Wright writes.....

[Manxcat]

9 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Sadly, I told her I did not 'deal' in such things and advised her to contact the second-hand dealers. One hopes she'll get something back. 

Tony,

 

Our club is contacted every few months with enquiries about the sale of the collections of deceased modellers. We have found that sales at auction can sometimes secure a lot more than second hand dealers will offer. Some years ago now a widow with some O gauge tinplate locos contacted us and I visited her, since she lived close to our clubroom. The items were in very good condition and she told me a dealer had seen them and offered £200 for them all. We put her in touch with Warwick and Warwick, who advertise in the model press, and they fetched £800, after commission, when auctioned individually. 

 

The firm will appraise larger collections by sending a valuer to the seller's house and make an offer for them or auction them if that is what the seller would prefer. You might like to consider referring widows to them where RTR items are involved, Neither I nor any of our club members has a connection with them. 

 

Archie

[manna]

5 hours ago, micklner said:

From what I have read, the following Gresley designs were also rough riders ,  B17 , K3 any others ?.

G'Day Folks

 

K2's were rough, as were the O1's (Gresley), Ragtimer's and Tango's, give you an idea.

 

manna

[Chamby]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I had a phone call the other evening from a widow, asking for my assistance in 'disposing' of her late husband's model railway collection. Her husband had died in August. Though I can't recall him, I must have spoken to him at shows, since he had my card (which his widow then used to get in touch with me).

 

From what she said, his collection was mainly locomotives, and all RTR - Hornby/Bachmann/Oxford/Heljan/etc, all steam-outline and all boxed. The 'problem' was he'd detailed/altered/weathered, etc, all of them, so they were no longer original. Ironically (so it would appear), despite their then being 'more accurate', their resale value (especially to collectors) is then less.

 

Sadly, I told her I did not 'deal' in such things and advised her to contact the second-hand dealers. One hopes she'll get something back. 

 

I had a similar situation recently, only in this case the widow had been married to a club member so I helped out.  

 

Not being savvy with internet selling platforms, I found the best place to sell such modified loco’s was in clubs.  I contacted three different clubs relatively local to me, and after a couple of visits to each, managed to sell the whole collection.  Inevitably, some sold quickly and for better prices, the last few for rather less, but the collection made rather more than I had initially anticipated.  The club members got items for less than the resellers ask, and the widow got rather more than a reseller would have offered for the collection, plus the knowledge that her deceased husband’s treasured items had gone to fellow modellers who would similarly appreciate them.

 

That said, it is not a task to be undertaken lightly.  Every item needed to be thoroughly test run, parts checked and in some cases repaired, then catalogued and assigned a reasonable value, then each item demonstrated to the potential purchasers.  Throughout it all, is an awareness of a commitment made and a responsibility to deliver the right outcome.  In my case the widow received a four figure sum for which she was very grateful.  But I will think carefully about taking on such a task again, given the amount of work involved.

[James Fitzjames]

7 hours ago, micklner said:

From what I have read, the following Gresley designs were also rough riders ,  B17 , K3 any others ?.

K4s were supposed to be quite lively over the flatter stretches into Glasgow and along Loch Eil-side. 

Edited December 4, 2021 by James Fitzjames
Typo

[jrg1]

I wonder how the new B17 will ride, as it is being built with cannon axleboxes.

[gr.king]

I've been scratching my head trying to remember which locos of mine might include that alternative two-springy-wire A-frame suspension for a carrying/radial axle. The penny has at last dropped, so if anybody is interested but is still uncertain of the precise form of the structure following my earlier description, here's an example. How time flies, it is about ten years since I did this:

 

[Atso]

On the subject of rough riding on Gresley locomotives, it would seem that, if the (tender) loco didn't have a Cartazzi truck then it would be a rough rider at speed; especially when due to a works visit. I've just finished reading a book on the LNER mogul classes and it seems that crews didn't like running them at speeds. Therefore, when deputising on express passenger duties, mogul crews would attack climbs as hard as possible so that they wouldn't have to rely on fast downhill running to make up time. Pacific crews on the other hand apparently let their locos find their own pace on a climb knowing that they could always make up time on the downhill stretches.

 

From a modelling perspective, I prefer the Gresley aesthetic over other designers (especially Thompson who designed some ungainly Pacifics) - thankfully my loco crews don't complain about anything! 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Atso

[jrg1]

Here's my solution to the pony wheel problem.  Because of the long wheelbase of the Raven A2, the axle runs in a round tube, itself in a square section tube that is free to move up and down in the frame slots.  I utilised Hornby flangeless wheels, to ensure there would be no derailments on curves, and I still need to do final spring adjustment.

[Iain.d]

I‘ve not posted anything for a few weeks but thought I’d just show where I am up to with an LMS D1810 Restaurant First Open I’m building from a Comet / Wizard Kit. Today I did a final build to make sure all the parts would go together prior to the last wash. There was a bit of minor adjustment needed to the interior / roof interface otherwise all went well. Currently the chassis only has 3 buffers, one was too deformed to use so I’ll purchase a replacement pack in the New Year.

 

The roof is detachable, being secured by two 12BA bolts fixed in the roof, I drilled holes in the roof, filed the bolt heads to shape and fixed them in and tidied up with some filler. I soldered in two substantial cross members to the coach sides that the bolts pass through, these improve the rigidity of the body when handling. I’ll add roof rain strips (from tape) after the last wash. The coupling bar I have fabricated hangs down a bit in the assembled image, it won’t on final assembly as I have bent a short piece of wire to act like spring to keep it elevated.

 

 

I have also made up all the handrails, scissor gangways, cut the windows, etc. I’ll knock up some curtains through the week. And I’ll paint the interior and fix in the tables too. The lamps are a length of .5mm wire with a short piece of semi-transparent wire sheathing to represent the shades.

 

 

It’s now at the point of painting, tomorrow morning I’ll try and get a coat of grey Tamiya primer on the roof and body and Vallejo Surface primer on the chassis (German Panzer grey with and some brown primer added). I’ll spray in the garage, which is currently at 25 degrees, hopefully it’ll cool down to below 20 tonight!!

 

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Iain.d
Change a word.

[Barry Ten]

2 hours ago, jrg1 said:

Here's my solution to the pony wheel problem.  Because of the long wheelbase of the Raven A2, the axle runs in a round tube, itself in a square section tube that is free to move up and down in the frame slots.  I utilised Hornby flangeless wheels, to ensure there would be no derailments on curves, and I still need to do final spring adjustment.

 

 I don't understand how it'll track round curves at all without the flanges?

[t-b-g]

2 hours ago, Atso said:

On the subject of rough riding on Gresley locomotives, it would seem that, if the (tender) loco didn't have a Cartazzi truck then it would be a rough rider at speed; especially when due to a works visit. I've just finished reading a book on the LNER mogul classes and it seems that crews didn't like running them at speeds. Therefore, when deputising on express passenger duties, mogul crews would attack climbs as hard as possible so that they wouldn't have to rely on fast downhill running to make up time. Pacific crews on the other hand apparently let their locos find their own pace on a climb knowing that they could always make up time on the downhill stretches.

 

From a modelling perspective, I prefer the Gresley aesthetic over other designers (especially Thompson who designed some ungainly Pacifics) - thankfully my loco crews don't complain about anything! 

 

I am not sure that the LNER mogul classes were ever designed for high speed running, so it is hardly a shock that they were not smooth runners when they were trying to perform duties that would normally require a pacific or suchlike. I think most 2-6-0 designs would have been the same running at express speeds on top link duties. The fact that locos like the K3s were able to perform such duties when needed to deputise for a proper express loco at all is more of a positive than a negative.

 

I don't think it is any surprise that the vast majority of top link express locos from all companies, certainly post 1923, had a bogie at the front. Honourable exceptions being the V2 and the P2 and they were not immune from problems with their leading pony trucks.

 

When the mogul types were kept on the duties they were intended for, they performed well, especially the K3s and the K4s.   

[gr.king]

On 04/12/2021 at 14:16, Barry Ten said:

 

 I don't understand how it'll track round curves at all without the flanges?

Indeed. I'm tempted to imagine that if there's any freedom at all for those wheels to descend to, or below, normal railhead level, then (bearing in mind that no track I've ever seen is dead level everywhere) there will be a risk of them getting alongside rather than on top of the rails on curves, and then fighting the loco's attempts to run straight after the curve. I worry that a twitchy / jerky rear end action, or a derailment of other wheelsets might result.

Edited December 5, 2021 by gr.king
Spelling mistake!

[cctransuk]

4 hours ago, jrg1 said:

Here's my solution to the pony wheel problem.  Because of the long wheelbase of the Raven A2, the axle runs in a round tube, itself in a square section tube that is free to move up and down in the frame slots.  I utilised Hornby flangeless wheels, to ensure there would be no derailments on curves, and I still need to do final spring adjustment.

 

Why bother? Surely, if using flangeless wheels, two axle holes in the mainframes will suffice?

 

This seems to work for Hornby - if you like that sort of thing; (I don't).

 

CJI.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Why bother? Surely, if using flangeless wheels, two axle holes in the mainframes will suffice?

 

This seems to work for Hornby - if you like that sort of thing; (I don't).

 

CJI.

Depends on ones layout. We run Britannias and rebuilt WCs with flanged trailing wheels on one with minimum radii of 36" and they behave just fine as well as looking way better.

 

John

[Chas Levin]

8 hours ago, gr.king said:

I've been scratching my head trying to remember which locos of mine might include that alternative two-springy-wire A-frame suspension for a carrying/radial axle. The penny has at last dropped, so if anybody is interested but is still uncertain of the precise form of the structure following my earlier description, here's an example. How time flies, it is about ten years since I did this:

 

That's very interesting Graeme, thanks for such a clearly illustrated posting. It looks a very neat way to provide simultaneous sideways and downwards control. I've only tried using a single central spring, have to try this...

[60526]

Tony,

There I was enjoying a nice pint of Black Sheep listening to the BRM panel discussion between Phil Parker, Chris Mead, Graham Nicholas and yourself, when I choked somewhat, I thought that I heard you say that "weathering should not be used to disguise mistakes". A quick reverse and yes you did say that. Now, the other day I was looking at buying one of the Hornby A2's, it would have been the most expensive RTR model that I have ever bought,model costs have caught up with me somewhat, I'd previously decided not to spend that sort of money on a model which I consider has the wrong colour green. I can understand you waxing lyrical about some of the newer Hornby models in the BRM videos, I'd agree the B1 is particularly good, but do you really believe that the A2 out of the box is the right coloured green? I'm not totally convinced, but the weathered A2 you have shown photos of seems to cover it up some what?

Charlie

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, gr.king said:

I've been scratching my head trying to remember which locos of mine might include that alternative two-springy-wire A-frame suspension for a carrying/radial axle. The penny has at last dropped, so if anybody is interested but is still uncertain of the precise form of the structure following my earlier description, here's an example. How time flies, it is about ten years since I did this:

 

Perhaps it's too early on a Sunday morning but I'm struggling with the geometry of that.

 

Is it one of those things that works in practice but not in theory?

[cctransuk]

4 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Depends on ones layout. We run Britannias and rebuilt WCs with flanged trailing wheels on one with minimum radii of 36" and they behave just fine as well as looking way better.

 

John

 

So do I - but I ensure that the trailing trucks are able to move as the curves dictate; in accordance with the prototype.

 

John Isherwood.

[Dunsignalling]

2 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

So do I - but I ensure that the trailing trucks are able to move as the curves dictate; in accordance with the prototype.

 

John Isherwood.

I've done that on one but lost track of which one until I lifted it off in the FY, so I haven't bothered doing any more.

 

it will go round a tighter (30") curve though so it's one for future reference/other layouts.

 

John

 

[cctransuk]

2 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

I've done that on one but lost track of which one until I lifted it off in the FY, so I haven't bothered doing any more.

 

it will go round a tighter (30") curve though so it's one for future reference/other layouts.

 

John

 

 

The Hornby WC is the easiest. I'd guess that it was designed with a pivoting truck, but changed to a fixed truck with flangeless wheels.

 

If only all Pacifics were designed that way - modding to pivoting trucks with flanged wheels would be a doddle!

 

John Isherwood.

 

 

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, St Enodoc said:

Perhaps it's too early on a Sunday morning but I'm struggling with the geometry of that.

 

Is it one of those things that works in practice but not in theory?

It was too early. After another cup of coffee and a quick play with a pair of compasses and a straight edge I've got it.

 

Very neat.

[grahame]

24 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

It was too early. After another cup of coffee and a quick play with a pair of compasses and a straight edge I've got it

 

That's your problem. Drop the coffee and have a cup of tea instead.

;-)

 

 

[jrg1]

11 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

 I don't understand how it'll track round curves at all without the flanges?

The height is set by shimming on the washer, and the assembly is then locked.  The tyres are wide enough to stay on curves.  I decided on this arrangement as there is very little clearance between the outer wheel faces and the cast Cartazzi frames.

[jrg1]

9 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Why bother? Surely, if using flangeless wheels, two axle holes in the mainframes will suffice?

 

This seems to work for Hornby - if you like that sort of thing; (I don't).

 

CJI.

This is arranged for P4-clearances are very tight.

[Barry Ten]

10 hours ago, jrg1 said:

The height is set by shimming on the washer, and the assembly is then locked.  The tyres are wide enough to stay on curves.  I decided on this arrangement as there is very little clearance between the outer wheel faces and the cast Cartazzi frames.

 

 

I still don't get it, sorry. It looks to me like you've engineered a very nice swinging truck arrangement, and then negated its functionality by using flangeless wheels.