Wright writes.....

[t-b-g]

Are the new motors as good at slow speed with a light load?

 

 

[APOLLO]

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Does anyone know where this is, please?

 

 

It's an awful scan, I know, but it's the best I can do. The picture comes with the caption 'Widnes', and that's that. 

 

If it is Widnes, is DELTIC coming off the Mersey Viaduct on a Liverpool-bound express, having crossed over from Runcorn on the other side? 

 

There's a line below - ex-CLC? 

 

Thanks in anticipation...................

 

 It's not Runcorn as the viaduct curves in the wrong direction at the end (bottom of this view).

 

 

Probably Widnes (at the top in this view).

 

Look at this map and use the slider for the modern view. A section of the viaduct is an embankment for a short distance on the Widnes side just before the river crossing. CLC dock lines everywhere (all long gone), which I think are the lines you mention.

 

The train has crossed the viaduct at Widnes, is on the short embankment and is about to cross the Mersey bridge heading towards Runcorn.

 

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/index.cfm#zoom=17&lat=53.3515&lon=-2.7387&layers=168&b=1

 

Deltic was used on the Liverpool - London expresses for a while.

 

Brit15

 

 

Edited July 24, 2019 by APOLLO

[JamieR4489]

Tony,

At the weekend, I made a start on the horsebox you gave me (thanks again) and it has definitely been the most challenging kit I've ever built!

 

It looks very messy at the moment but at some point I'll give it a good clean up with a fibre-glass pencil.

 

Regards,

Jamie

[Tony Wright]

Just now, JamieR4489 said:

Tony,

At the weekend, I made a start on the horsebox you gave me (thanks again) and it has definitely been the most challenging kit I've ever built!

 

It looks very messy at the moment but at some point I'll give it a good clean up with a fibre-glass pencil.

 

Regards,

Jamie

Good on you Jamie,

 

There are modellers old enough to be your grandfather who couldn't tackle stuff like this! Some have even been described as 'accomplished' modellers.

 

It's amazing what a fibreglass propelling pencil and a good clean-up can achieve. And, don't forget, a coat of paint eventually hides everything!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

Are the new motors as good at slow speed with a light load?

 

 

Sorry Tony,

 

I should have mentioned that they are. The combinations are super-smooth throughout the whole speed/load range, and will be my preferred prime-movers from now on.

 

It's just that an A1 at slow speed on a light load isn't very often seen on Little Bytham.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[St Enodoc]

23 hours ago, manna said:

G'Day Folks

 

I wonder how much a 'Un-Pure' pint of water weighs. ?????

 

manna

Approximately a pound and a quarter...

Edited July 24, 2019 by St Enodoc

[t-b-g]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Sorry Tony,

 

I should have mentioned that they are. The combinations are super-smooth throughout the whole speed/load range, and will be my preferred prime-movers from now on.

 

It's just that an A1 at slow speed on a light load isn't very often seen on Little Bytham.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

It is nice to know that it is a good choice for those of us who don't run 10 carriages at 80mph. That means nearly all of us! 

[96701]

On 13/07/2019 at 08:49, Tony Wright said:

No doubt it was, Grahame,

 

However, it's a question of precedence. Silurian is a series of rocks forming a subdivision of the Palaeozoic immediately underlying the Devonian, named as first investigated in the district of the Silures (a people of ancient Britain). SILURIAN is the racehorse which won the 1923 Doncaster Cup.

 

I wonder if William Hartnell thought of those things as the first Dr. Who? Or, did the monsters of that name post-date him? Probably.

 

I once worked with a chap whose knowledge of such matters was staggering. I 'rejoiced' in my own ignorance of the subject! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Also a morris side from Ledbury.

http://www.silurianmorris.org.uk/

[johnarcher]

10 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Sorry Tony,

 

I should have mentioned that they are. The combinations are super-smooth throughout the whole speed/load range, and will be my preferred prime-movers from now on.

 

It's just that an A1 at slow speed on a light load isn't very often seen on Little Bytham.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Is there any idea what the motors are, or whether DJH might sell them separately? The motor sounds good, but the gearbox seems a bit big, and a single shape, to squeeze into some smaller prototypes?

[micklner]

1 hour ago, johnarcher said:

Is there any idea what the motors are, or whether DJH might sell them separately? The motor sounds good, but the gearbox seems a bit big, and a single shape, to squeeze into some smaller prototypes?

This has been mentioned before, due to the sheer size of the gearbox, there are very limited applications that are really viable for their use, without the front of the Gearbox being on view , or having the motor hanging out the back of the firebox into the Cab (shades of  XO4 days !!) .

 

Personally I will continue to use High level Boxes, now with cheap Chinese motors . DJH need to produce a much smaller version , that would then sell very well !!.

[cctransuk]

33 minutes ago, micklner said:

This has been mentioned before, due to the sheer size of the gearbox, there are very limited applications that are really viable for their use, without the front of the Gearbox being on view , or having the motor hanging out the back of the firebox into the Cab (shades of  XO4 days !!) .

 

Personally I will continue to use High level Boxes, now with cheap Chinese motors . DJH need to produce a much smaller version , that would then sell very well !!.

 

I do agree - but Tony builds big locos and has stated that he is not averse to the gearbox being visible below the rear of the boiler; performance is all at LB!

 

As ever, each to their own.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[t-b-g]

I don't build that many locos compared to some but in recent times I have found that High Level provide something that will fit any loco, perform any job and and have enough flexibility in shape and size to be fitted invisibly.

 

Gearboxes sticking out under boilers is so 1970s!  

 

I haven't purchased any of the "new breed" of motors as I am still using up my fairly meagre stock of Portescap, Mashima and Sagami cans but at my rate of construction, a small supply of motors last a lot of years.

 

I am sure the time will come when I need to get some more so it is worth looking at what is out there. I have a handful of 4mm locos I would still like to do.

 

 

[Barry Ten]

A question for Tony and others, if I may?

 

I'm building the SE&CR loco with its DJH tender. Unlike the two other DJH tenders I've made, this one has the wheels running with extended pinpoint axles into the white metal sideframes. Is it recommended to fit top hat bearings?

 

Al

[jwealleans]

Yes.  If you don't, the whitemetal will wear away and your axles will burrow upwards into the frames and eventually seize.

[Tony Wright]

12 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

It is nice to know that it is a good choice for those of us who don't run 10 carriages at 80mph. That means nearly all of us! 

80 mph?

 

No, faster than that!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[thegreenhowards]

9 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

80 mph?

 

No, faster than that!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Is that a scale 80mph?!

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, micklner said:

This has been mentioned before, due to the sheer size of the gearbox, there are very limited applications that are really viable for their use, without the front of the Gearbox being on view , or having the motor hanging out the back of the firebox into the Cab (shades of  XO4 days !!) .

 

Personally I will continue to use High level Boxes, now with cheap Chinese motors . DJH need to produce a much smaller version , that would then sell very well !!.

I agree the 'boxes are a bit on the big-size, Mick,

 

However, parts of the etched sides can be cut away to reduce the appearance. 

 

 

This B16/3 was originally built by Mike Edge, with a DS10 motor and single gear/worm drive. It was a bit noisy, so I substituted a DJH AM9 gearbox and Mashima can. It obviously took up more space, but I nibbled bits of the frames so that it fitted, with just a bit of metal needing removal from the inside of the backhead. The drive (as in the original) is via the rear axle. The result, complete invisibility, and far superior performance. I painted it and Tom Foster weathered it. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

4 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Is that a scale 80mph?!

Andy,

 

A week or two ago, I actually 'measured' the speed of one of my expresses. I measured the distance between two points on the scenic section and used a stopwatch. The result - over 270 scale mph! That's with having to slow down for the end curves. 

 

Shows what can be done on good track! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[t-b-g]

22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

80 mph?

 

No, faster than that!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

 

Even on LB in steam days, only a small proportion of the trains would be doing those speeds.

 

I think it is clear that LB is not a "typical" model railway in that it is a model of a section of a real life race track.

 

How many other steam are model layouts are there where long trains at such speeds can be run with any degree of realism?

 

Probably none!

 

 

 

[thegreenhowards]

Indeed- I remember a video of a visiting loco going somewhat above the speed limit which is what prompted my post. Of course it doesn’t need to be good track - just remember how fast Hornby Dublo could go!

Edited July 25, 2019 by thegreenhowards
Correcting auto correct!

[St Enodoc]

55 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Andy,

 

A week or two ago, I actually 'measured' the speed of one of my expresses. I measured the distance between two points on the scenic section and used a stopwatch. The result - over 270 scale mph! That's with having to slow down for the end curves. 

 

Shows what can be done on good track! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Crikey! That's over 5 feet per second! I don't think I'd dare try that, even with Jesse around to catch things...

[grahame]

It's not exactly modelling weather but yesterday evening I tackled a small N/2mm project and scratch-built a load for the flat back trailer truck I'd recently bashed (see earlier) to roughly replicate this: https://www.na3t.org/road/photo/CX00986-04

 

The 'concrete' sewer pipes have been made from short lengths of plastic tube with the joint flanges produced by adding a slither of a larger diameter tube around them and filing to shape. The diameter of this outer tube was a little too large so I cut a section out of it to pull it tighter and fit snuggly. They are fitted on supporting 'wood' staves (square section styrene strip). Oddly, in the pic referenced above, there doesn't appear to be any lashing ropes/chains. Perhaps it's about to be unloaded or is just loaded and the load not yet lashed down.

 

Here's my model version just resting on the trailer - not yet glued in place. The cab also needs glazing, a driver fitted and fixing in place.

 

 

G

 

Edited July 25, 2019 by grahame

[Coach bogie]

I would like to thank you all for inspiring me to build another loco. I have been building coaches for some time. After all the recent posts, I decide it was time to build another engine.

 

I am also much wiser to what would be seen in a particular location time Versus what I would like to run. I had all the research, all I had to do was study it myself.  There appears to be a belief that the 1930's GWR was well served by 57XX panniers. The reality is somewhat different with Victorian build panniers, many still with open cabs, some even still with saddles awaiting rebuild, were around in big numbers. It was the mid thirties before the new order began to really take over. My layout is based on the Westbury area and should have six non 57XX panniers for the 1930-35 period, hence the SEF purchase.

 

I had bought an 1854 from SEF at Aylesbury and decided it was a straight forward build to get me back into it. It is too hot to go out and I have a few days off, so here is where I am up to after a couple of days. the body may date from the 1960's but there are many extras included now, with a choice of cabs. The frames are now all nickel with brakes and other parts, finely etched. I had bought the wheels of eBay for £20.00. There were fitted to a non working/part built K's pannier which I stripped for wheels and parts.

 

I built the chassis first and got everything running, then started building the body around it.

 

I will go back to the den, in a while, and fit the brake gears crank washers etc, and add the fittings to the tank. There were 4 holes in the top which confused me ( not too difficult, even after I read the instructions....yes i did actually read them!) Back to the books and I found they were for the tank lifting hooks/rings. Sad as I am. I have just made four from thin strands of wire.

 

Once again, thanks for all the postings that gave me the kick to do another engine

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

 

Even on LB in steam days, only a small proportion of the trains would be doing those speeds.

 

I think it is clear that LB is not a "typical" model railway in that it is a model of a section of a real life race track.

 

How many other steam are model layouts are there where long trains at such speeds can be run with any degree of realism?

 

Probably none!

 

 

 

An interesting (as usual) post, Tony,

 

Though the penultimate sentence needs reading more than once to make sense...............

 

I think 'realism' is the key word, as always. Look in any of the works of Nock or Allen regarding 'fast' runs, and the name 'Little Bytham' will appear probably more than any other. More 100 mph steam runs have been achieved here than any other place in the realm (maybe the world?), and it's where MALLARD went through at over two miles per minute 81 years ago, just prior to breaking the world steam record for all time. 

 

That being the case, why shouldn't I run fast trains through my model of the station? It's irrelevant whether or not there are any other railway models where such fast running is possible - it's possible on LB, and, as Sandra Orpen showed us on Sunday, she ran her trains very, very fast - and they were Down trains, too! I might add that a huge amount of fun was enjoyed as well - surely what railway modelling, in all its forms, is about? 

 

I know it's vital that short, slow trains should run perfectly, without stuttering or stalling. At high speed, any 'dead spot' is fizzed over with impunity, but (for different reasons) it's just as difficult to ensure that fast-running trains perform faultlessly. A Pacific has twelve wheels, plus eight on its tender, and well over 80 wheels under its express. That could be more than a hundred wheels under any one train, racing over loads of track joints, all with the potential of bringing something off the road. I would argue (you know I'm argumentative!) that's it's more critical under those circumstances to ensure that the track/wheel standards are more accurately made/observed than on some secondary system where trains just crawl along. Isn't that so of the real thing? 

 

And anyway, why should I (as part of a group, of which you've been a participant - a much-valued one) want to build a 'typical' model railway. Rather philosophically, what is a 'typical' model railway nowadays? If my more-recent observations in the media and at shows are anything to go by, it's mainstream OO, not based on a real prototype, is mainly RTR-based/RTP-based, not that big and is representative of the steam/diesel transition period on BR in the late-'50s/early-'60s. That last point is the only commonality I might see with LB, other than it being OO. Diesel/electric-era layouts seem to be even more RTR-based, often representing far too small a depot, where everything makes a lot of noise, but hardly moves at any speed! 

 

I know we have different views on what constitutes a 'successful' model railway. As you know, I model what I remember from my 'spotting days, where big engines hauled long trains at high-speed. Not everywhere, of course, and at places like Donny or York, they were under a rather tight rein. But, at Botany Bay (not far from you), they weren't half going a lick, and one had to be very brave near the platform edge at Thirsk as an A4 or (especially) a Deltic was going through at top speed.  I never saw steam at LB, but I can tell you the Deltics were really going fast through there, and even more so with the HSTs and the electrics. 

 

My 'needs' are simple. It must be a model of a prototype, it must be ECML in my 'spotting days and the trains must run fast. That and the fact that I must have built (most of) them. I can run fast trains, and I do!

 

It's my privilege to have so many visitors to see LB, and all comment on the 'good running' - the good, high-speed running. I don't know if it would be as 'popular' if trains just crawled along, and then fell off!  

 

Each to their own, of course.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited July 25, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, Coach bogie said:

I would like to thank you all for inspiring me to build another loco. I have been building coaches for some time. After all the recent posts, I decide it was time to build another engine.

 

I am also much wiser to what would be seen in a particular location time Versus what I would like to run. I had all the research, all I had to do was study it myself.  There appears to be a belief that the 1930's GWR was well served by 57XX panniers. The reality is somewhat different with Victorian build panniers, many still with open cabs, some even still with saddles awaiting rebuild, were around in big numbers. It was the mid thirties before the new order began to really take over. My layout is based on the Westbury area and should have six non 57XX panniers for the 1930-35 period, hence the SEF purchase.

 

I had bought an 1854 from SEF at Aylesbury and decided it was a straight forward build to get me back into it. It is too hot to go out and I have a few days off, so here is where I am up to after a couple of days. the body may date from the 1960's but there are many extras included now, with a choice of cabs. The frames are now all nickel with brakes and other parts, finely etched. I had bought the wheels of eBay for £20.00. There were fitted to a non working/part built K's pannier which I stripped for wheels and parts.

 

I built the chassis first and got everything running, then started building the body around it.

 

I will go back to the den, in a while, and fit the brake gears crank washers etc, and add the fittings to the tank. There were 4 holes in the top which confused me ( not too difficult, even after I read the instructions....yes i did actually read them!) Back to the books and I found they were for the tank lifting hooks/rings. Sad as I am. I have just made four from thin strands of wire.

 

Once again, thanks for all the postings that gave me the kick to do another engine

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

That's lovely work, Mike,

 

Thanks for posting........

 

Regards,

 

Tony.