Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, davidw said:

Good use of an old coach. How did you. Remove the moulded battery boxes?

 

Good Question,

 

that part was over twenty years ago. I had to dig out an unadulterated Bachmann carriage to see what I did. The battery boxes are not low relief, even though they fill up all the space between the queen posts then viewed from the front. Why they bothered with the 3d element when it can't be seen, I do not know? I had to removed this first from the back of the angle iron, by drilling out the underside of the upside down battery box. I could then get some cutters and a saw blade in and remove the back of the box. I could then remove the rest with a craft knife, cutting up to the back of the angle iron and the floor. This could be broken free with a pair of flat nosed pliers along the line of the cut.

 

Fig 1 Yellow drill red cut.

 

1459274488_Drillandcut2.jpg.f7fb25d35a0d3f1712ee911ce207cd49.jpg

 

 

What remained was the flat front of the battery box embedder in the angle iron. I drilled out the area vertically and parallel with the queen post and then cut out the remainder by scoring along the join between the lower angle iron and the sole bar. Once this was removed, it was necessary to clean up with a craft knife, files and wet and dry.

 

Fig 2 Yellow drill, Red cut.

 

1547974727_Drillandcut1.jpg.d91a7b14f4a1e3e7f4b868c38ef783a1.jpg

 


Fig 3 The finished result.

 

1409520882_BTK2.jpg.f33eee034478d21fa347cb3d5281d345.jpg

Edited by Headstock
  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Good Question,

 

that part was over twenty years ago. I had to dig out an unadulterated Bachmann carriage to see what I did. The battery boxes are not low relief, even though they fill up all the space between the queen posts then viewed from the front. Why they bothered with the 3d element when it can't be seen, I do not know? I had to removed this first from the back of the angle iron, by drilling out the underside of the upside down battery box. I could then get some cutters and a saw blade in and remove the back of the box. I could then remove the rest with a craft knife, cutting up to the back of the angle iron and the floor. This could be broken free with a pair of flat nosed pliers along the line of the cut.

 

Fig 1 Yellow drill red cut.

 

1459274488_Drillandcut2.jpg.f7fb25d35a0d3f1712ee911ce207cd49.jpg

 

 

What remained was the flat front of the battery box embedder in the angle iron. I drilled out the area vertically and parallel with the queen post and then cut out the remainder by scoring along the join between the lower angle iron and the sole bar. Once this was removed, it was necessary to clean up with a craft knife, files and wet and dry.

 

Fig 2 Yellow drill, Red cut.

 

1547974727_Drillandcut1.jpg.d91a7b14f4a1e3e7f4b868c38ef783a1.jpg

 


Fig 3 The finished result.

 

1409520882_BTK2.jpg.f33eee034478d21fa347cb3d5281d345.jpg

Thanks for the reply. I've  resided a number of old tooling Thompsons. The underframe continues to let them down. The mods you've done are excellent. Thanks for the comprehensive answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Atso said:

Hello Tony and friends!

 

A bit of excitement at my end as I've just received the etches from some artwork I designed!

 

 

 

Out of interest, did you get a company to etch for you, and if so who that would be?

 

I've a small etching project I've had in the back of my mind for a while....

 

Cheers,

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, westernviscount said:

I am glad it isn't just me who has been disappointed by the wheels in the new parkside range. I raised the matter on my kitbuilding thread and was slightly worried I had commited blasphemy!! 

 

My apologies,

 

I missed your post first time around. I'm a little concerned about all the 'proper' wheel manufactures these days. Without them, stock variety could be reduced by two thirds. There would be little point in making anything and most of us would be reduced to being consumers, collectors and Wishlisters only. There are some much more reliable RTR wheelsets available these days, at least for rolling stock. However, even the most modern RTR wheelsets tend to be slightly overscale and can cause all sorts of clearance issues.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Doncaster Green said:

Hi Steve

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the lower left a GNR Dia99 Twin First?

Regards

John

 

Maybe John ;)

 

20210831_230220-1.jpg.a54b123719f28004f8a05c630aaa773a.jpg

 

Needs a bit (a lot!) of a clean up but it went together more or less as I hoped.

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am exploring the frustrations of signal construction and am finding my files are all a tad large for some of the slots I wish to cut. These are about 1mm width. Who would you go to for suitable tools to do what I want. I've browsed watchmakers supplies and am a little more puzzled than before.

   The signals were made by Courtney,Stevens & Bailey and are very distinctive!

Thanks for any advice it all helps.    Micl

     

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
42 minutes ago, Mike 84C said:

I am exploring the frustrations of signal construction and am finding my files are all a tad large for some of the slots I wish to cut. These are about 1mm width. Who would you go to for suitable tools to do what I want. I've browsed watchmakers supplies and am a little more puzzled than before.

   The signals were made by Courtney,Stevens & Bailey and are very distinctive!

Thanks for any advice it all helps.    Micl

     

 

Rather expensive (£22 each), but with these ultra thin flat and round files it might be just the job. A 'long term' investment.

https://www.metalclay.co.uk/ultra-thin-file-medium-fine-flat/#/

https://www.metalclay.co.uk/ultra-thin-file-medium-fine-round/#/

 

image.png.a463a8bdbc58542d67b13e508a9bd106.png

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Geoff Haynes brought a couple of locos round for photography this morning.....................

 

572854759_SD0-6-0ST03.jpg.2382c250c1b6501d32a9e038e56c5c9f.jpg

 

He built and painted this S & D 0-6-0ST in P4.

 

864498566_GWR4-4-003.jpg.4d5b63ff61d887b15e626a19a6e90f0b.jpg

 

And painted this O Gauge GWR 4-4-0. 

 

He did tell me which class it was....................

 

 

Hello Tony

3361 is a Bulldog. Originally named Edward VII until the plates were removed in 1927.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Denbridge said:

Hello Tony

3361 is a Bulldog. Originally named Edward VII until the plates were removed in 1927.

I’m not convinced that this is a Bulldog. It looks like one of the 6’ 8” 4-4-0s. Certainly 3361 was a Bulldog with 5’ 8” wheels but the wheels on this model look too large. To me it looks like an Atbara for it has the high-stepping appearance of these locos. The distinguishing feature is the height of the splashers. In a Bulldog the springs rise above the top of the splashers but on this model the top of the splashers are clearly above the springs because of the need to clear the larger wheels

 

The model is painted in the post first-war livery of plain green but it still has the small circular cab windows which I think may have disappeared pre-war.

 

I wonder what others think?

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, sandra said:

I’m not convinced that this is a Bulldog. It looks like one of the 6’ 8” 4-4-0s. Certainly 3361 was a Bulldog with 5’ 8” wheels but the wheels on this model look too large. To me it looks like an Atbara for it has the high-stepping appearance of these locos. The distinguishing feature is the height of the splashers. In a Bulldog the springs rise above the top of the splashers but on this model the top of the splashers are clearly above the springs because of the need to clear the larger wheels

 

The model is painted in the post first-war livery of plain green but it still has the small circular cab windows which I think may have disappeared pre-war.

 

I wonder what others think?

i thought the same at first glance, but think it is possibly the angle that suggests larger wheels. comparing against prototype photographs shows it is indeed a Bulldog. I agree that in the period depicted, the small round cab windows would probably be plated over.

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, sandra said:

I’m not convinced that this is a Bulldog. It looks like one of the 6’ 8” 4-4-0s. Certainly 3361 was a Bulldog with 5’ 8” wheels but the wheels on this model look too large. To me it looks like an Atbara for it has the high-stepping appearance of these locos. The distinguishing feature is the height of the splashers. In a Bulldog the springs rise above the top of the splashers but on this model the top of the splashers are clearly above the springs because of the need to clear the larger wheels

 

The model is painted in the post first-war livery of plain green but it still has the small circular cab windows which I think may have disappeared pre-war.

 

I wonder what others think?

Having fired up my laptop, rather than looking on my phone, I think you are indeed correct. The wheels do look more like 6' 8" suggesting as you say an Atbara. Curious.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
24 minutes ago, sandra said:

I’m not convinced that this is a Bulldog. It looks like one of the 6’ 8” 4-4-0s. Certainly 3361 was a Bulldog with 5’ 8” wheels but the wheels on this model look too large. To me it looks like an Atbara for it has the high-stepping appearance of these locos. The distinguishing feature is the height of the splashers. In a Bulldog the springs rise above the top of the splashers but on this model the top of the splashers are clearly above the springs because of the need to clear the larger wheels

 

The model is painted in the post first-war livery of plain green but it still has the small circular cab windows which I think may have disappeared pre-war.

 

I wonder what others think?

I would agree Sandra. Not a Bulldog. I'm not very familiar with the GWR 4-4-0s but I would also say it's a - very fine - model of an Atbara.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, zr2498 said:

Rather expensive (£22 each), but with these ultra thin flat and round files it might be just the job. A 'long term' investment.

https://www.metalclay.co.uk/ultra-thin-file-medium-fine-flat/#/

https://www.metalclay.co.uk/ultra-thin-file-medium-fine-round/#/

 

image.png.a463a8bdbc58542d67b13e508a9bd106.png

 

 

Many thanks zr2498, just ordered the flat one - accurate 0.5mm groove filing should be a little easier with that!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sandra said:

I’m not convinced that this is a Bulldog. It looks like one of the 6’ 8” 4-4-0s. Certainly 3361 was a Bulldog with 5’ 8” wheels but the wheels on this model look too large. To me it looks like an Atbara for it has the high-stepping appearance of these locos. The distinguishing feature is the height of the splashers. In a Bulldog the springs rise above the top of the splashers but on this model the top of the splashers are clearly above the springs because of the need to clear the larger wheels

 

The model is painted in the post first-war livery of plain green but it still has the small circular cab windows which I think may have disappeared pre-war.

 

I wonder what others think?

 

I think it is an Atbara, fitted with the wrong number. It has the tall vacuum stand at the front along with the portholes which is consistent with a loco in early 1920s condition. I would suggest it should have the tall safety valve cover though. The plating over of the portholes, low vacuum pipe stand and the fitting of heavier tender springs are things that started to occur from around 1925. 

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, jrg1 said:

Try a Stanley knife blade to open up the slots

And another alternative that I have used (carefully) in a Proxxon TBM 220 drill to extend slots.

https://www.shop-apt.co.uk/micro-diameter-end-mills-2-flute-altins-coated-ultra-fine-grain-carbide-60hrc.html

 

image.png.728c877cc0780784b1d6df2275f58864.png

Perhaps this could be used in a pin vice to open out holes?, but better to mount in a drill stand so it is kept straight (even if turned by hand).

Dave

 

  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...