GWR steam railmotors

[rue_d_etropal]

just done design for the first of a series of GWR steam railmotors. 

First is Diag O, the earlier version of Diag R, which is the type preserved. I plan to do this as it is only a small mod, as well as the shorter versions, Diag Q and Q1.

the shorter version, the Q is now done. Next to do the versions with single passenger doors, the Q1 and the R . The restored one is an R.

Edited June 6, 2017 by rue_d_etropal

[richard i]

looks good, but it the bottom half where the real modeling issues lie with all that valve gear, how are you intending to solve that? I have a GCR steam railmotor which has stalled at that point.

[Gordon A]

What scale?

 

Gordon A

[richard i]

00 gauge . If it was in 7 mm the valve gear would be easier as it is larger. If it was 2mm then half could be left off as it is too small to see. God only knows how someone in 3mm would cope.

Richard

[rue_d_etropal]

I just design the bodies. I leave the fun part to the modeller. From my experience with narrow gauge modellers, many enjoy the challenge. Why make it too easy.

For most of my standard gauge models, I am offering 4mm/ft, then 3.5mm/ft, 3mm/ft and N gauge(I could off true 2mm/ft as well for anyone intersested). Going bigger is in theory possible. All my designs start as O scale, but I don't think many would want to pay the price. S Scale would probably not be too bad price wise.

I probably have the most difficult scale, namely HO as finding chassis with small enough motors is not as easy. I would probably have a dummy mechanism at the steam end, and a SPUD at the other.

 

I think one reason why some projects fail, is that they start out dfficult, so when you get to an even more difficult step you give up, you have had enough. Answer is to start with something at a stage, so that the next stage, you are ful of energy, and the really difficult one is easier to face. Obviously you don't want to do everything, and leave the modeller something to finish off on the body, then they still feel they have built the model.

Edited June 18, 2017 by rue_d_etropal

[David Bigcheeseplant]

There is something that seems not quite right, maybe it is the depth of the material around the windows. Also the chimney goes through a square plate rather than a round collar that has been drawn.

 

The bufer shanks should also be square rather than round. It might be worth tracking down the book GWR steam railmoters by John Lewis (Wild Swan) has this gives plenty of details and information.

[micklner]

I just design the bodies. I leave the fun part to the modeller. From my experience with narrow gauge modellers, many enjoy the challenge. Why make it too easy.

For most of my standard gauge models, I am offering 4mm/ft, then 3.5mm/ft, 3mm/ft and N gauge(I could off true 2mm/ft as well for anyone intersested). Going bigger is in theory possible. All my designs start as O scale, but I don't think many would want to pay the price. S Scale would probably not be too bad price wise.

I probably have the most difficult scale, namely HO as finding chassis with small enough motors is not as easy. I would probably have a dummy mechanism at the steam end, and a SPUD at the other.

 

I think one reason why some projects fail, is that they start out dfficult, so when you get to an even more difficult step you give up, you have had enough. Answer is to start with something at a stage, so that the next stage, you are ful of energy, and the really difficult one is easier to face. Obviously you don't want to do everything, and leave the modeller something to finish off on the body, then they still feel they have built the model.

 

Quote "Why make it easy " a very strange attitude for someone trying to sell any item !. 

 

If there is no chassis available as a kit or r.t.r, and is this case they are renown for being a nightmare to build , how many do you think you will ever sell ? Price is immaterial  if you cant get it to work or even display. That is a big reason for projects failing when it is not viable from the start.

[Gordon A]

Jeremy Suter of the Scalefour Society is working on a new etched chassis for a GWR steam rail motor.

 

Gordon A

[Horsetan]

Jeremy Suter of the Scalefour Society is working on a new etched chassis for a GWR steam rail motor.

Saw it at the AGM. Looks very good.

[rue_d_etropal]

I am trying to do something for the average modeller who either can not or does not want to build a difficult kit. 3D printing is not the best way to produce a working chassis(unless it is just a kit of metal parts), and for many people in OO a simple Smokey Joe chassis would be OK. For those who want something a bit better, then it can be used as a start point, having seen quite a few narrow gauge modellers do that. Look around and there may even be something with an HO label that will work well as a OO chassis(eg Rivarossi/Mehano old USA 040 loco).

I admire those who can build working models(and I stress the working) in any finescale , but reality should also be appreciated and that they are a minority, and pushing the hobby in their direction will exclude many people, who just want to enjoy the hobby in their own way. They out number those who want everything spot on, ie the rivet counters, but they prefer to enjoy the hobby rather than grumble that it is not good enough for them.

 

The hobby, by definity should be fun, otherwise why are we doing it. It is a compromise. Make it too basic and easy(full r2r/r2p), then it becomes boring for many. Make it too difficult(complicated kits), and you won't get enough people signing up. One of the busiest and most popular stands at exhibitions used to be the Crownline stand, with all its bits to modify r2r models. People then, and now are willing to do a certain amount of modification/finishing off(just look at the thread on that Great British locomotives partwork ).

[David Bigcheeseplant]

I think times have moved on, people now expect things to be correct, a good basic kit is a good starting point but it needs to be correct and if parts are needed to complete these need to be available , it is no use stating that a smokey joe chassis may be suitable if there is no way it can be made to fit or is no way like the real thing.

 

With Kernow bringing out a railmotor out at some point at a price I should think that will be over £100, how much would your 3D printed body cost when you have added in all the bits needed to complete and painted it? Bill Bedford is bringing some 3D printed Met coaches out and these will be over £50 a coach.

 

If the 3D print is capable of making a good model I would be temped but would not if the were major things wrong.

 

David 

[micklner]

I am trying to do something for the average modeller who either can not or does not want to build a difficult kit. 3D printing is not the best way to produce a working chassis(unless it is just a kit of metal parts), and for many people in OO a simple Smokey Joe chassis would be OK. For those who want something a bit better, then it can be used as a start point, having seen quite a few narrow gauge modellers do that. Look around and there may even be something with an HO label that will work well as a OO chassis(eg Rivarossi/Mehano old USA 040 loco).

I admire those who can build working models(and I stress the working) in any finescale , but reality should also be appreciated and that they are a minority, and pushing the hobby in their direction will exclude many people, who just want to enjoy the hobby in their own way. They out number those who want everything spot on, ie the rivet counters, but they prefer to enjoy the hobby rather than grumble that it is not good enough for them.

  

The hobby, by definity should be fun, otherwise why are we doing it. It is a compromise. Make it too basic and easy(full r2r/r2p), then it becomes boring for many. Make it too difficult(complicated kits), and you won't get enough people signing up. One of the busiest and most popular stands at exhibitions used to be the Crownline stand, with all its bits to modify r2r models. People then, and now are willing to do a certain amount of modification/finishing off(just look at the thread on that Great British locomotives partwork ).

 

Para 1 

I doubt very much that many "average" modellers (do such people exist, everybody would have a different opinion on what that maybe)  , would consider building a Railcar as a early project . As said earlier this one is not a average type of model , from the earlier posts a P4 chassis may exist in the future which is a specialised modelling gauge , no idea if that chassis could be converted to EM or OO ? This is fact not grumbling etc . 

Para 2

All hobbies is fun, otherwise what is the point of doing any hobby. Make it basic or too complicated to build as you suggest ?   in between these two pits is a huge chasm in skills . Either way people wont buy it if they cant be completed it as a viable model. Crownline, existed as there was a available working r.t.r  base model to add the parts too, not the other way round in this case.

 

 

Please dont think I would not support a viable kit (if the subject was off interest to me) as 3D has huge potential for the future. I see no reason why a chassis could not be made using a etched motion and brass bearings for the axles. Not many people would be willing to make their own etched parts , they expect the kit maker to cover these parts.

[Horsetan]

....All hobbies is fun, otherwise what is the point of doing any hobby. ....

 

[richard i]

I just design the bodies. I leave the fun part to the modeller. From my experience with narrow gauge modellers, many enjoy the challenge. Why make it too easy.

For most of my standard gauge models, I am offering 4mm/ft, then 3.5mm/ft, 3mm/ft and N gauge(I could off true 2mm/ft as well for anyone intersested). Going bigger is in theory possible. All my designs start as O scale, but I don't think many would want to pay the price. S Scale would probably not be too bad price wise.

I probably have the most difficult scale, namely HO as finding chassis with small enough motors is not as easy. I would probably have a dummy mechanism at the steam end, and a SPUD at the other.

 

I think one reason why some projects fail, is that they start out dfficult, so when you get to an even more difficult step you give up, you have had enough. Answer is to start with something at a stage, so that the next stage, you are ful of energy, and the really difficult one is easier to face. Obviously you don't want to do everything, and leave the modeller something to finish off on the body, then they still feel they have built the model.

I went with the spud option too, I had the gubins off a GWR mallard models steam rail car, but could never get it to run smoothly. I have build valve geat for other locos, like v2 but getting smaller just made it too difficult at present. I have had an eye on the Kernow railmotor as a possible insert. Unless another simpler, clearer etch is made to build from another source.

Richard

[John_Hughes]

I went with the spud option too, I had the gubins off a GWR mallard models steam rail car, but could never get it to run smoothly. I have build valve geat for other locos, like v2 but getting smaller just made it too difficult at present. I have had an eye on the Kernow railmotor as a possible insert. Unless another simpler, clearer etch is made to build from another source.

Richard

 

Me too - the steam bogie just goes along for the ride and the power actually comes from the spud at the back. The roof was a pig too; in the end it's attached with magnets at front and rear, so that it just clips off.

 

I have the impression that Mallard planned and marketed the body kit first and then wondered about powering it, so that a number of fudges were necessary to get the whole thing to work as a unit. Typical Mallard botch, in other words, though it does look nice when it's done as this photo of No. 74 running trials on my Canadian Pacific layout shows. She was modelled to represent the prototype in her last, run-down days, and is actually worth all the hassle it took to make her.

[Gordon A]

Here is, with Jeremy Suter's permission, a couple of pictures of the etched motor bogie he is working on:

 

 

 

Gordon A

 

[richard i]

Here is, with Jeremy Suter's permission, a couple of pictures of the etched motor bogie he is working on:

 

gwr rail motor 1.jpg

 

gwr rail motor 2.jpg

 

Gordon A

The answer to my prayers? Could you make sure you let us know when it is available please. Out here in the states am a bit out of the loop on when things appear. Lost out on a GCR s1 from Judith edge because only realise it existed once it had all sold out.

Richard

[John_Hughes]

Here is, with Jeremy Suter's permission, a couple of pictures of the etched motor bogie he is working on:

 

gwr rail motor 1.jpg

 

gwr rail motor 2.jpg

 

Gordon A

 

Oh, that's lovely!

[Siberian Snooper]

Here is, with Jeremy Suter's permission, a couple of pictures of the etched motor bogie he is working on:

 

gwr rail motor 1.jpg

 

gwr rail motor 2.jpg

 

Gordon A

I hope that they will be suitable for EM gauge, as I have need of one. It looks very good.

[Horsetan]

The answer to my prayers? Could you make sure you let us know when it is available please. Out here in the states am a bit out of the loop on when things appear. ....

 

So far it's only broken cover on the Scalefour Society forum, and some of us also saw it at the S4 AGM at the weekend, so may well be a P4 chassis only. No mention of the other gauges.

[terry.ecmr]

Quote "Why make it easy " a very strange attitude for someone trying to sell any item !. 

 

If there is no chassis available as a kit or r.t.r, and is this case they are renown for being a nightmare to build , how many do you think you will ever sell ? Price is immaterial  if you cant get it to work or even display. That is a big reason for projects failing when it is not viable from the start.

I bought a 3D printed 3 car Oelikon set from this supplier.

It wasn't cheap and it did take some work to get the body to a satisfactory finish, plus I added detailing etc.

I also had to sort out chassis, motor bogie etc.

 

But I ended up with a thoroughly good model of something that couldn't be purchased elsewhere and which I had tried (and failed) to scratch build.

 

It appeared at a recent exhibition and drew many admiring comments.

 

Here is a small supplier trying to fill gaps in the market, and in many scales.

I think he should be applauded for that. If an individual modeller thinks creating or sourcing is not viable then he/she doesn't have to purchase it.

 

But let's give the guy some praise and support rather than predicting gloom and doom or even criticising him for not supplying chassis/motors etc.

[rue_d_etropal]

thanks Terry, any chance of some photos?

Hopefully  you will be able to get your layout up north sometime. I wasn't able to get to Doncaster, as I had famly issues to sort out. My friend John did get to talk to you, and see the other side of the layout.

 

One the reasons many, if not most, companies fail is money. Traditional model development requires a lot of money up front to create even one sample product. Depending on materials used, this can vary. I suppose some could be produced to order(etched brass or laser cut kits), but I decided to take the 3D print to order path. Apart from the computer software I bought, and my time there is no main costs for me. Once a design is completed it exists forever. It can be upgraded in the future, but it is pretty sustainale as a business plan.

Getting what I have done noticed is most difficult part. I have had a classified advert in RM. I did try an advert in BRM, but I would rather not talk about that. I will be having a new advert in RM starting soon. This will concentrate on new items I am developing, and I might have trouble picking which new produuct to show. I currently have the GWR steam railmotor waiting in the wings, and have just done a SR Sentinel Cammell railbus. It is not perfect, but is certainly easier than scratchbuilding one.

[Gordon A]

I have had an e-mail from Jeremy Suter saying that he is also looking at producing 00 and EM versions of his motor bogie chassis.

 

Gordon A

[terry.ecmr]

thanks Terry, any chance of some photos?

Hopefully  you will be able to get your layout up north sometime. I wasn't able to get to Doncaster, as I had famly issues to sort out. My friend John did get to talk to you, and see the other side of the layout.

 

One the reasons many, if not most, companies fail is money. Traditional model development requires a lot of money up front to create even one sample product. Depending on materials used, this can vary. I suppose some could be produced to order(etched brass or laser cut kits), but I decided to take the 3D print to order path. Apart from the computer software I bought, and my time there is no main costs for me. Once a design is completed it exists forever. It can be upgraded in the future, but it is pretty sustainale as a business plan.

Getting what I have done noticed is most difficult part. I have had a classified advert in RM. I did try an advert in BRM, but I would rather not talk about that. I will be having a new advert in RM starting soon. This will concentrate on new items I am developing, and I might have trouble picking which new produuct to show. I currently have the GWR steam railmotor waiting in the wings, and have just done a SR Sentinel Cammell railbus. It is not perfect, but is certainly easier than scratchbuilding one.

Hi Simon

 

Next week I'm going to Australia for a month but when I get back I'm going to take some good quality photos and videos of much of my stock. I will post some pictures then.

 

Earl's Court has done about 45 exhibitions and there are bookings for later this year, but nothing north of Spalding.

Having exhibited at Warley, Railex, Doncaster, Ally Pally, Stafford,  Leamington etc. enquiries are just starting to tail off a bit. But I would love to do a couple of exhibitions further north.

 

I'm always happy for interested, responsible people to have a look round the operating side.

 

One of the other magazines has asked to do an article about the stock featured on Earl's Court. So the Oerlikon will be included.

 

Terry

[Trog]

I am trying to do something for the average modeller who either can not or does not want to build a difficult kit. 3D printing is not the best way to produce a working chassis(unless it is just a kit of metal parts), and for many people in OO a simple Smokey Joe chassis would be OK. For those who want something a bit better, then it can be used as a start point, having seen quite a few narrow gauge modellers do that. Look around and there may even be something with an HO label that will work well as a OO chassis(eg Rivarossi/Mehano old USA 040 loco).

I admire those who can build working models(and I stress the working) in any finescale , but reality should also be appreciated and that they are a minority, and pushing the hobby in their direction will exclude many people, who just want to enjoy the hobby in their own way. They out number those who want everything spot on, ie the rivet counters, but they prefer to enjoy the hobby rather than grumble that it is not good enough for them.

 

In most of the small simple steam engines the body fits to the works with a screw one end and two prongs through holes in the body at the other, but for a railmotor you need a central pivot point mounting on top. Is 3D printing an good way to produce a bracket that would fit on a suitable nominated donor mechanism with a mounting at the top set so that the mechanism plus bracket can be mounted in one of your bodies perhaps with the traditional hidden screw down the chimney. Then you have options for both those who want an assemble and paint job and those who would rather do it all themselves and can sell to both.