Dettingen GCR might have been layout

[jwealleans]

First thing I'd do, if that's the Millholme/McGowan kit is see whether any of it is the right size or shape.   That might reduce your options.

[gr.king]

I built the McGowan Immingham, which I presume shares many parts with the former firm's Atlantic. It wasn't easy to decide where to start, there being no obvious point on any of the parts that could be treated as a reliably correct reference point from which to measure and set relationships. Amongst other things, I put a huge fillet down the top centre joint of the boiler halves and filed MASSES of white metal off the "3 and 9 o'clock" areas of the boiler to make it round and reduce the enormous uneven thickness of the parts. The upper cab front and roof had to be replaced completely to arrive at anything that I considered to approach the right shape. Large quantities of metal had to be hewn from the battleship-armour thickness of the tender sides too. The loco sits on a re-wheeled 1990s Hornby B12 chassis with added brake gear and bogie from the kit.

[richard i]

It might be a bad place to start but it is in the journey. It is also so it will make the other look better.

i look forward to the extra metal which can be melted into some people or boiler fittings.

one plus side no tender so no thick sides to file down. I need to resolve it. I have some spares picked up on my travels so I will see if one works. The worsley works one comes with a brass sided one.

richard 

[richard i]

Some bending rolling and cutting out has occurred. 
it has led to a question. The boiler is rolled, but it is too big for the end piece. This means to be the correct diameter it will overlap at the bottom of the boiler.

do I: overlap it and file back the extra?

overlap it and use the extra to give a greater binding surface?

cut back to the right length by using pi to workout diameter of a circle to a straight line. Half from each side so chimney is in the right place. 
 

it will mostly be hidden behind wheel arches.

thoughts?

thanks to Richard for letting me borrow his rollers as the made forming shapes so much easier.

richard

[ChrisN]

4 minutes ago, richard i said:

Some bending rolling and cutting out has occurred. 
it has led to a question. The boiler is rolled, but it is too big for the end piece. This means to be the correct diameter it will overlap at the bottom of the boiler.

do I: overlap it and file back the extra?

overlap it and use the extra to give a greater binding surface?

cut back to the right length by using pi to workout diameter of a circle to a straight line. Half from each side so chimney is in the right place. 
 

it will mostly be hidden behind wheel arches.

thoughts?

thanks to Richard for letting me borrow his rollers as the made forming shapes so much easier.

richard

 

Richard,

Speaking as someone who has never done this, if it was me I would roll it and lap the extra.  If it is underneath it will not show, especially if there is a sliver of solder over it.

 

You could try filing, but this might be a long and awkward process, for not much gain.

 

As for the calculation, it is already rolled so to do it properly it would need to be flattened.  We all know that maths works but there are quite a few sources of error in doing this and you are quite likely to end up with just that bit too much taken off.  (If it was me I would do something that is obviously wrong in the calculation or cutting, but not see it until it was too late, and then think, "Why on earth did I do that?  That was obviously not the right thing to do.")

[Regularity]

Overlap it. If you don’t like the result, then cut down the middle of the seam, and that will give a perfect meeting of the two sides for butt-joining with a splice behind. You don’t even have to worry about getting a straight and square cut, either!

[Keith Turbutt]

Richard,

 

The edges of the boiler look a bit flat in your picture especially the RH edge. I think this is a common problem using rolling bars to get the whole piece rolled especially at the edges. This will affect the 'fit' of the smokebox to the boiler. Perhaps someone can suggest a way of forming these edges. 

 

Does the kit come with discs to fit inside the boiler or at least a back plate at the firebox end.

 You could use this to check the 'roundness' of the rolling. Presumably the smokebox has a 'faceplate' too which you can use to check whether the whole piece has been rolled or if there is a 'flat' at the edges.

 

I certainly wouldn't do any trimming until you have checked this out.

 

Sorry if this advice is all rubbish - I haven't used my rolling bars yet! 

 

Keith

 

 

[richard i]

Thanks for the advice. I will look to overlap. I will make another disk to hold the boilers shape. I think I will brace them apart, but how far. Too near the back and it might not leave room for the motor which can mostly fit in the firebox. Too near the front and I will lose the space to put extra weight in to balance it out. 
that’s my next play….. or start the tender to build it in tandem. 
richard 

[Andy Hayter]

Just as an aside, where do people get their rolling bars from?   I know Richard has said he has borrowed his but that is not an easy option for me tucked away in deepest France.

[richard i]

I have seen a stand at a show.

[Regularity]

Probably GW Models.

[gr.king]

I haven't used rolling bars, but I think that "good practice" is to induce the necessary bends near what will become the joining edges of the sheet before the sheet is fed into the rollers. One way to do that might be to use a vice with smooth undamaged jaws to grip just a final few miilimetres along the edge of the sheet and give the rest of the sheet a gentle push, then lift a fraction more out of the jaws and bend a touch more, then repeat until there's too little edge remaining to grip in the vice. Use of suitable carriage-side bending bars, if you have access to any, on the edge portion of the sheet might be another way to get the curve into those areas, again before using the rollers.

[richard i]

Building up from the flat.

trying a different approach. Following on from last coach build of adding the detail in the flat and then joining the big pieces together rather than get the basic shape and then add the detail.

let’s see if it makes for an easier build.

anyone got strong views on which approach is better from experience?

richard 

[Caley Jim]

Whether it's a coach or a wagon kit I much prefer to add as much detail as I can in the flat as it's much easier to hold the piece.  Trying to hold an assembled body securely, without damaging it, while you add details is always fraught with danger in my experience.

 

Jim

[richard i]

Questions 

tenders, do I look to modify the white metal one , ( or is it a 3500gal one?) or steal the tender from a director kit which is very far down the build list. It is brass. It is to go with the white metal loco, same material matter?

then motors and gear boxes. I got these a while ago. Does anyone know if the little motor is powerful enough for the job? Are the gear boxes appropriate or is that all down to how low they are geared?

what about the motor with plastic gear, does this have much mileage or is it going to be a weak link ?

richard

Edited January 21, 2022 by richard i

[jimwal]

No idea on tender types but the material dosen't matter, you are painting it aren't you?

 

Motors: forget the K's HP2M (top right), it will probably be a weak link, most were high revving and noisy.

The other two look fine, the smaller should fit wereas the larger may be a bit bulky.

 

The gearboxes look to be 'High Level' ones which may well do the job. Have a look at their website which has all the details and suggested uses.

[richard i]

The tender debate may be solved. Whilst looking for valve gear I can across another tender I had brought for a “future project”  it is rather well done and is a 4000gal one, though it might need a little work topside. The other is shorter so a 3500? Which would only be right for the first few and only for the first couple of years.

it does have the small blemishes on the paintwork this side which I need to investigate. Gunk I can remove or paint scratches I will need to cover. 

Blending the paint colour, now that’s a challenge for me with such poor colour differentiation.

for that matter getting the loco the same colour too. 
who was it who did a paint match service and would put it in a spray can for you?

richard 

[richard i]

More questions.

this is the front of the tender the circles below the coal hole have been etched through. Is that for a handle? Does the little extension on the front of the coal area floor go through the door,( it fits) or does it fold down to give the height at the front of the tender.

any thoughts or proof gratefully received.

in other news. I was going to build the main parts of the tender but realized I need to mark out the back for handrails. So will do that first.

richard

[Caley Jim]

24 minutes ago, richard i said:

More questions.

this is the front of the tender the circles below the coal hole have been etched through. Is that for a handle? Does the little extension on the front of the coal area floor go through the door,( it fits) or does it fold down to give the height at the front of the tender.

Not familiar with that particular tender, but the two little holes will be for the control handles for the valves to shut off the water supply pipes when the tender is detached from the loco. The little extension could well be a 'shelf' to help the fireman when taking coal.  If there is no half etched bend line on the underside, then I would presume is should pass through the coal hole.

 

Jim

[t-b-g]

On 08/01/2022 at 15:54, gr.king said:

Is there any prototype photograph to support that cabside lining panel on a C4 in LNER green? Obviously some of the more challenging lining has been omitted from the model, but I would ordinarily expect only edge lining on the cab, save for the early LNER paint jobs on prestigious locos at Darlington works, which continued in the NER fashion regardless of any group standard.

 

With that number (no 5 added yet) and the GCR pattern lining, I wonder if the prototype would have still been in GCR Green livery with LNER lettering added, rather than LNER Green.

 

As for the McGowan Atlantic, I started one a while ago and made some progress. It had a new footplate, a new cab (it had possibly the worst GCR cab I have ever seen), new frames and from memory I shortened the boiler/firebox assembly by 2mm and lowered it by 2mm.

 

By this stage I had realised that it would be easier scratchbuilding one but Malcolm Crawley beat me to it and produced this beauty (one of the Compound Atlantics), so I never went any further with mine. I have one part done in O Gauge and I still may finish the McGowan one. It will just be interesting to see if anybody can tell the origin when it is done.

 

     

[richard i]

The weather allowed a diversion back to the carriages. Sunny but not quite warm enough so I took over the shed

put the heater on and sprayed away. 

only the brown body colour to hand paint on. The variation of background colour of red and black should I hope give a subtle variation in top colour. That’s the plan anyway. 
I will need gold numbers for the first and third but simple not fancy without any other colours. I can find yellow ones is there a railway company which had similar?

richard 

[hayfield]

On 21/01/2022 at 21:42, richard i said:

Questions 

tenders, do I look to modify the white metal one , ( or is it a 3500gal one?) or steal the tender from a director kit which is very far down the build list. It is brass. It is to go with the white metal loco, same material matter?

then motors and gear boxes. I got these a while ago. Does anyone know if the little motor is powerful enough for the job? Are the gear boxes appropriate or is that all down to how low they are geared?

what about the motor with plastic gear, does this have much mileage or is it going to be a weak link ?

richard

 

Richard

 

The motor top right is a Keyser HP2m, most try and keep well away from these

 

The Mishima's are super motors, the 1020 are highly sought after. simply as there are few competitors. The 1020 should fit most locos, the other one depends on size, both width and length

 

The gearboxes do look like High Level ones, probably the best around at the moment. The left hand one looks to be a load Hauler  https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/_files/ugd/27e471_2a214b504e0843868c689f4d2b070b2d.pdf

 

The right hand one a RoadRunner  https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/_files/ugd/27e471_1532540cfc82469786092557474ed514.pdf

 

  

[richard i]

47 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Richard

 

The motor top right is a Keyser HP2m, most try and keep well away from these

 

The Mishima's are super motors, the 1020 are highly sought after. simply as there are few competitors. The 1020 should fit most locos, the other one depends on size, both width and length

 

The gearboxes do look like High Level ones, probably the best around at the moment. The left hand one looks to be a load Hauler  https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/_files/ugd/27e471_2a214b504e0843868c689f4d2b070b2d.pdf

 

The right hand one a RoadRunner  https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/_files/ugd/27e471_1532540cfc82469786092557474ed514.pdf

 

  

Thanks

jim has also warned me off the keyser one. The info on the motors and gearboxes is useful. I will play around with them to what fits each loco when they are built enough to weigh it up.

richard 

[richard i]

What a difference a colour makes.

certainly easier than chocolate and cream.

window frames and buffer beam detail to paint then interiors to build.

I will be giving it a wash of black to vary the side colours a little more

Please point out any errors of colour

richard 

[richard i]

Cat definitely amongst the pigeons.

plan A for letter was the upper carriages style. It painted plasticard letter. A fraction too big but with relief like the originals, but more relief than needed.

plan B came about because Guard would not fit on the guards door. Therefore I used a transfer. I then tried transfers for the end lettering and numbers - as shown on the bottom carriage. Lettering is slightly too small and so are numbers. It is more subtle though and I wonder if that compromise is a better one as it looks more natural and less toy model like? Views?

As an aside. The numbering for the class designation does not look too bad in the raised numbers. But would mix and matching work? Again views gratefully received.

many thanks 

richard