Pragmatic Pre-Grouping - Mikkel's Workbench

[Miss Prism]

I can't comment on what was going on at Crewe, Jol, but the 1905-14 years on the GWR were indeed a Churchward 'revolution', with many locos (both Armstrong/Dean and Churchward's own) coming in to the works on numerous occasions for new chimneys, safety valves, fireboxes, smokeboxes, superheaters, boilers, tanks, bunkers, frame extensions, ATC gear, etc. It was an era of very rapid change. No doubt all very logical at the time, but a hundred or so years later, it's little wonder us muddlers get confused.

[Brinkly]

 You don't think they would take it back if there's a motor failure?    It's a lot of money of course, but on the other hand - people spend more on a single night out sometimes.

Haha re motor! And quite re night out! Some people spend ridiculous amounts on booze and all they have to show for it is a hang over!

 

Good work.

 

I saw a while ago that you had a rather nice Dapol Terrier, any updates? I've been so tempted to get one myself, it is untrue!

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

[Brassey]

 Crankpin on spoke was a pan-GWR characteristic, and not confined to Wolverhampton locos. (Crankpin between spokes was I think introduced by Collett.) 

 

Miss P,

 

The source of my previous comment was a discussion in the Model Railway press in the late 70s/early 80s about the wheels on the 517 class and the conclusion was that the crankpins were "on spoke" as that was the standard for locos built at Wolverhampton.  I assumed that the people writing at the time had more contemporary knowledge and I had no reason to doubt it.

 

I believe crankpin between the spokes did exist long before the Collett period as shown in this image.  (I always thought that was the GWR standard)  Ultrascale wheels supplied for the Finney DG are between the spoke as per Mike Sharman's wheel spec for modellers book.  However, now that I've looked, all the DG in Craig's photos seem to have the crankpin on spoke!

 

 

[Miss Prism]

Oh yes. Thanks. Brassey. Actually, the press discussion does ring a vague bell now (or was it the discussion about the 517 crankpin throw?).

 

CBS seems to have gone from being in fashion, to out of fashion, and then back in fashion again.

Edited July 12, 2017 by Miss Prism

[MikeOxon]

This splendid machine positively flaunts its crankpin on spoke

 

 

[BG John]

This splendid machine positively flaunts its crankpin on spoke

I wonder what Oxford would make of one of those

[autocoach]

I wonder what Oxford would make of one of those

A bespoke model?

[Guius]

Miss P,

 

The source of my previous comment was a discussion in the Model Railway press in the late 70s/early 80s about the wheels on the 517 class and the conclusion was that the crankpins were "on spoke" as that was the standard for locos built at Wolverhampton.  I assumed that the people writing at the time had more contemporary knowledge and I had no reason to doubt it.

 

I believe crankpin between the spokes did exist long before the Collett period as shown in this image.  (I always thought that was the GWR standard)  Ultrascale wheels supplied for the Finney DG are between the spoke as per Mike Sharman's wheel spec for modellers book.  However, now that I've looked, all the DG in Craig's photos seem to have the crankpin on spoke!

 

 

2322_Dean_Goods_crop.jpg

Oh to have half an hours craik with these two.  My H. G. Wells time machine would be set for about 1905 I think.... If only

 

Best

 

Guy

[Mikkel]

Not really the view you need, but the best I've got.

 

Thanks, that's useful. In that shot the front splasher looks slimmer, but I wonder if it's the perspective. See e.g. this photo of 2516 from the other end. It's hard to say but if there is a difference in that photo, it would be imperceptible in 4mm scale anyway, I think?

 

Looking through DG photos in my collection I haven't  yet found any others that appear to show any difference in splashers.

 

 

I saw a while ago that you had a rather nice Dapol Terrier, any updates? I've been so tempted to get one myself, it is untrue!

No progress on the Terrier I'm afraid. For some reason the 7mm bug didn't quite bite me. Though I notice poorer eyesight, so maybe worth keeping it.

[Edwardian]

Well, I've found a detailed Roche drawing, with measurements, of a Dean dome of 1898, said to be for the 3031 Singles, 3252 Dukes and 2301 Goods. 

 

It is certainly is one of the wider variety, and I would associate it with the type commonly found on S4s.  S4s were the standard new boilers from 1894, the same year the Dean Singles were built/rebuilt.

 

What I have not found is a drawing of similar detail of the dome commonly used with the S2 boiler. The photographs do make it clear that these domes were slimmer.  There is a lovely shot in Russell (p.81), showing S2 DGs at Worcester in 1906.  2328, 2335 and 2345 are shown with S2 boilers bearing what Russell describes as the narrow dome on the front ring.

 

It looks to me as if the S2 dome is the same height as the S4 dome, but narrower.

[Quarryscapes]

I've now pulled out all the supports, it won't fit on the the Oxford chassis, but with a few changes to the internal structure it will be ok. I'll also pull all the details off as the supports just make a hash of them.

[Dave John]

I am enjoying all this. Some fantastic pre grouping pics, and much debate over dimensions. 

 

So, thanks Mikkel for starting it all, I might even be tempted to make a GWR wagon ... 

[BG John]

Oh to have half an hours craik with these two.  My H. G. Wells time machine would be set for about 1905 I think.... If only

 

Best

 

Guy

Don't forget to check the colour of GWR wagons while you're there. Hopefully there will be a mixture of grey and red in 1905, but we need to know .

[Mikkel]

Well, I've found a detailed Roche drawing, with measurements, of a Dean dome of 1898, said to be for the 3031 Singles, 3252 Dukes and 2301 Goods.

 

 Excellent, thanks! I should be able to sort that out. Years of looking out for brass domes on ebay is proving worthwhile.

 

 

I've now pulled out all the supports, it won't fit on the the Oxford chassis, but with a few changes to the internal structure it will be ok. I'll also pull all the details off as the supports just make a hash of them.

I have been eyeing this for some time. It's very tempting but I might try to modify the Oxford Rail one first. 

 

On a related issue I was looking at Sparkshot's E2 splashers on Shapeways. They are much too small for the Dean Goods even for my pragmatic approach, but 3D printed splashers would ensure consistency over scratchbuilt ones.  

[Mikkel]

I might even be tempted to make a GWR wagon ...

 

Good idea, a lonely GWR wagon would look good in your CR trains. I'm not sure what years Kelvinbank is set in, but a 3-planker or 4-planker might suit the Caledonian style?

 

 

[bgman]

Good morning Mikkel,

 

Apologies if this has been mentioned or maybe you've used it for the splashers but have you considered making them with the Silhouette cutters?

 

Grahame

[Mikkel]

Good morning Mikkel,

 

Apologies if this has been mentioned or maybe you've used it for the splashers but have you considered making them with the Silhouette cutters?

 

Grahame

 

Hi Grahame, yes the plan was to use the cutter to make them. Apart from the front and curved top I'm hoping to cut a thin 5 thou "mask" (not sure what the right word is) to make up the bands along the edges. Even so the challenge will be to get them all looking the same, as we all know the eye is very good at finding little inconsistencies.

 

Which of course highlights the paradox that when you set out to improve an RTR model, you introduce your own little errors and inaccuracies. But at least then they are your own 

[Mikkel]

Been away this past week so progress on the Dean Goods has been limited. But I’ve drawn up the cab components and did a test cut and build today.

 

 

 

 

It’s a bit of a puzzle to make it all fit an OO scale chassis while trying to retain the overall look of the thing. You compromise on one small dimension in one area, and it will have follow-on effects somewhere else.

 

 

 

 

I'm beginning to understand the challenges that RTR manufacturers and kit makers are faced with.

 

 

 

 

I have decided to base the model on No. 2487, and thanks to several helpful souls I have obtained a lovely photographic print of the loco, for which I'm very grateful. It would have been nice to do one of the prototypes posted by Craig earlier, but the ca. 1900-1903 condition of No. 2487 as seen here is a good fit with the period I’m after. The short smokebox and curved “piano lid” cover at the front should make for an interesting variation.

 

 

I need to correct a couple of issues on the cab, one being the spectacles which appear too small.

Edited July 20, 2017 by Mikkel

[Donw]

Well after all that I am somewhat unclear about the conclusions. I do have a Finney Dean Goods to build and will be aiming for around 1904 so the next thing is what can be built from the kit.

 

From what I can tell by the way boilers were swapped around the GWR was happy to fit whatever they had to hand as was littled bothered whether the boiler on a loco leaving the works matched the one in went in with. How many other bits and pieces could be changed?

 

Don

[Brassey]

Well after all that I am somewhat unclear about the conclusions. I do have a Finney Dean Goods to build and will be aiming for around 1904 so the next thing is what can be built from the kit.

 

From what I can tell by the way boilers were swapped around the GWR was happy to fit whatever they had to hand as was littled bothered whether the boiler on a loco leaving the works matched the one in went in with. How many other bits and pieces could be changed?

 

Don

 

The footplate and splashers remained the same, though the earliest versions had a curved front step, the rest of it changed.

 

The Finney kit provides for any loco after 1900 so does not allow for prior versions such as the short smokebox Mikkel is building here, nor the S2 boiler with the smaller dome on the front ring.

 

The Finney kit has 3 fireboxes, 4 sets of cabsides, 3 cab fronts, 3 roofs, 2 footplates, riveted and plain smokebox wrappers and splashers etc.  There's enough to make 2 locos which I hope to demonstrate on my own thread but has been documented in an MRJ.

[Brassey]

 

Been away this past week so progress on the Dean Goods has been limited. But I’ve drawn up the cab components and did a test cut and build today.

 

 

 

 

It’s a bit of a puzzle to make it all fit an OO scale chassis while trying to retain the overall look of the thing. You compromise on one small dimension in one area, and it will have follow-on effects somewhere else.

 

 

 

 

I'm beginning to understand the challenges that RTR manufacturers and kit makers are faced with.

 

 

 

 

I have decided to base the model on No. 2487, and thanks to several helpful souls I have obtained a lovely photographic print of the loco, for which I'm very grateful. It would have been nice to do one of the prototypes posted by Craig earlier, but the ca. 1900-1903 condition of No. 2487 as seen here is a good fit with the period I’m after. The short smokebox and curved “piano lid” cover at the front should make for an interesting variation.

 

 

I need to correct a couple of issues on the cab, one being the spectacles which appear too small.

 

Mikkel, note how the boiler almost touches the spectacle window.  The Finney round top boiler does not go as high as can be seen by the various builds on RMWeb.  Either this is a mistake or later S4 boiler fits where shorter or the windows smaller.

 

According to RCTS, some locos, having received a B4 boiler, later had an S4 round top refitted.  This must have involved fitting a new cab front too as the belpaire firebox windows were much smaller.

 

On my build, I am going to compromise and have the windows off the boiler by about 2mm but mine will be in 1912 condition.

 

Edit: I now realise a retro fit of an S4 boiler did require a new cab front as the boiler protrudes into the cab to form the back head.  These later cab fronts could have had smaller windows, the Finney kit I think is based on GA drawings so is likely to be correct but probably for a much later build than yours.

Edited July 20, 2017 by Brassey

[Mikkel]

Well after all that I am somewhat unclear about the conclusions. I do have a Finney Dean Goods to build and will be aiming for around 1904 so the next thing is what can be built from the kit.

 

From what I can tell by the way boilers were swapped around the GWR was happy to fit whatever they had to hand as was littled bothered whether the boiler on a loco leaving the works matched the one in went in with. How many other bits and pieces could be changed?

 

Don

 

Don, as Brassey says you should be fine with your Finney kit for 1904 as long as you find a prototype with extended smokebox and S4 boiler. The reason for my particular choice is that I want a loco in pre-1904 condition (to go with my red wagons), and a lined one with the early monogram. I have not been able to find a prototype photo of a loco with extended smokebox in that condition, so I'll go for the short smokebox variant.

 

As you’ll know, most of the main variations on the Dean Goods are described in the Finney instructions (available to the general public here).

 

Some things not mentioned in those instructions:

 

*Capuchon or plain copper cap. Most roundtopped models I have seen feature a capuchon. But looking through the 25+ photos of S2 and S4 boilered Dean Goods that I have available, most have a plain coppercap. I can only definitely see a capuchon in two photos (one of them is no. 2579 in 1915, can't identify the other). I think this would have been a later feature then?

 

*Piano lids: On short smokeboxes there were 2-3 varieties, but the curved one in the photo above seems most common at the turn of the century. On extended smokeboxes a straight forward sloping cover seems to have been the norm. Most photos (the majority) show the sloping cover making contact with the footplate very close to the front edge, although confusingly a few other photos show them more withdrawn.

 

*Cab roof curve. Miss P has a theory that there were three variations. Could this have to do with Brassey's comment on B4 to S4 cab changes below?

 

*Spectacle windows. See below.

 

* Lamp brackets: Old style brackets phased out from 1903, replaced by lamp irons.

 

 

 

Mikkel, note how the boiler almost touches the spectacle window.  The Finney round top boiler does not go as high as can be seen by the various builds on RMWeb.  Either this is a mistake or later S4 boiler fits where shorter or the windows smaller.

 

According to RCTS, some locos, having received a B4 boiler, later had an S4 round top refitted.  This must have involved fitting a new cab front too as the belpaire firebox windows were much smaller.

 

On my build, I am going to compromise and have the windows off the boiler by about 2mm but mine will be in 1912 condition.

 

Edit: I now realise a retro fit of an S4 boiler did require a new cab front as the boiler protrudes into the cab to form the back head.  These later cab fronts could have had smaller windows, the Finney kit I think is based on GA drawings so is likely to be correct but probably for a much later build than yours.

 

Thanks Brassey, that would explain the difference in spectacle windows which is quite noticeable once you are aware of it. Or could it have something to do with the footplate width, and hence the cab width? Compare the windows in Craig's two photos here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/97672-pragmatic-pre-grouping-mikkels-workbench/?p=2780230

Edited July 20, 2017 by Mikkel

[Miss Prism]

I think capuchons were a later thing, probably c 1910/2, but no doubt other (non-DG) classes got them at different, possibly earlier, times.

 

I'm not convinced that DG cab fronts varied in width, since they all seem to sit on the rear splasher by the same amount, and splasher positions did not change as far as I am aware. The footplate width widening on the loco was I believe driven primarily to match the footplate width of contemporary tenders.

 

Spectacle apertures seem to vary both in vertical position and diameter. Possibly Swindon had a stash of various Dean (and not necessarily DG-specific) cabfronts that could be picked and used.

Edited July 20, 2017 by Miss Prism

[MikeOxon]

 

 

It’s a bit of a puzzle to make it all fit an OO scale chassis while trying to retain the overall look of the thing. ..........

 

It' not too bad with the Dean Goods but you will lose a lot of space inside the cab.  As I have found, it becomes a nightmare with large-wheeled 'singles', where the boiler won't fit between the wheels and huge gaps appear behind outside axleboxes!

[Mikkel]

It' not too bad with the Dean Goods but you will lose a lot of space inside the cab.  As I have found, it becomes a nightmare with large-wheeled 'singles', where the boiler won't fit between the wheels and huge gaps appear behind outside axleboxes!

 

You have my sympathies Mike, I can imagine the dilemmas your early locos must lead to. 

 

The main issue on this one are the splashers. One thing is that they eat away at the space inside the cab, but due to the compromises in an OO RTR wheel there are limits to how short I can make them. This in turn affects the curvature of the lower cab sides.

 

Accuracy is all very good in modelling, but as I'm finding out it's also important to work out how best to hide the inevitable compromises!