headstocks came from ancient PC parts, as did the bogies, and the rest of the bits from MJT, Comet, Southern Pride and brass/Plastikard stock. 

 

 

The roof is just resting in place, pending painting/lining/lettering/glazing. The interior came from a Hornby car I'd butchered to add brass sides and make into another type. 

 

Is this methodology the 'future' for rolling stock construction, at least in part? It might be, but the finish needs to be improved in my view. 'Witness marks' from the process are evident and I think they'll still be evident if I paint it in BR colours. In teak, it might look very good, the surface being 'grainy' so to speak. Mr King, Mr Weallans, do you fancy having a go at it for Grantham? 

 

The plastic is very hard and resists cutting/filing tools as much as harder metals. 

 

Will I embrace the new technologies? Please, give me etched kits every time. That said, I think the exercise has been worth it. Andy Edgson will probably have it on his stand at the CMRA Modellers' Day in Watford next weekend. Both it, and the D&S kit, will feature in my forthcoming Crowood book. 

[asmay2002]

I understood it to be part of one of Sam Fay's big ideas for modern, economical working, before the Great War, no doubt encouraged by discussions at Baldwins during the GC management tour of North America, to use such a really powerful loco and high capacity bogie wagons for bulk movement of export coal from Wath to Immingham Dock. The scheme is mentioned I believe in Dow's  "Great Central" volume 3, where an outline drawing of the Baldwin loco proposal appears, complete with four outside cylinders - one pair each side, one cylinder above the other, each pair of cylinders working in unison driving a common or yoked crosshead. An interesting way to get the kind of cylinder volume that was required within the tight UK loading gauge without recourse to inside cylinders and cranked axles.

Somebody else has a model, of a sort, of that loco too......

STA77807 vs 9J or J11.jpg

That sort of cylinder arrangement usually means it's  a Vauclain compound.

Edited July 8, 2016 by asmay2002

[Headstock]

Phew, I'm not one for having multiple builds on the go at one time. It always seems to take twice as long, if that is not quite the case in reality. I suppose it does give an added incentive to get things done, as I am never one to leave a project unfinished. Suddenly things are coming along quite rapidly, and the end is in sight. The Gresley FO is now complete and the stores van is not far behind requiring only couplings and a tad more weathering. A couple of other items should be completed over the coming week.

[Tony Wright]

Phew, I'm not one for having multiple builds on the go at one time. It always seems to take twice as long, if that is not quite the case in reality. I suppose it does give an added incentive to get things done, as I am never one to leave a project unfinished. Suddenly things are coming along quite rapidly, and the end is in sight. The Gresley FO is now complete and the stores van is not far behind requiring only couplings and a tad more weathering. A couple of other items should be completed over the coming week.

Andrew,

 

When I witness work of this quality it proves to me that most of the time I'm just mucking around with my modelling. I suppose that if I have an excuse it's that to have built so much down the years, even if I could produce really high-quality stock (which is questionable), there would be less of it. I suppose that's the compromise. 'Needing' in excess of 200 carriages, with an intention of building/modifying most of them myself (in which I've succeeded) has required an on-going building schedule now in excess of 40 years, though the survivors from the '70s are not much more than a learning curve. Thus, my 'layout train' philosophy has allowed my building of the Elizabethan, Queen of Scots, Northumbrian, Talismans, White Rose, West Riding and so forth, the emphasis (as in your case) on 'my' building, though Ian Rathbone painted the Pullman cars.

 

If I have a further role in the hobby, I hope it's as a tutor these days, either on a one-to-one basis here (donations to charities), or, as will be the case over the weekend, where I'm at Hobby Holidays. I'll report accordingly. I can't see a future career path as 'Honest Tone's of Little Bytham, Model Railways Found New Homes For', even though the Gerald Scarborough sales are now in excess of £5,000 (and counting). Once more, my most grateful thanks to all those who've bought items. It's certainly been worth it, when one collective offer was under £2,000.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited July 8, 2016 by Tony Wright

[PMP]

 

 It might be, but the finish needs to be improved in my view. 'Witness marks' from the process are evident and I think they'll still be evident if I paint it in BR colours. In teak, it might look very good, the surface being 'grainy' so to speak.

 

One way of filling/minimising the 'texture' is to use a texture paint such as Mr. Surfacer 1200. Simply put it fills imperfections which can then be sanded smooth, military modellers use it and similar products.

http://www.missing-lynx.com/reviews/other/mrsurfacerreviewbg_1.html

The texture looks quite prominent on the coach so a levelling thinner could be used, this slows the paints drying time to allow it to fill imperfections, which you then build up with several coats to get a smooth top coat. I've got some which Hobby Holidays supplies, but not had the opportunity/need to use it yet. I understand my brother has used levellers to good effect on his plastic models.

[jwealleans]

Mr Weall(e)ans, do you fancy having a go at it for Grantham?

Bring it along to the next running session, Tony, and I'll have a look at it. Halfords Filler Primer might tackle those finishing marks, in addition to Paul's ideas above.

[gr.king]

That sort of cylinder arrangement usually means its  a Vauclain compound.

 

Normally yes, but in this case a simple. I think Vauclain's days at Baldwins had finished by the time the GC 2-10-2 was drafted out, but some bright spark obviously saw a way to exploit what had been tried/learned/developed when those compounds had been built.

 

The drawing in Dow does include a puzzle though. It shows but one large piston valve set per pair of parallel-acting outside cylinders, that valve set being between the frames. That much makes sense. Above each "upper" cylinder however is a (dummy?) steam pipe cover connecting that upper cylinder to the smokebox. Unless this was merely cosmetic (why?), or a means of adding bracing to the structure of the loco, or some misunderstanding on the part of the draughtsman who prepared the diagram for Dow's book (improbable, surely?) then why is that pipe / cover there? We cannot ask Dow's draughtsman any more, he is long gone, and if he was working from the surviving Baldwin blueprint that may not have survived either. It has been suggested to me that the draughtsman's railway papers were regarded as "junk" by his widow and much went in the bin before anybody with knowledge intervened.....

 

Slightly better picture of the model, hacked out of a Bachmann HO USRA "light" 2-10-2. The coupled wheels are too small and the coupled wheelbase is too short to fit any bigger ones. The Proto 2000 HO "heavy" 2-10-2 would have been a better basis for a near scale OO model but would have almost doubled the cost of making this neverwazzer...

 

 

I omitted the unexplained steam pipes above the cylinders.

Edited July 8, 2016 by gr.king

[gr.king]

Regarding those Isinglass printed coach parts, I'm interested to learn whether filler primer alone does the trick in removing the texture, as I have a set that Andrew Edgson printed at Nottingham in March 2015 and I've been wondering how to tackle them....

[Red Devil]

Regarding those Isinglass printed coach parts, I'm interested to learn whether filler primer alone does the trick in removing the texture, as I have a set that Andrew Edgson printed at Nottingham in March 2015 and I've been wondering how to tackle them....

 

Can't comment on the coach part prints as I've never tried them, but on 3d printed stuff I do I prefer to just use normal Halfords primer taken back with a glass fibre brush, multiple coats but none too heavy, I did try Mr Surfacer but couldn't get on with it, probably me rather than it. 

[Woodcock29]

Tony

 

The Isinglass 3D printed coach body/roof is certainly interesting.  It looks to me like the main issue with getting a better finish if its intended to be 'teaked' is to remove the horizontal '3D grain' from the upper vertical panels.  The lower horizontal panels may well come up quite nicely in teak as the '3D grain' is in the right direction. 

 

It will be most interesting to follow progress with this coach by whoever might take up your offer.

 

Andrew Emmett

[peach james]

 

Normally yes, but in this case a simple. I think Vauclain's days at Baldwins had finished by the time the GC 2-10-2 was drafted out, but some bright spark obviously saw a way to exploit what had been tried/learned/developed when those compounds had been built.

 

The drawing in Dow does include a puzzle though. It shows but one large piston valve set per pair of parallel-acting outside cylinders, that valve set being between the frames. That much makes sense. Above each "upper" cylinder however is a (dummy?) steam pipe cover connecting that upper cylinder to the smokebox. Unless this was merely cosmetic (why?), or a means of adding bracing to the structure of the loco, or some misunderstanding on the part of the draughtsman who prepared the diagram for Dow's book (improbable, surely?) then why is that pipe / cover there? We cannot ask Dow's draughtsman any more, he is long gone, and if he was working from the surviving Baldwin blueprint that may not have survived either. It has been suggested to me that the draughtsman's railway papers were regarded as "junk" by his widow and much went in the bin before anybody with knowledge intervened.....

 

Slightly better picture of the model, hacked out of a Bachmann HO USRA "light" 2-10-2. The coupled wheels are too small and the coupled wheelbase is too short to fit any bigger ones. The Proto 2000 HO "heavy" 2-10-2 would have been a better basis for a near scale OO model but would have almost doubled the cost of making this neverwazzer...

 

STA77808.JPG

 

I omitted the unexplained steam pipes above the cylinders.

 

It would depend- the cylinder castings for such a beast are going to be fairly complex, and running the steam down that way MAY have made sense, depending on the superheat and throttle arrangements that they thought would be needed.  It's a strange beast, that's for sure- I'd have gone for an articulated 2-4-4-2 or 2-6-6-2 like the Unitah engines, I think, in order to get enough cylinders.  (it's also ~20 years later though...).  But again, I have the advantage of hind sight, which is always 20/20

 

James

[jrg1]

An interesting Might-Have-Been, with bogie coal wagons proposed to give high capacity.

BR tried to do something similar and abolish small capacity coal wagon haulage, but were defeated by the NCB, who would not invest in the plant necessary to accommodate larger wagons-we had to wait decades for MGR wagons.  So, the thought is, after all the investment in Vauclain engines and large wagons, would the mines and docks have followed suit?  I believe the L and Y had a bogie wagon train hauled by a large 0-8-0, but this went nowhere.  There was also the Felix Pole HC wagons on the GWR, but it seems the short wheelbase 12 tonner was a fixture until the sixties.

[Manxman1831]

It was a Baldwin design 2-10-2 that Robinson of the GCR had a look at as a possible banker for a certain hill that ended up eventually with the LNER U1.

 

Robinson had visited the USA and had picked up a few ideas. I have seen a weight diagram type drawing somewhere but I can't recall just where.

 

Tony 

Close, but slightly wrong.  The original design was for a loco capable of pulling trains of the then-new 40-ton wagons from the South Yorkshire coalfields to the then-new port of Immingham.  According to the George Dow book that features the appropriate drawings for both the Baldwin and Gorton designs, the American version was going to be capable of pulling 100 wagons (remember these are 40-ton not 10-ton), and would have required the opening out of Conisborough tunnel to accommodate the 13ft 6in height, and then onto the Doncaster avoiding line.

 

Graeme King has built an Anglicised version, and also some of the wagons.

[Mallard60022]

With many discussions on-going about the future of kit-building (in any media), I thought, having finished construction of the etched brass D&S M&GNR Restaurant Car, I'd finish the construction of the Isinglass 3D-printed Gresley shorty Brake Third. What one gets are the sides (in four pieces), two ends, gangways, droplights and a roof (in two parts). All the other bits have to be sourced from elsewhere. 

 

DSC_5127.JPG

 

I made the floor pan from 30 thou Plastikard, the solebars from Peco O gauge rail, the headstocks came from ancient PC parts, as did the bogies, and the rest of the bits from MJT, Comet, Southern Pride and brass/Plastikard stock. 

 

DSC_5137.JPG

 

The roof is just resting in place, pending painting/lining/lettering/glazing. The interior came from a Hornby car I'd butchered to add brass sides and make into another type. 

 

Is this methodology the 'future' for rolling stock construction, at least in part? It might be, but the finish needs to be improved in my view. 'Witness marks' from the process are evident and I think they'll still be evident if I paint it in BR colours. In teak, it might look very good, the surface being 'grainy' so to speak. Mr King, Mr Weallans, do you fancy having a go at it for Grantham? 

 

The plastic is very hard and resists cutting/filing tools as much as harder metals. 

 

Will I embrace the new technologies? Please, give me etched kits every time. That said, I think the exercise has been worth it. Andy Edgson will probably have it on his stand at the CMRA Modellers' Day in Watford next weekend. Both it, and the D&S kit, will feature in my forthcoming Crowood book. 

Looks good Tony. Would you consider doing a coach building/conversion workshop at Hobby Holidays. it could include something like this as well maybe? I'd come. 

 Have a good weekend and please pass on my best wishes to Phil at HH as I know he was almost on the point of packing in the courses.

Sincerely, Phil  @ 36E (Toot as you pass by)!

[gr.king]

It would depend- the cylinder castings for such a beast are going to be fairly complex, and running the steam down that way MAY have made sense, depending on the superheat and throttle arrangements that they thought would be needed.  It's a strange beast, that's for sure- I'd have gone for an articulated 2-4-4-2 or 2-6-6-2 like the Unitah engines, I think, in order to get enough cylinders.  (it's also ~20 years later though...).  But again, I have the advantage of hind sight, which is always 20/20

 

James

It's interesting to speculate. I never claim to understand everything, but as far as I can see from the drawing that steam pipe could not be connected to anything useful at the lower (cylinder) end. It would simply meet the cylinder wall at the mid-stroke position. The cylinders are not long enough to suggest a Stumpf Uniflow engine, so it seems unlikely to be a centre, valveless exhaust direct from the cylinders. The pipe isn't angled low enough to be aimed at the base of a blast pipe anyway. If it were the more usual live steam pipe then either steam jacketed cylinders (again not indicated) or cylinders within sleeve valves (why, if a set of piston valves was already provided between the frames?) would be arrangements that wasted much of the space that was required for a large diameter of cylinders.

 

Edited July 9, 2016 by gr.king

[t-b-g]

Close, but slightly wrong.  The original design was for a loco capable of pulling trains of the then-new 40-ton wagons from the South Yorkshire coalfields to the then-new port of Immingham.  According to the George Dow book that features the appropriate drawings for both the Baldwin and Gorton designs, the American version was going to be capable of pulling 100 wagons (remember these are 40-ton not 10-ton), and would have required the opening out of Conisborough tunnel to accommodate the 13ft 6in height, and then onto the Doncaster avoiding line.

 

Graeme King has built an Anglicised version, and also some of the wagons.

 

Fair enough. In my memory, I have a recollection of reading something about Robinson proposals which included the 2-10-2 and a banker and in my head the two merged into one. I have seen Graeme's loco and wagons in the flesh and they are really very well done and fascinating models.

 

Some of the bogie coal wagons had a very long life, having been sold on to the coal industry and some were in use at Markham Main Colliery (called Markham Main but actually at Armthorpe near Doncaster) right through the 70s and possibly the 80s. The colliery closed in 1992 and although I didn't go there and see them myself after the early 80s, there is a possibility that these GCR wagons were in use there right up until closure. Perhaps some expert can confirm?

 

If I had known what they were (a friend told me long after the pit had gone) I would have had my camera out!

Edited July 9, 2016 by t-b-g

[gr.king]

Regarding those Isinglass printed coach parts, I'm interested to learn whether filler primer alone does the trick in removing the texture, as I have a set that Andrew Edgson printed at Nottingham in March 2015 and I've been wondering how to tackle them....

Further on this point: Given the coarseness of the texture on the surfaces of my coach parts, these having been printed by extrusion of layers of plastic filament through a nozzle rather than by the "fusion within a block" method which (from what I've seen) gives a finer finish, I had not envisaged any satisfactory way to proceed. I know from experience that I could scrape down every panel to a flat finish using suitable tools, but that would be incredibly time-consuming. If filler-primer will actually bury the unwanted ridges completely, without later paint shrinkage revealing them again, and will achieve that effect without blurring the necessary crisp edges, beading lines and square corners, then I'll be both surprised and delighted.

[billbedford]

Can we deal with a few GC myths here?

 

• The 30 & 40 ton bogie coal wagons were built in 1903/4, the Baldwin loco dates from 1914, so they were unlikely to be part of the same project.
• The bogie coal wagons could only be unloaded by hand, so they were very unlikely to have be used for export coal.
• Coal handling at Immingham docks was by wagon lifts and end door wagons, so these were likely to have been the wagon used in the 100 wagon trains.
• A 1200ton GWL train (i.e. a 100 wagon train) was beyond the capacity of most UK railways in 1914.

[billbedford]

Is this methodology the 'future' for rolling stock construction, at least in part? It might be, but the finish needs to be improved in my view. 'Witness marks' from the process are evident and I think they'll still be evident if I paint it in BR colours. In teak, it might look very good, the surface being 'grainy' so to speak. Mr King, Mr Weallans, do you fancy having a go at it for Grantham? 

 

 

It seems to me this is part of a long cottage industry tradition of people making what they can rather than what the customers would like.

[Headstock]

Andrew,

 

When I witness work of this quality it proves to me that most of the time I'm just mucking around with my modelling. I suppose that if I have an excuse it's that to have built so much down the years, even if I could produce really high-quality stock (which is questionable), there would be less of it. I suppose that's the compromise. 'Needing' in excess of 200 carriages, with an intention of building/modifying most of them myself (in which I've succeeded) has required an on-going building schedule now in excess of 40 years, though the survivors from the '70s are not much more than a learning curve. Thus, my 'layout train' philosophy has allowed my building of the Elizabethan, Queen of Scots, Northumbrian, Talismans, White Rose, West Riding and so forth, the emphasis (as in your case) on 'my' building, though Ian Rathbone painted the Pullman cars.

 

If I have a further role in the hobby, I hope it's as a tutor these days, either on a one-to-one basis here (donations to charities), or, as will be the case over the weekend, where I'm at Hobby Holidays. I'll report accordingly. I can't see a future career path as 'Honest Tone's of Little Bytham, Model Railways Found New Homes For', even though the Gerald Scarborough sales are now in excess of £5,000 (and counting). Once more, my most grateful thanks to all those who've bought items. It's certainly been worth it, when one collective offer was under £2,000.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Hi Tony,

 

thanks for the kind words, a reflection more on the quality of the kit and an interesting prototype I think, although good reference material did help. If you describe yourself as, 'just mucking around with modelling' then I would be quite happy if my own work was described thus. Extrapolating from your description then the epitome of modelling in our hobby must be mucking around  with bells on.

 

The stores vans above was a rather interesting modelling prototype. Daily workings of these vans would take them back and forth between the major works and locations such as sheds. They could be attached to passenger, parcels or freight trains in order to traverse the network. They also provided useful employment for a variety of former pre grouping six wheel passenger brake vans and carriage conversions. An everyday if unassuming sight on the steam railway, and an interesting prototype that is rarely modelled.

 

On the subject of carriage construction, mixed media would be my preferred method. Teak carriages did not have textured grain, they were as flat as steel ones. A set of brass sides in conjunction with the 3d printed ends and roof would be a much better option. Perhaps a 3d printed floor pan with brass overlays for the sole bars would also work quite well.