RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted November 11, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 11, 2011 Wonder if that's the limited edition serial number on the weight? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Limited edition weight???? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Autocoach, thanks ver much. Just what I wanted. Very very neat piece of design. I'm guessing somehow the running plate can come off with a few more screws. Looking at the design, some careful work with a knife and saw, a little bit of rolled brass sheet, and the skirt under the boiler is gone! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 2ManySpams Posted November 11, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 11, 2011 Mmmm...just noticed a gap starting to appear on 30586 between the running plate and the bottom of the square splasher. I'm sure it wasn't there when it arrived? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted November 11, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 11, 2011 Mmmm...just noticed a gap starting to appear on 30586 between the running plate and the bottom of the square splasher. I'm sure it wasn't there when it arrived? You prompted me to check mine. The bodywork (on all of them) is a little less robust than on some larger locos. I don't consider that to be a fault or a defect in any way. It is a feature of their size. There simply isn't enough material in them nor space to include additional strengtheners to give the rigidity that exists in, for example, a Hornby T9. There is sufficient "give" that a tiny gap can be created between uppers and frames but only by applying a light twisting pressure which I don't intend to repeat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Now its been brought up, basically my body dismantling question was driven by the slight gaps apparent on picsof 585 and 587 between the cab splasher and running plate, which appears to be not quite straight. The running plate above the rear driver appears to form a slight 'high point', with consiquential gap at front of cab splasher as the running plate falls away. Fractions of mm here (possibly 0.25). My guess is that there's a tight fit somewhere causing distortion. This is also why I asked about the cab/boiler - if the cab is a seperate fitting, any slight discrepency in the way it is fixed to the boiler might distort the running plate. Looking at Autocoach's pictures again, there DOES seem to be a glue seam on the inside of cab splasher, and a tab just above the splasher at the front of the cab inside. This suggests to me the pieces are glued together. Based on expereince (Bachmann panniers, A2s... I could go on), quite often stripping loco body's down to their main comonents and checking fit can solve all sorts of bends and gaps. Its definiately meant to be straight and snug according to the CADs. Again, everything I say is based on photographs, so I don't want to start banding certainties around. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
autocoach Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 On a more personnel vein. I am looking at putting a driver and fireman in my 2 BWT's. I like poses where both are leaning out of the cab to survey the scene while watching and waiting for a signal or guard's flag. I have the Dart Castings set on order. Are there any other good sets of enginemen that any of you could recommend that would fit well in the cab of an SR locomotive 1945-47. At the price I am not looking forward to the necessary amputations to fit in the BWT cab. (Speaking of amputations and today being 11-11, I am reminded of my grandfather who had one leg amputated below the knee in WW 1 after a German shell hit the cook shack. He was a cook having been a butcher before the war.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted November 12, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 12, 2011 "Bachmann 1950s locomotive crew" fit the bill for my crew perfectly and the amputation is quite easy with a sharp scalpel. I "weathered" mine with dilute acrylics. Pics HERE and HERE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Gwiwer's loco crew look just the part. 30587 turned up today, that's the number I'd ticked off in my Ian Allan ABC book all those years ago. Superb model, very nice box, well it's all been said. Very well done Kernow/Dapol, I'm now going up into loft for a few hours.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Nevard Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 There must be lots of happy BTW fan today with my Number 7 arriving today too. It's such a dinky little loco. I need little excuse to point a camera at anything, especially toy chuffers so here's mine... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Just come down from loft. Doesn't half run slow.. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brossard Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 That is one attractive model. It's not my region tho'. I'm relieved to see the number font appears correct. I had seen some pictures where it looked quite odd. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Nevard Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I finally gave it a little run through Catcott - after a couple of spririted traverses to remove any cobwebs it's a very smooth runner indeed with a Gaugemaster feedback unit. If it's this good now, it will be even better after the cats have chased it around by set track loop to run in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
autocoach Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 On my 3314/30585 I cut off the the six pin plug board and hard wired a TCS T1 full function decoder. Even more room in boiler now. Runs smooth as silk over Peco long insulfrog straight and curved turnouts. That tiny flywheel and BEMF works. (I dd remove capacitor.) Still need to find the right size Bullied "Southern" for the splasher. Fox Transfers N scale one is too big. Was ok for Graham's Bullied era 3329 but not on curved splasher of 3314. Nothing on HMRS sheet is small enough. Suggestions welcome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren01 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I finally gave it a little run through Catcott - after a couple of spririted traverses to remove any cobwebs it's a very smooth runner indeed with a Gaugemaster feedback unit. If it's this good now, it will be even better after the cats have chased it around by set track loop to run in. Hi Chris Cracking shot ! on your new layout, i have this one on order,hope to see it soon!. All the best Darren Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted November 14, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 14, 2011 30587 in the woods. Showing fire irons (supplied), lump coal and bucket (added), light weathering (my own) and the driver (Bachmann 1950's locomotive crew repainted by myself) giving a jaunty wave to the photographer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted November 14, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 14, 2011 It is very pleasing to see these delightful models snapped in such bucolic surroundings, so redolent of the little branchline that they frequented for so many years. I wonder if anyone will backdate one to be as their designer intended and run in a LSWR setting in suburban London? Hounslow Loop, anyone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdaysydney Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Great photo Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinjamesporter Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Received my model Saturday and have run it in on rolling roads on dc. I fitted the Bachmann 6 pin chip and it runs well on rolling roads and the straight test track. However on the layout it stops intermittently particularly on corners. Has anyone had this? The track is clean. I am very happy with the model just puzzled by its behavior. Many thanks colin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 2ManySpams Posted November 14, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 14, 2011 We had 2 working occasionally on Treneglos this weekend at Spalding show. Very pleased with the running and they pulled 8 Mk1sin a 'special' - much to John's joy as the fiddle only holds 5 ;-) We also had a Dapol model sitting next to a Jidenco (sp?) kit built version in the headshunt on Sunday. Both had identical slightly tapered chimneys, so the original kit designer must have agreed with Dapol on that aspect. Interestingly the main difference between the two is the cab area - the kit version has the cab and opening much shorter. (oh and you can probably buy all three Dapol ones for the cost to build the kit) This comparison in my view is very favourable towards the RTR version and just shows again we're now getting RTR that's better looking and running than kits of even a few years ago. Looks like my 587 will arrive tomorrow - pity it couldn't have been in the line up with it's brothers at Spalding show. just now need to get 12 brake vans to justify a special along the NCR through Treneglos ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cary hill Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Received my model of 30587 this morning and it will go very nicely with 30586. Just noticed, when comparing it with photographs of 30587 I took a couple of years ago at Bodmin, that the prototype has extra rivets on the splasher and cabside on one side only I have also checked the photographs of 30587 in the "North Cornwall Railway" Irwell tome and the extra rivets are there in June 1962 but not in May 1958. I assume the extra rivets appeared during it's 1960 overhaul when it also acquired it's BR late emblem. I've got no interest in "rivet-counting" per se and I know they shouldn't be there on this early emblem model anyway, just curious that's all. Please shoot me down if this has already been covered. Edited for omissions in my original query Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Don't think this has been mentioned before? Several pics previously posted show models with scale 3-link couplings fitted, as per prototype and I was musing about doing that to my model of 30587 (which has now notched up several hours of merrrily chugging reliably round the loft towing 2 Maunsell coaches). Looking at various books on the North Cornwall and Bodmin and Wadebridge lines, I've come across several pics of well tanks with an additional screw link coupling hanging on the front coupling hook over the fitted 3 link coupling. Other pics show a spare screw link coupling lying on the footplate in front of the smokebox between the frames. 30585 being jacked up for repair in May 1958 looks as if it's fitted with an actual screw coupling. 30586 has sc hanging in place shunting at Wadebridge in Sept 1954. 30586 on 2 coach set at Padstow in July 1954 looks like it has an actual screw link coupling fitted at the front. 30587 on china clay train on Wenford branch Aug 1958 2 HC Casserley photos from the 1920s also show screw link couplings hanging over the 3 link ones, one on a loco on a passenger train, one on a freight, so it must have been a long running practice. I haven't so far found a pic of this happening on the rear coupling. Carrying a spare screw coupling would look good on the model. However, why would this have been done? Was it to couple to a fitted van? Presumably with a coach the coach coupling would be used? Any thoughts on this? The replacement ex GWR 1366 class tanks all had screw link couplings. References are: (sadly can't scan in copyright pics) Bodmin and Wadebridge Bradford Barton 1979 p.48, p.53, p.61, p.80 North Cornwall Railway Irwell Press p.92 p.110 Branch Line to Padstow Middleton Press Pic.112 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted November 16, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 16, 2011 The well tanks were occasionally used on a passenger duty between Wadebridge and Padstow for which purpose a screw coupling would have been required. I believe that was a requirement of working passenger trains in order to minimise any slack or snatch. There are numerous published images of the locos with a spare 3-link carried in the recess below the smokebox door. I'd hazard a guess this was probably the emergency coupler for which no other place could be found on such small locomotives. I intend to add such to two of mine (not 30586) once new supplies of Smiths couplers arrive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted November 16, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 16, 2011 Engine to a coach should be the engine coupling (and it should of course be a screw coupling - sorry, forgot to make that clear). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Thanks very much for that, Gwiwer and The Stationmaster. Hadn't come across this before, interesting operation. It's this sort of detail that adds authenticity to model railways - I'll now go and put a screw link coupling in front of the smokebox (another excuse to go back and run loco again). cheers Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.