Small Inside Cylinder 0-6-0's

[GERDecapod]

Hello I'm trying to find inspiration for a scratch built 0-6-0 I would like to make. I'm trying to find a suitable basis to make it into, it has a wheelbase of about 38mm.

 

Kind regards Steven

[GERDecapod]

 

Edited June 7, 2022 by GERDecapod

[Aire Head]

That's a very short wheelbase!

[Compound2632]

Assuming we're looking at 4 mm scale, 9' 6". The challenge with "small" is the height of the motor block, which by measurement off the photo stands about 36 mm - 9' 0" - above rail level. Some sort of industrial saddle tank? Wheels look about 15.5 mm diameter - about 3' 10" - which might be passable. Maybe even a long boiler type?

 

But how smooth is it? - if it doesn't respond sensitively to the controller, it's not going to be much fun running it. 

[Michael Hodgson]

LMS dock tank?

[Compound2632]

18 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

LMS dock tank?

 

Spot on for wheelbase and diameter but I suspect the outside cylinders and outside Walschaerts valve gear are not what the OP is hoping for...

[bécasse]

I suspect that with such a short 6-coupled wheelbase an inside cylindered loco isn't practical. There just wouldn't be sufficient space to fit in workable valve gear - which is why the LMS dock tank was outside cylindered with outside Walschaerts valve gear.

[Michael Hodgson]

The reason it had such a short wheelbase was of course that dockyards had some extremely sharp curves.  That's the only reason I can think of for any other loco class that did the same.

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, Aire Head said:

That's a very short wheelbase!

Agreed, I wonder if the chassis is an HO one?

[Compound2632]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

The reason it had such a short wheelbase was of course that dockyards had some extremely sharp curves. 

 

Down to 2½ chains, 660 ft - 26" for 4 mm scale. The RTR manufacturers make Pacifics going round tighter curves!

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

...  26" for 4 mm scale. The RTR manufacturers make Pacifics going round tighter curves!

.... and rather faster than a Dock Tank could achieve ....... pity the poor passengers !

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

The reason it had such a short wheelbase was of course that dockyards had some extremely sharp curves.  That's the only reason I can think of for any other loco class that did the same.

 

Built to fit on wagon turntables rather than tight curves. They were built as a replacement for the Pugs that was seen as being under powered by the 1920s. The same reason they built the BR 02s.

 

They had a Cartazzi rear axlebox for the tight curves.

 

 

Jason

[LMS2968]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Down to 2½ chains, 660 ft - 26" for 4 mm scale. The RTR manufacturers make Pacifics going round tighter curves!

I hate to mention this but a chain is 22 yards or 66 feet, so 660 feet is ten chains. 2½ chains is 165 feet. 26 inches is correct for 4mm/ft scale, though.

[Wickham Green too]

hmmmm ................ 660mm ....... hmmmm

[sir douglas]

stephenson tank, Royal Albert Dock? though i have no idea of the wheelbase

[The Johnster]

I'd be looking at the possibility of a jackshaft driven industrial diesel mechanical, with a tall hood like the North British and Andrew Barclay types.  Or how about an 0/16 7mm narrow gauge engine!

[GERDecapod]

Thank you everyone for your response, I'm sorry I didn't respond earlier. For those who are curious, it is a similar runner to a Dapol pug. I do quite like the Stephenson tank, I think I'm going to try that out Thank you Sir Douglas. I also found a Peckett shunter with inside cylinders and a really small wheelbase, if anyone's interested.

 

Best Regards Steven

[Compound2632]

4 hours ago, LMS2968 said:

I hate to mention this but a chain is 22 yards or 66 feet, so 660 feet is ten chains. 2½ chains is 165 feet. 26 inches is correct for 4mm/ft scale, though.

 

Doh. I knew 660 came into it somewhere - it's the radius at 4 mm/ft scale, in millimetres! I worked it all out, turned off the calculator, then wrote it all out from memory. Of course one chain is the length of a cricket pitch, except where its 20 m, which is 4 19/32" shorter.

[lanchester]

Personally I would go for something long-boilered - The NER 1001 'class' and its many relatives. The glory is that they were built in several different works, (Leeds, Gateshead, York, a few outside contractors I think, plus the S&D built much the same sort of thing when it was a semi-independent operation, 1863-1873 or thereabouts). Fletcher really didn't do standardisation - not just of details like cabs but even of wheel diameters, and to call any of these a 'class' is really stretching things. So if you've run out of, say, Salter safety valves, that's OK. If your attempt at a cab looks like it was run up on someone's allotment, or you nicked one off a Worsdell body you had lying around, (hey, take the whole boiler, for a later period) well there's a prototype for that (especially since most of them were never photographed). Poor old McDonnell came in with ideas for standardisation, and was he thanked? No way!

 

And if it doesn't look quite North Eastern, you could claim it is one of the Earl of Durham's home-grown jobbies ex Lambton Engine Works exploiting running rights. Some of them look exactly like they were assembled from a spare parts box (they were before my great grandfather's time, 1897 onwards, but I suspect that is exactly how they were put together. Lambton did have a proper boiler shop at one time, also foundry etc but why would you when you can buy in boilers, wheelsets etc from the North East's many local contractors, or second hand from the 'big railway'). 

 

Can't go wrong.

[Artless Bodger]

How about the A class tanks used at Consett? At a pinch - the wheelbase is asymmetrical.

[DCB]

With that wheelbase I don't think you could fit inside cylinders in , 4ft 9" , the connecting rod from the crank on the middle axle has to clear the leading axle.  quite often the cylinders were inclined to allow this, often the single or three bar motion like Gresley used outside with no lower slide bar helped sometimes the leading axle was slightly cranked or had flats on it but apart from tiny locos like Terriers which got away with 6ft  between leading and centre axles because of their 20" stroke most locos needed 6ft 6" or more, the GWR went for 7ft 3" ish and Midland 8ft.  Basically that short a wheelbase needs outside cylinders.     They were widely used as dock and factory shunters in the UK and as main line freight haulers on the continent where speeds were generally lower than the UK, The GWR habitually ran its 4ft wheeled 2021 and 850 class as main line passenger pilots at up to 60mph circa 1900 about 15mh more than the Continentals risked.   It has long centre crank pins for outside cylinders and there is room for inside valve gear with inside valves for outside cylinders so where is the problem.