locomotive kits 30368's Workbench SR Loco's with a bit of LNER

[Mallard60022]

I've just realised that you Richard have been on there already. My apologies.

Just seen DLT's PDK S 15 Build. That' the same one I have for you (Not Daves')

His looks lovely, but I never asked him if and how he got weight in the Boiler!

P

[Michael Edge]

11 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

I must admit I wouldn't have noticed Mike. However it really looks weird that the kit actually went together like this. I wouldn't have known had I been doing this.

I've never seen a U1 kit mentioned on RMWeb, so maybe it's not a common build? I know from someone's Kitbuilding posts, that The DJH S15 has a load of errors. Dave someone. I must have a poke if I can find his threads.

Phil

It's very noticeable on a U1, there is a big gap between the valve chests and the footplate but it's a very common mistake, even more so with angled cylinders. I agree about the S15, that's a real dogs breakfast of errors.

[30368]

4 hours ago, Michael Edge said:

It's very noticeable on a U1, there is a big gap between the valve chests and the footplate but it's a very common mistake, even more so with angled cylinders.

 

I am truly pleased that you pointed this out Michael. I usually check such things against a drawing, however I don't have one for the U1. I should though have looked at the many images more carefully. They make it clear. I have built a U class 2-6-0 and had no such trouble but stupidly forgot that that was based on a SEF kit! Anyway the situation is redeemable and the cylinders have been removed intact with the application of Gluebuster and a Stanley knife. Pleased I did not solder them into position. In any case with that thickness of mainframe so much heat would have had to be applied leading to whitemetal meltdown.

Phil, Sorry for the cock-up! I will try harder...

 

Gluebuster is also a good paint stripper!

 

A further update - all re-assembled and connecting rods, well, connected!

 

LH cylinder casting unmodified RH modified by removing 2.2mm so that it sits lower in the frame slot.

 

Allowing for the angle of the chassis, piston rod in line with wheel centres.

 

Ready to assemble the rest of the valve gear.

Kind regards,

 

Richard

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by 30368

[Michael Edge]

PM sent with drawing attached

[Mallard60022]

6 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

I am truly pleased that you pointed this out Michael. I usually check such things against a drawing, however I don't have one for the U1. I should though have looked at the many images more carefully. They make it clear. I have built a U class 2-6-0 and had no such trouble but stupidly forgot that that was based on a SEF kit! Anyway the situation is redeemable and the cylinders have been removed intact with the application of Gluebuster and a Stanley knife. Pleased I did not solder them into position. In any case with that thickness of mainframe so much heat would have had to be applied leading to whitemetal meltdown.

Phil, Sorry for the cock-up! I will try harder...

 

Gluebuster is also a good paint stripper!

 

A further update - all re-assembled and connecting rods, well, connected!

 

LH cylinder casting unmodified RH modified by removing 2.2mm so that it sits lower in the frame slot.

 

Allowing for the angle of the chassis, piston rod in line with wheel centres.

 

Ready to assemble the rest of the valve gear.

Kind regards,

Richard

 

No need to apologise Richard. We thank Mike for his diligent observation.

Brilliant corrective work there.

I should also have made it clear that there is on the actual Loco, a large gap above the Cylinders. I looked at my 1959 Combined Volume to see that!

 I wonder how many U1s have been put together incorrectly by innocent builders such as myself, thinking all must be OK?

Do we need to check the Valve Setting at the BIg End /Crank Angle? Is it only Bulleids with the 'different' forward angle at BDC; emissions is it? 

I don't actually know if any other 'Wall Charts' SR Engines require that leaning forward angle?

P

 

[30368]

1 hour ago, Mallard60022 said:

Do we need to check the Valve Setting at the BIg End /Crank Angle? Is it only Bulleids with the 'different' forward angle at BDC; emissions is it? 

I don't actually know if any other 'Wall Charts' SR Engines require that leaning forward angle?

Hi Phil,

 

Most SR engines had, I think, the usual leading (leaning forward at wheel bottom dead centre) return crank angle of around 10 degrees. I know the N15X and, having looked at the images, the U1 has a trailing (leaning backwards) return crank angle of around 10 degrees. I think all the 2-6-0s and the "W" 2-6-4T are trailing. All the ex LSWR 4-6-0 designs, including Maunsell's modified versions, were leading. A quick survey!

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

[Michael Edge]

Locos with inside admission piston valves (nearly all) have the return crank leaning forward at bottom dead centre. Outside admission piston valves (notably rebuilt Bulleid pacifics) and slide valves require the crank leaning backwards.

[Michael Edge]

The earlier comment made me think so I went to check - the locos listed, including the U1 do indeed have outside admission valves so the backward lean is correct. Outside admission wasn’t popular with most railways since it made it more difficult to keep the valve chests steam tight where the piston rod passed through the ends.

[DLT]

On 14/12/2023 at 21:21, Mallard60022 said:

I've just realised that you Richard have been on there already. My apologies.

Just seen DLT's PDK S 15 Build. That' the same one I have for you (Not Daves')

His looks lovely, but I never asked him if and how he got weight in the Boiler!

P

Hi Folks, 

The reason nothings appeared on the DLT SR Loco topic is that nothings happened for a while, I've been concentrating on narrow gauge,

 

Thanks for the comment about the PDK S15.  As you say I was a bit concerned about lack of weight.  I didn't weight the boiler, but added weight in the chassis, by fixing all sorts of odd-shaped lumps of lead in any cavity I could find.

Alternatively, IF you've got the confidence, I'm sure you could bore out the middle of the resin boiler and fill it with lead.

 

Yes, the DJH S15 has a few dimensional issues, notably being too short at the front end making it really awkward to get the bogie in.  I think you had a similar issue with one of your DJH kits earlier Richard? 

I DID like the S15 cylinder arrangement, very positive fit and well thought out.

 

I've not done a U1, but I did a U some years back.  It was an amalgam of the DJH loco body and the more recent SEFinecast etched chassis.  DJH seemed to be trying to use as many common parts as possible in their U & N kits,  but there are a number of differences.  In particular the footplate step was correct for the N, which is shallower than the U, leading to issues with the cab and tender.  The U is NOT simply an N with bigger wheels.  And the original U-class, rebuilt from the River tanks, are totally different.

 

The most reliable source of information is photographs, and the Internet is your friend.  Try This One

Drawings can be unreliable.  If there are recent drawings available, then they should be very good, but some of the older ones are not to be trusted.  Always compare with photographs.

 

Anyway, its all looking good Richard, I will be following with interest.

All the best,

Dave.

[30368]

9 hours ago, DLT said:

It was an amalgam of the DJH loco body and the more recent SEFinecast etched chassis.

 

Pleased that you are back DLT. I use the site that you reference regularly and also SMUGMUG. How is the Craftsman LN running?

 

My version, based on the "River" class tank re-builds, was constructed around the SEF body and chassis kit. The SEF chassis kit is first class and Kindly Dave of SEF sent me a second chassis kit too FOC. A truly decent chap all around. I must build one of the "new build" versions of the U class some time using this chassis.

 

 

Phil, I hope to get the valvegear completed on the U1 before leaving for Christmas at our daughter's place in the USA next Tuesday.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

 

[Mallard60022]

15 hours ago, Michael Edge said:

The earlier comment made me think so I went to check - the locos listed, including the U1 do indeed have outside admission valves so the backward lean is correct. Outside admission wasn’t popular with most railways since it made it more difficult to keep the valve chests steam tight where the piston rod passed through the ends.

Thanks mike and admission...yes I should have remembered that.

I usually adjust my Hornby Bulleid Pacifics as they become available for service (Decoder Fitted).

How do you find out about which Engines had this difference?

Thanks

Phil

[Mallard60022]

1 hour ago, 30368 said:

 

Pleased that you are back DLT. I use the site that you reference regularly and also SMUGMUG. How is the Craftsman LN running?

 

My version, based on the "River" class tank re-builds, was constructed around the SEF body and chassis kit. The SEF chassis kit is first class and Kindly Dave of SEF sent me a second chassis kit too FOC. A truly decent chap all around. I must build one of the "new build" versions of the U class some time using this chassis.

 

 

Phil, I hope to get the valvegear completed on the U1 before leaving for Christmas at our daughter's place in the USA next Tuesday.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

 

 

1 hour ago, 30368 said:

 

Pleased that you are back DLT. I use the site that you reference regularly and also SMUGMUG. How is the Craftsman LN running?

 

My version, based on the "River" class tank re-builds, was constructed around the SEF body and chassis kit. The SEF chassis kit is first class and Kindly Dave of SEF sent me a second chassis kit too FOC. A truly decent chap all around. I must build one of the "new build" versions of the U class some time using this chassis.

 

 

Phil, I hope to get the valvegear completed on the U1 before leaving for Christmas at our daughter's place in the USA next Tuesday.

Kind regards,

Richard

Thank you.

Enjoy that family time. It's precious.

That's a good looking Engine.

So, with my DJH U sitting in the Roundtoit Cupboard; do I get a SEF Chassis?

That Dave really is a good bloke; he has helped me numerous times with all sorts of additional spare bits. I must dig some of those out; sure I have a Watercart Tender somewhere (not Bogie).

Phil

[30368]

1 hour ago, Mallard60022 said:

How do you find out about which Engines had this difference?

 

Phil,

 

I'm sure Michael will comment. But all the original Bulleid Pacific's have chain driven valve gear so no return crank to worry about. All the re-built engines have outside admission so the return crank faces backwards from the verticle with the driving wheels at bottom dead centre. Just checked my 34053 (R2586) and it is set correctly. So no need for action on your part unless Hornby have made a mistake.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

[30368]

12 hours ago, DLT said:

The U is NOT simply an N with bigger wheels.  And the original U-class, rebuilt from the River tanks, are totally different.

 

 

Wise words Dave.

If one ignores tenders for now and individual loco variations there are three variations with the U class.

The new build, with high running plate and small splashers and two window spectacle and cab sides with low  roofline. Secondly the River rebuilds 31790 -99 which have a low running plate, large splashers and cut away cab sides with high roofline and four window spectacles and thirdly River rebuilds 31800 - 09 which are much the same as the earlier re-builds except they have sanding gear operating levers on both sides of the loco. There are variations in smoke deflectors too but here it is almost at the painted number level of variation.

Indeed, the U is anything but a large wheeled N class!

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

 

 

[Michael Edge]

1 hour ago, 30368 said:

 

Phil,

 

I'm sure Michael will comment. But all the original Bulleid Pacific's have chain driven valve gear so no return crank to worry about. All the re-built engines have outside admission so the return crank faces backwards from the verticle with the driving wheels at bottom dead centre. Just checked my 34053 (R2586) and it is set correctly. So no need for action on your part unless Hornby have made a mistake.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

It's fairly clear from side photos and the SR weight diagrams show the position of the return cranks but I went to check on the U1 GA I sent you and the steam passages are easily seen at each end of the valve chests in the plan view. I think the valve gear drive in the original Bulleid pacifics was to the middle of the valve spindle so outside admission had no drawbacks, the rebuilds retained this feature. I'm now wondering if locos of these types which I've built in the past are correct in this aspect.....

[30368]

47 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

It's fairly clear from side photos and the SR weight diagrams show the position of the return cranks but I went to check on the U1 GA I sent you and the steam passages are easily seen at each end of the valve chests in the plan view.

 

A useful discussion then? Hope all is well with those loco's you have built.

I have checked the U1 GA too, agree, steam feed at each end of the valve chests.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

[30368]

That is it for today, valve gear assembled ready for erection onto the locomotive frames, except the return crank which I aim to modify.

 

 

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

[DLT]

2 hours ago, 30368 said:

Wise words Dave.

If one ignores tenders for now and individual loco variations there are three variations with the U class.

The new build, with high running plate and small splashers and two window spectacle and cab sides with low  roofline. Secondly the River rebuilds 31790 -99 which have a low running plate, large splashers and cut away cab sides with high roofline and four window spectacles and thirdly River rebuilds 31800 - 09 which are much the same as the earlier re-builds except they have sanding gear operating levers on both sides of the loco. There are variations in smoke deflectors too but here it is almost at the painted number level of variation.

Indeed, the U is anything but a large wheeled N class!

Kind regards,

Richard

They are indeed a minefield for the modeller, and there is no substitute for a decent photo or three of the actual loco you want to portray.

Tenders are another minefield!  The U that I built had a Hornby tender supplied.  There was only one loco that had that particular type of tender, so choice of loco was made for us.

 

You can't blame the kit manufacturers for wanting to use standard parts, especially with big whitemetal castings, like a footplate.  But you can end up with a model that is compromise or hybrid, which doesn't always look right.

 

[Michael Edge]

2 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

A useful discussion then? Hope all is well with those loco's you have built.

I have checked the U1 GA too, agree, steam feed at each end of the valve chests.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

I've found two which I did wrong, both  3mm scale from last century though. I got the most recent one, a 7mm W, right at least.

[Mallard60022]

5 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

Phil,

 

I'm sure Michael will comment. But all the original Bulleid Pacific's have chain driven valve gear so no return crank to worry about. All the re-built engines have outside admission so the return crank faces backwards from the verticle with the driving wheels at bottom dead centre. Just checked my 34053 (R2586) and it is set correctly. So no need for action on your part unless Hornby have made a mistake.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

Sorry I should have said Classes.

Phil

[Mallard60022]

6 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

Phil,

 

I'm sure Michael will comment. But all the original Bulleid Pacific's have chain driven valve gear so no return crank to worry about. All the re-built engines have outside admission so the return crank faces backwards from the verticle with the driving wheels at bottom dead centre. Just checked my 34053 (R2586) and it is set correctly. So no need for action on your part unless Hornby have made a mistake.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

Sorry I should have said Classes; not individual Engines. I'm sure if I had 'The Book of.....' for every Class, I'd know!

I'm not 100% certain but I think all Hornby  Modified Pacifics, well at least the early products, need the VG adjusting. I look at them on my Rolling Road when TDC is achieved. Getting the angle correct is a bit tricky, but I just look at the gear in motion on the RR and if it looks OK, that's it! Could easily be slightly different either side, BUT one can't see both sides at once so who cares eh (Tony W?)? 

You mustn't forget that the Baccy N's gear is wrong too IIRC!  Something to do with the angle of the Radius Bar I think it is? 

Phil

[Mallard60022]

6 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

Phil,

 

I'm sure Michael will comment. But all the original Bulleid Pacific's have chain driven valve gear so no return crank to worry about. All the re-built engines have outside admission so the return crank faces backwards from the verticle with the driving wheels at bottom dead centre. Just checked my 34053 (R2586) and it is set correctly. So no need for action on your part unless Hornby have made a mistake.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

 

6 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

Phil,

 

I'm sure Michael will comment. But all the original Bulleid Pacific's have chain driven valve gear so no return crank to worry about. All the re-built engines have outside admission so the return crank faces backwards from the verticle with the driving wheels at bottom dead centre. Just checked my 34053 (R2586) and it is set correctly. So no need for action on your part unless Hornby have made a mistake.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

Sorry I should have said Classes; not individual Engines. I'm sure if I had 'The Book of.....' for every Class, I'd know!

I'm not 100% certain but I think all Hornby  Modified Pacifics, well at least the early products, need the VG adjusting. I look at them on my Rolling Road when TDC is achieved. Getting the angle correct is a bit tricky, but I just look at the gear in motion on the RR and if it looks OK, that's it! Could easily be slightly different either side, BUT one can't see both sides at once so who cares eh (Tony W?)? 

You mustn't forget that the Baccy N's gear is wrong too IIRC!  Something to do with the angle of the Valve Rod/Radius Bar I think it is? 

Phil

[Mallard60022]

19 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

 

Sorry I should have said Classes; not individual Engines. I'm sure if I had 'The Book of.....' for every Class, I'd know!

I'm not 100% certain but I think all Hornby  Modified Pacifics, well at least the early products, need the VG adjusting. I loo

The Walschaerts gear can be linked to inside or outside admission valves. This article has only considered inside-admission piston valves until now, but outside-admission valves (slide valves and some piston valves) can use Walschaerts valve gear. If the valves have outside admission the radius bar connects to the combination lever below the valve stem rather than above.

k at them on my Rolling Road when TDC is achieved. Getting the angle correct is a bit tricky, but I just look at the gear in motion on the RR and if it looks OK, that's it! Could easily be slightly different either side, BUT one can't see both sides at once so who cares eh (Tony W?)? 

You mustn't forget that the Baccy N's gear is wrong too IIRC!  Something to do with the angle of the Valve Rod/Radius Bar I think it is? 

Phil

Quote from Wiki:

The Walschaerts gear can be linked to inside or outside admission valves. This article has only considered inside-admission piston valves until now, but outside-admission valves (slide valves and some piston valves) can use Walschaerts valve gear. If the valves have outside admission the radius bar connects to the combination lever below the valve stem rather than above.

But you knew that.

I think the Baccy gear is incorrect in that connection to the Combi Lever, OR isn't far enough down from the top of the Combi?

P

[Mallard60022]

Wiki info on the U1.

P

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR_U1_class

[30368]

22 hours ago, DLT said:

But you can end up with a model that is compromise or hybrid, which doesn't always look right.

 

 

Having spouted off about the U variations my model is, naturally, wrong! It requires a cut back cab roof. My recollection of 6 years ago, when it was built, was that I decided to go with what I had in the kit. Maybe I will correct the model at some time...

 

Phil, U1 valve gear is well on the way but I doubt it will be completed before we leave for USA.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard