RMweb Premium thegreenhowards Posted November 9, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 9, 2020 8 hours ago, Tony Wright said: It could well be a Saturday, Andy, I'm relying entirely on the memory of 12-year old, 62 years ago. I never saw either locos returning. We were under strict instructions to be back by 6.00 pm, for tea. Regards, Tony. I don’t remember much of my 12 year old spotting. It would have been mainly 4-CEPS, SUBS and EPBs with an occasional crompton thrown in for a treat and on a very special day a trip to Finsbury Park to drool over Deltics. I don't remember any details from that period, so I’m impressed with your Retford recollections! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PMP Posted November 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2020 9 hours ago, 65179 said: Sorry Tony I didn't explain myself well enough. I think the part of each lubricator you have facing the boiler should in fact be facing outwards. Simon I know what you’re saying, a quick check through a couple of books indicates the ‘clock face’ of the lubricator housing faces inward on the 8F’s, unlike the Black fives (outward) as you mention. So Tony’s is likely correct. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chamby Posted November 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2020 15 hours ago, MJI said: We know what kit building is and scratchbuilding. What is it called when you buy bits from all over the place and make a model like that? It doesn’t sound as macho as ‘hunter-gatherer, but the term I’m familiar with would call you a Kit-basher... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted November 10, 2020 Author Share Posted November 10, 2020 10 hours ago, 65179 said: Sorry Tony I didn't explain myself well enough. I think the part of each lubricator you have facing the boiler should in fact be facing outwards. Simon Good morning Simon, I see what you mean now. The rear faces of the DJH 8F lubricators are just blank. I think what's slightly confusing is the 'chunky' representation of the 'U'-shaped operating cranks (were these for hand-use?). Were I 'pure', I'd have replaced them with wire. To have cast them to scale would have made them too vulnerable. Regards, Tony. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarrMan Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 12 hours ago, westerner said: The fence was built of Balsa (nothing looks better as wood than wood. The piers were constructed of 4mm foamboard and covered with Slaters stone sheets. The decking used Balsa again, supported by Evergreen H girders. It was a girder bridge. Originally wood but later second hand iron girders. The bridge was then painted, detailed and weathered by me. Very effective modelling to look so realistic. Being very pedantic, the girder should be an I beam, not an H beam. The H sections would normally be used for piles or bridge piers, where the forces parallel and perpendicular to the legs of the H are likely to be similar. For a bridge beam, the main forces are vertical (along the stem of the I) rather than horizontal (except for bridge bashing), and hence the width is much less than the height of the steel section. Also for the bridge, the strength of the flanges (the horizontal bits) is increased by their distance from the mid height of the beam, so a longer web with shorter flanges is much more economic that longer flanges and a shorter web. The only place where H sections would be used for beams is if there is very restricted depth between the loading gauge and the required surface level above. Having said all this though, what a realistic impression is given of weathered masonry including the prominent corner stones on the piers. Lloyd 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 65179 Posted November 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2020 I think this is just a case of the 8F being the poor relation. Looking at the DJH site the same castings have been used as used in the Black 5 kit for the Silvertown lubricators. That would be OK, but for the B5 you can leave the rear handles off whereas they should be visible on the 8F. What PMP describes as the clock face is the side of the lubricator where the mechanical linkages are attached (you can see the linkages fairly prominently in my photo of 44806, but they are not really visible in the 8F photos). Putting them the right way round on your model would require handles adding whereas having them the wrong way round saves that trouble (albeit with a small compromise in appearance). I only mentioned it because of previous discussions about V2 lubricators. The staggered arrangement of a V2's lubricators to allow room for the linkages is replicated to the rear on the 8F (the different length lubricators you note being placed at the same distance from the outer edge of the running plate so that they are effectively staggered when viewed from the inner edge). Watch me forget all this when I get around to my 8F and Black five kits! Simon 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 (edited) Dear Tony, I've just replayed the Little Bytham video. Did i spot a 9f without a smoke box handrail? I've not seen a prototype like that. Is it correct or are my eyes deceiving me? Edited November 10, 2020 by davidw Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Roger Sunderland Posted November 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2020 Hi Tony i wonder if I may ask for a little assistance from your good self? I have recently acquired a DJH B16/1 kit . I’ve just completed the PDK kit for a B16/3 and it was, generally a delight to build. The DJH kit is one of their earliest kits and is therefore, how can I put it, a little basic by today’s standards. I see that in their advertising DJH show one of these locos, on Little Bytham I think. Did you use the DJH frames, which are basically 2 pieces of rather thick brass. Also I note the crossheads are white metal. I think I can make a reasonable job but wonder how you approached it and if you substituted any parts. Any tips from the master would be much appreciated. (PS I am aware that PDK and LRM do a kit for the B16/1 but I like a challenge!) 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leander Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 (edited) On 10/11/2020 at 08:37, Tony Wright said: Good morning Simon, I see what you mean now. The rear faces of the DJH 8F lubricators are just blank. I think what's slightly confusing is the 'chunky' representation of the 'U'-shaped operating cranks (were these for hand-use?). Were I 'pure', I'd have replaced them with wire. To have cast them to scale would have made them too vulnerable. Regards, Tony. Do these photos show the lubricators clearly enough? Edited November 11, 2020 by Leander More information 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted November 10, 2020 Author Share Posted November 10, 2020 (edited) 41 minutes ago, Leander said: Does these photos show the lubricators clearly enough? They do indeed, Pete, Many thanks. I think the ones supplied by DJH are a bit of a fudge, but they're staying. Actually, Hornby's RTR 8F has more-accurate lubricators............... Which rather begs the question 'Why bother building one when something like this is available (is it still?) RTR at probably less than half the price? All I've done with this loco is just to weather it further; then give it to Ian Wilson. I didn't take off the obtrusive strip beneath the tender's soleplate. Why is it there? Why build, then? Anyone who builds their own locos will understand. Just the motion to make now. Tomorrow's job................... Regards, Tony. Edited November 10, 2020 by Tony Wright to add something 12 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Blandford1969 Posted November 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2020 10 hours ago, Tony Wright said: what's slightly confusing is the 'chunky' representation of the 'U'-shaped operating cranks (were these for hand-use?). Were I 'pure', I'd have replaced them with wire. To have cast them to scale would have made them too vulnerable. Regards, Tony. The U shapes are to prime the lubricators when they have been filled. Normally I give them about 20 turns during preping a loco 1 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mullie Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 Just wanted to add to the chorus of those who enjoyed the virtual exhibition. What I like is to keep going back in during the days after the exhibition, I have also saved some of the YouTube footage to watch later. I have been modelling and these were posted on my thread last week, just a few scenic views on the test plank showing beet wagons being shunted by a class 10 shunter. A few jobs still to do on the shunter to bed the body down properly. Martyn 16 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chas Levin Posted November 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2020 (edited) On 09/11/2020 at 19:52, 2750Papyrus said: I would have been in the middle of my 'O' levels. Hooray - thank you for mentioning 'O' Levels, makes me feel young again... Edited November 10, 2020 by Chas Levin 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike 84C Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 From the footplate, if the lubricator stopped working (not unknown for a clevis pin to wear and drop out or bend the drive rod) then that small bar with the bent ends told you straight away. If it was rotating all was well as it was atatched to the plunger drive shaft. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted November 11, 2020 Author Share Posted November 11, 2020 9 hours ago, Mike 84C said: From the footplate, if the lubricator stopped working (not unknown for a clevis pin to wear and drop out or bend the drive rod) then that small bar with the bent ends told you straight away. If it was rotating all was well as it was atatched to the plunger drive shaft. Thanks Mike, I wonder if anyone has actually made a 'working' 4mm lubricator? By that, I mean the wheels/handles actually move/rotate. I know I fit the drives to A4s and the W1, but they're really dummy. They move, but not the lubricators. I did fit a lubricator drive to a SR Q1, though I think that only pivoted below the actual lubricator. I rigged a similar thing up on a USA tank. An interesting challenge; one I'll never take up! Regards, Tony. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waraqah Posted November 11, 2020 Share Posted November 11, 2020 Hi Tony, Apologies if this has already been asked, but are you the T.G. Wright behind the excellent Jago Hazzard channel on Youtube? 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 96701 Posted November 11, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 11, 2020 9 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Thanks Mike, I wonder if anyone has actually made a 'working' 4mm lubricator? By that, I mean the wheels/handles actually move/rotate. I know I fit the drives to A4s and the W1, but they're really dummy. They move, but not the lubricators. I did fit a lubricator drive to a SR Q1, though I think that only pivoted below the actual lubricator. I rigged a similar thing up on a USA tank. An interesting challenge; one I'll never take up! Regards, Tony. I doubt that the ratchet mechanism could be made that tiny and still work. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atso Posted November 11, 2020 Share Posted November 11, 2020 10 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Thanks Mike, I wonder if anyone has actually made a 'working' 4mm lubricator? By that, I mean the wheels/handles actually move/rotate. I know I fit the drives to A4s and the W1, but they're really dummy. They move, but not the lubricators. I did fit a lubricator drive to a SR Q1, though I think that only pivoted below the actual lubricator. I rigged a similar thing up on a USA tank. An interesting challenge; one I'll never take up! Regards, Tony. Ask Tim, I'm sure he'll include it on his next 2mm model! 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted November 11, 2020 Author Share Posted November 11, 2020 7 hours ago, Waraqah said: Hi Tony, Apologies if this has already been asked, but are you the T.G. Wright behind the excellent Jago Hazzard channel on Youtube? Good evening Waraqah, Please forgive me, but I haven't the least idea of what you're referring to. I'm A.J. Wright..................... Regards, Tony. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tony Wright Posted November 11, 2020 Author Popular Post Share Posted November 11, 2020 Apart from painting, the DJH Stanier 8F is now complete................ I always split the motion into two halves when erecting it. Standard .45mm nickel silver wire pick-ups installed - no squeaking at all. The smaller DJH motor/gearbox combo gives superlative running. Worth every penny in my book. Thorough testing as standard. Tomorrow, on the layout......................... Still some cleaning up to do before painting. An ideal 'layout loco'? 21 13 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted November 11, 2020 Share Posted November 11, 2020 Certainly looks like an 8F, Tony! Makes a (nice?) change from yet another East Coast pacific ... ouch! (runs for cover) 2 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 96701 Posted November 11, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 11, 2020 There is something rather fine about a well built brass / nickel silver / whitemetal loco. It is a completely different beast to a painted, lined and weathered loco. Maybe it is because the components are different colours because of the way that they are made and the metal from which they are made. Is it that the unpainted model displays engineering techniques and the model maker's skill, whilst the painted / lined / weathered version more displays the painter's skills? 1 3 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodcock29 Posted November 11, 2020 Share Posted November 11, 2020 2 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Apart from painting, the DJH Stanier 8F is now complete................ I always split the motion into two halves when erecting it. Standard .45mm nickel silver wire pick-ups installed - no squeaking at all. The smaller DJH motor/gearbox combo gives superlative running. Worth every penny in my book. Thorough testing as standard. Tomorrow, on the layout......................... Still some cleaning up to do before painting. An ideal 'layout loco'? Tony It looks like a lovely model. I had the chance to buy the kit quite cheaply recently but reasoned I'd never have time to build it given the number in the to-build pile. I have built the Black 5 kit and have another (actually the Model Loco Armstrong version) to build. One thing I find strange is that you didn't bother to replace the cast smokebox door handles. I always think that as part of the face of the loco they lift it considerably. I've actually got a later repainted Hornby version on the LMS part of my layout and in fact a very old re-motored Hornby Dublo version that I've had running recently just for the fun of it. I fitted it with a small Portescap back in the mid 80s for my father. Despite the fact it still has the old HD driving wheels it actually runs pretty well. I had the workshop at my work at the time mill the chassis out for me in their lunch break! I fitted a new chimney, smokebox door handles (although I would now fit much finer ones!) backhead, buffers, tender and pony wheels and handrails all round to bring it up to my spec at the time. It could do with some weathering clearly but here is a quick photo taken on my phone. I wonder if I'll ever change the driving wheels, fit steps etc? I think it still looks the part and is part of my modelling history. Andrew 17 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Apart from painting, the DJH Stanier 8F is now complete................ I always split the motion into two halves when erecting it. Standard .45mm nickel silver wire pick-ups installed - no squeaking at all. The smaller DJH motor/gearbox combo gives superlative running. Worth every penny in my book. Thorough testing as standard. Tomorrow, on the layout......................... Still some cleaning up to do before painting. An ideal 'layout loco'? Tony As already said above, Smoke Box Door handle a must to change. I would also change the huge front coupling. I would also use some turned/sprung Buffers and Safety Valves as well for much better detail. The awful XO4 cutout in the battleship thickness frames need sorting as well, it looks like you can see daylight coming through the frames in that area . Good to see, that the motor/gearbox is hidden on this one !!! Mick Edited November 12, 2020 by micklner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Roger Sunderland Posted November 12, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 12, 2020 The 8F is very nice Tony. I built one some years ago. It’s married to a Hornby tender for extra pickups though not sure it needs them. Still waiting for any advice you can give me on the DJH B16/1 I’ve acquired (please see my post a little while back) 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