scanman Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 A very interestingthread - & one to watch. I'm particularly impressed with the wagon underframes. I'ver seen Craig on RMWeb and in MRJ - must get a couple to 'play' with! However, the most interesting ( for me) was the wipers/bus-bar/sprung pick-up debate. I'll admit my chasis has the required apertures for spring pick-ups, but Im not sure about them confidence-wise. I understand that soldering connecting wires can lead to downgraded spring performance due to heating? Having already built the pannier chassis (almost ot completion I reckin it's too late to fit buss-bars, but it's something to consider for the future. Being an old(er) modeller who was brought up on wipers, I'm looking to be convinced this is not the way to go... Regards Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Paul, Have you seen my method for split axle pickup? The idea is to solder a thin sheet of double sided copperclad inside the frames directly between the frames and the hornblock etches (Typically no more than 10 thou thick). This allows you to insulate the hornblocks from the frames but still maintain a robust soldered joint. I normally do this as the first operation when I remove the frames from the fret. Once you have soldered the copperclad on, you just continue to build the chassis as per instructions. The main advantage is that you don't have to compromise the main frame spacers, or insulate the body from the frames, because the frames remain electrically neutral. If you are here on Tuesday, I can show you the three mogul chassis on the go at the moment using this method. Regards Mark Humphrys Dave, Many thanks for your kind comments! It's through talking to people like yourself that i've got to this stage in the first place and yes I am very pleased with it so far. Interesting you mention you haven't done this to the BM chassis's. Is this due to difficulties with adapting these kits or did you just find a preferable alternative? I have a couple of their 4.6.0's hidden away for a rainy day, together with the 4f mentioned above (and another awaiting in store) so it would be good to be aware of any neccessary mods required before I make a start. Likewise I can't help but be impressed by the ride of a fully sprung loco! Even fully compensated chassis's still have an element of lurching apparent to my eye's, but when fully sprung they appear to glide through trackwork! The buss bar's have been incorporated with the pick up's in mind, both in terms of maintenance and for ease of location. As soon as I saw you'd responded to this thread my thoughts turned towards plucking your brains about pick-ups, so I was delighted to see that you've already gone down this path. I knew from speaking to you in the past that you hide the pick ups behind the brake blocks, however do you still wipe onto the edge of the tyre or do you prefer to wipe on to the backs? Assuming the former, how do you avoid shorting on the brakes? My brakes are detachable as one unit but are not insulated. Yes I can see the advantages of split axle, however the desire to include the inside valve gear on both the Jinty and the 4f tends to rule this option out. I'd also prefer to keep to main chassis as designed to maintain squareness, I wouldn't be too happy to cut through the frame spacers of any future build at this stage in my model making career although I may still give it a go one day! I'm currently borrowing a scrawker to finish isolating my buss bars, hopefully this should be completed before the days out! Best Wishes Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Paul, The idea is to solder a thin sheet of double sided copperclad inside the frames directly between the frames and the hornblock etches (Typically no more than 10 thou thick). This allows you to insulate the hornblocks from the frames but still maintain a robust soldered joint. I normally do this as the first operation when I remove the frames from the fret. Once you have soldered the copperclad on, you just continue to build the chassis as per instructions. The main advantage is that you don't have to compromise the main frame spacers, or insulate the body from the frames, because the frames remain electrically neutral. Regards Mark Humphrys Sounds a bit like using the Exactoscale plastic hornblocks which I mentioned to Paul offline though using copperclad may be felt to be more robust? Certainly a better method if you've fitted all of the inside motion etc than trying to insulate the frames from each other! If you can put a photo of your build on rmweb somewhere i'm sure others would like to see it as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kempenfelt Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 Paul, The BM issue is just one of laziness! I'm sure they could be modified to use a keeper plate arrangement - I just didn't bother. My pick-ups-behind-the-brake-block bear on the back of the rim, rather than on the flange, so shorting onto the etched brake blocks is not an issue. Dave. Dave, Thanks again for your comments, i'm pleased to hear that the BM kits should be suitable for the keeper plate treatment, still a lot of head scratching required for sure! I'll have to keep an eye out for any future demo's of yours, I would most certainly like a closer look at your work again at somepoint in the future! Thanks for the clarification of the pick-ups too! Your method of bearing on the back of the rim definitely makes hiding the wiper easier and a clever using the brake block as cover. I was under the impression that bearing on to the rim is preferential to bearing on the back of the rim, however I have no experience or evidence to back up this argument, your method obviously works though! Dave Don't you get issues with dirty pick ups using this method? Mike Paul Pleased to see your still at the same project...how about some more piccys... M Haha, thanks Mike! The only problem is that i'm rapidly running out of piccies now! I'm getting deperately close to having to do a bit more modelling just to keep the updates coming as I've gone through all of December's output now! I guess I could always get out the mk1's for a photo shoot if i'm getting desperate! B) When you do I'll be interested - I still have one in a box somewhere waiting on inspiration that hasn't entered my thick scull. There so many Wickham variants (alterations) that almost any general shape will do. Kenton Yes the Wickham's do appear to be a bit of a minefield! I can't confess to having any real knowledge for the subject but i'm being rapidly educated about what's wrong! I actually only started this kit because I just fancied putting the soldering iron to good use after an absence due to work and exams. I think I've found a severe inability of myself to be able to follow instructions, I've got a terrible habbit of finding modifications that I want to make to any kit I start! From what I can tell, my prototype is the same as the one in your avatar (the one from Didcot?). The kit gives an option of a grill or a sliding hatch for the front, however my prototype (a western region Wickham based on the S&D) appears to have the grill at the front for cooling the engine and the sliding hatch apears on the back (as visable on your avatar). This isn't a big problem as I should be able to alter the back by using the alternative front (sliding hatch) etch, currently left unused. Tim V has managed this on his Wickham, this was picture on his WB thread on the old forum. The front grill is a bit more difficult to correct. From looking at the protoype the grill goes almost all the way to the top of the etched componant, the part supplied only goes about half way! The ideal solution is a replacement etched componant so i'll need to scrub up on my CAD skills for this! Drive wise I like the idea of an axle hung motor as developed by the CLAG (Central London Area Group), however this too shares the requirement for me to improve my CAD skills and a bit of experimentation to boot! My desire is to completely hide the motor if possible! A very interestingthread - & one to watch. I'm particularly impressed with the wagon underframes. I'ver seen Craig on RMWeb and in MRJ - must get a couple to 'play' with! However, the most interesting ( for me) was the wipers/bus-bar/sprung pick-up debate. I'll admit my chasis has the required apertures for spring pick-ups, but Im not sure about them confidence-wise. I understand that soldering connecting wires can lead to downgraded spring performance due to heating? Having already built the pannier chassis (almost ot completion I reckin it's too late to fit buss-bars, but it's something to consider for the future. Being an old(er) modeller who was brought up on wipers, I'm looking to be convinced this is not the way to go... Regards Ian Ian, thanks for your kind comments! I too have been keeping a close eye on your thread as a fellow High Level devotee! You could probably get away with just having copper clad screwed to the front and rear frame stretchers of the 57xx if you did indeed decide to use a keeper plate instead of the plungers. My buss bar arrangement is a bit more complecated because I modified my chassis so I could drop out the leading and middle axles. You could always give it a go and worst case scenario ditch the buss bar and stick with the plunger's? I'd like to think i'm still a youngster and i'm just being naive, assuming wipers to be the most suitable for me at this stage due to skill required to make them and the ability to remove them for maintenance. I may however try other methods in the future, i'm keeping an open mind as per the ideal solution! Paul, Have you seen my method for split axle pickup? The idea is to solder a thin sheet of double sided copperclad inside the frames directly between the frames and the hornblock etches (Typically no more than 10 thou thick). This allows you to insulate the hornblocks from the frames but still maintain a robust soldered joint. I normally do this as the first operation when I remove the frames from the fret. Once you have soldered the copperclad on, you just continue to build the chassis as per instructions. The main advantage is that you don't have to compromise the main frame spacers, or insulate the body from the frames, because the frames remain electrically neutral. If you are here on Tuesday, I can show you the three mogul chassis on the go at the moment using this method. Regards Mark Humphrys Mark, Thanks for this info, I have been aware of this technique of yours via Gordon and Tim but haven't had the chance to try it out yet. My biggest concern with the method would be the extra thickness / thining required of the frame spacers and what this would mean to the 'slot and tab' arrangement of the spacers. I assume a bit of compromise / bit of extra work is required to modify the spacers? This arrangement would be useful even if I was to keep the solid axle and buss bar arrangement, as shorting on the brakes / any ofther part of the frames for instance wouldn't be issue. Yes I do hope to come across on Tuesday and a closs look at the Mogul's would be very useful! Hope to see you there! Best Wishes to all! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Drive wise I like the idea of an axle hung motor as developed by the CLAG (Central London Area Group), however this too shares the requirement for me to improve my CAD skills and a bit of experimentation to boot! My desire is to completely hide the motor if possible! One of the simplest ways is to model the version with the sides or with the storm curtains dropped/flapping I have some 140+ images culled over the years most copyright so I will not repost here. The one in the avatar is the one at Didcot sadly the only shot on a rather wet and dull day from a distance. I really should reschedule another visit and try to pick a sunny day. Sadly it isn't always easy to find in the yard. Good luck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Paul, The method doesn't have any effect on the frame spacers in the kit, because the copperclad is only used between the hornblock etch and the frames (In other wordes exactly the same shape as the hornblock). The rest of the frames are untouched. I have used it on a Finney 51xx with Dave Bradwell springing units, the three moguls and my Scratchbuilt Hall so far. It is quite easy to use on loco's with inside valve gear, either by using a double split axle, or by not picking up from that axle. The beauty of it is that it requires a minimal change to the original kit and doesn't have to add any significant difficulty as building progresses. It really is fit and forget. Regards Mark Humphrys Mark, Thanks for this info, I have been aware of this technique of yours via Gordon and Tim but haven't had the chance to try it out yet. My biggest concern with the method would be the extra thickness / thining required of the frame spacers and what this would mean to the 'slot and tab' arrangement of the spacers. I assume a bit of compromise / bit of extra work is required to modify the spacers? This arrangement would be useful even if I was to keep the solid axle and buss bar arrangement, as shorting on the brakes / any ofther part of the frames for instance wouldn't be issue. Yes I do hope to come across on Tuesday and a closs look at the Mogul's would be very useful! Hope to see you there! Best Wishes to all! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kempenfelt Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 Paul, The method doesn't have any effect on the frame spacers in the kit, because the copperclad is only used between the hornblock etch and the frames (In other wordes exactly the same shape as the hornblock). The rest of the frames are untouched. I have used it on a Finney 51xx with Dave Bradwell springing units, the three moguls and my Scratchbuilt Hall so far. It is quite easy to use on loco's with inside valve gear, either by using a double split axle, or by not picking up from that axle. The beauty of it is that it requires a minimal change to the original kit and doesn't have to add any significant difficulty as building progresses. It really is fit and forget. Regards Mark Humphrys Of course! Thanks Mark for the clarrification! The Jinty Build features the milled Brassmasters ones so i'd have to rethink the choice of hornblocks! A close look at the Mogul's still sounds like a fantastic offer and I hope to be round before it's pub time! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kempenfelt Posted January 13, 2011 Author Share Posted January 13, 2011 Morning All, I spent Tuesday evening at Mark Humphries house for the latest Bristol BS4 group meeting, complemented by some superb home made cakes and tea from marks wife Ann. (Thanks again Ann!) As Mark kindly offered earlier in my thread, I took up his opportunity to see first hand his method of isolating his hornblocks and guides through the use of 10 thou copperclad. These first 2 pictures show one of the frames of one of Mark's batch of 3 mogul's treated with this method. Mark advised that once you've soldered the copperclad to the chassis, clean and then seal the exposed edge of the coppercad with superglue. The reason for the latter is to avoid any solder or metal filings coming into contact with the isolated horn and therefore bridging the gap. The next batch of 4 photo's show Mark's chassis for his 51xx, this has reached the stage of the whole loco being finished and broken down into the relevent assemblies for painting. The chassis has been completed but unfortunately when the black for the smokebox was painted on top of the green, the paint blistered and bubbled. Mark has since had to strip the whole body of paint and is now facing the uneviable task of removing every last bit of paint from all the nooks and crannies whilst not damaging any of the detail. Mark has used the Bradwell horn blocks and guides together with Gordon Ashton's spring units, it is possible to make out the wire from the hornguides which negate the need for pick ups. I must admit I am very impressed with this form of pick up and may consider it in the dim and distant future when I get round to the chassis for the Brassmasters 4f. 51xx chassis overview 51xx front end view 51xx hornblocks and GA spring units 51xx radial truck, Mark has fully sprung this to work like the prototype! Very impressive work! Here's a general view of Mark's work bench. Current projects including 3 Alastair Wright B Sets, and point work for Mark's long planned model of Brent. Here's a close up of one of the B Sets The next few pictures show some close up os some of Mark's track work. I really liked Mark's idea to frame the sleepers whilst building the pointwork, although he freely admitted that this method increases the build time the additional work definitely has its advantages. The usual way is to glue or use double sided sticky tape to hold down the sleepers, this results in additional work cleaning up the underside of the sleepers and also still does not ensure no small movement of the sleepers during the build, Mark's method eradicates these issues. Mark has used a felt tip pen to colour the sleepers giving a dark and slightly shiney sleeper, giving a good representation of a newly creosoated sleeper. Once the trackwork is laid this will all be weathered in situ. Next we move on to some bits that Tim V brought round on my request. Margerie.......Margerie, do we have a puzzle for adults aged 16 - 85 of a 4mm Wickham Trolley! B) (I hope nobody takes that as age-est!) I was very suprised and impressed by the amount of lead weight Tim has managed to smuggle into the roof of the trolley, afterall it really is tiny. Once it also has a whitemetal crew i'm sure there wil be plenty of weight to ensure good adhesion and drive. Tim is locating the drive train (based on a Nigel Lawton chassis) underneath the bench seat. As a result the motor cover is still hollow and can be used for additional weight if required. I better not do anythink naught with such a close up of my fingerprint! Many thanks to both Mark and Tim for letting me have a good nose around your current projects. Please feel free to comment chaps if I missed anything, made any mistakes or if you just want to add to what i've written! Best Wishes Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Morning? The time stamp on your post is just after 3AM! Anyway, I'm having trouble remembering how the Wickham goes together, but at least I'm looking at it - it has been quite a while since I did that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesome_whistle Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Paul, This is a very interesting and thought-provoking thread. I'm very interested in your keeper plates for the High Level chassis - I've had a few crankpin issues with my High Level 57xx and the ability to drop the wheelsets out without removing wheels from axles by having removable springs is definitely a modification I'd like to incorporate. Your latest photographs of Mark's 51xx chassis are great - the copperclad is an ingenious way of isolating the axles and hornblocks from the chassis. The only minor drawback I can see with this arrangement is that it might be difficult to combine it with CSB type suspension without shorting everything out. I've been giving some thought to purchasing a late Christmas present for myself and was swithering between a Mitchell 43xx and a Finney 41/51xx - I think, based on the photos of the 51xx chassis, I might plump for the latter. A question for Mark, is the Finney kit designed to be built using a particular suspension arrangement (ie Compensation or springing) or can it be adapted easily to either? Many thanks and keep up the inspiration! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Thanks Paul you make it sound much better than it really is! With the double sided copperclad, I use Araldite to seal the edges and not superglue. Also bevelling the edge slightly also reduces the risk of getting any bridge between the two sides. Regards Mark Humphrys Morning All, I spent Tuesday evening at Mark Humphries house for the latest Bristol BS4 group meeting, complemented by some superb home made cakes and tea from marks wife Ann. (Thanks again Ann!) As Mark kindly offered earlier in my thread, I took up his opportunity to see first hand his method of isolating his hornblocks and guides through the use of 10 thou copperclad. These first 2 pictures show one of the frames of one of Mark's batch of 3 mogul's treated with this method. Mark advised that once you've soldered the copperclad to the chassis, clean and then seal the exposed edge of the coppercad with superglue. The reason for the latter is to avoid any solder or metal filings coming into contact with the isolated horn and therefore bridging the gap. The next batch of 4 photo's show Mark's chassis for his 51xx, this has reached the stage of the whole loco being finished and broken down into the relevent assemblies for painting. The chassis has been completed but unfortunately when the black for the smokebox was painted on top of the green, the paint blistered and bubbled. Mark has since had to strip the whole body of paint and is now facing the uneviable task of removing every last bit of paint from all the nooks and crannies whilst not damaging any of the detail. Mark has used the Bradwell horn blocks and guides together with Gordon Ashton's spring units, it is possible to make out the wire from the hornguides which negate the need for pick ups. I must admit I am very impressed with this form of pick up and may consider it in the dim and distant future when I get round to the chassis for the Brassmasters 4f. 51xx chassis overview 51xx front end view 51xx hornblocks and GA spring units 51xx radial truck, Mark has fully sprung this to work like the prototype! Very impressive work! Here's a general view of Mark's work bench. Current projects including 3 Alastair Wright B Sets, and point work for Mark's long planned model of Brent. Here's a close up of one of the B Sets The next few pictures show some close up os some of Mark's track work. I really liked Mark's idea to frame the sleepers whilst building the pointwork, although he freely admitted that this method increases the build time the additional work definitely has its advantages. The usual way is to glue or use double sided sticky tape to hold down the sleepers, this results in additional work cleaning up the underside of the sleepers and also still does not ensure no small movement of the sleepers during the build, Mark's method eradicates these issues. Mark has used a felt tip pen to colour the sleepers giving a dark and slightly shiney sleeper, giving a good representation of a newly creosoated sleeper. Once the trackwork is laid this will all be weathered in situ. Next we move on to some bits that Tim V brought round on my request. Margerie.......Margerie, do we have a puzzle for adults aged 16 - 85 of a 4mm Wickham Trolley! B) (I hope nobody takes that as age-est!) I was very suprised and impressed by the amount of lead weight Tim has managed to smuggle into the roof of the trolley, afterall it really is tiny. Once it also has a whitemetal crew i'm sure there wil be plenty of weight to ensure good adhesion and drive. Tim is locating the drive train (based on a Nigel Lawton chassis) underneath the bench seat. As a result the motor cover is still hollow and can be used for additional weight if required. I better not do anythink naught with such a close up of my fingerprint! Many thanks to both Mark and Tim for letting me have a good nose around your current projects. Please feel free to comment chaps if I missed anything, made any mistakes or if you just want to add to what i've written! Best Wishes Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 The Finney 51xx is designed to be used with standard compensation with a beam and one rigid axle. I have used Dave Bradwell springing units in mine. There is no reason why continuous springy beams cannot be used with this method, provided they are insulated from the main frames. Each chassis will no doubt require its own unique solution, but nothing is impossible if you are prepared to try. Regards Mark Humphrys Paul, This is a very interesting and thought-provoking thread. I'm very interested in your keeper plates for the High Level chassis - I've had a few crankpin issues with my High Level 57xx and the ability to drop the wheelsets out without removing wheels from axles by having removable springs is definitely a modification I'd like to incorporate. Your latest photographs of Mark's 51xx chassis are great - the copperclad is an ingenious way of isolating the axles and hornblocks from the chassis. The only minor drawback I can see with this arrangement is that it might be difficult to combine it with CSB type suspension without shorting everything out. I've been giving some thought to purchasing a late Christmas present for myself and was swithering between a Mitchell 43xx and a Finney 41/51xx - I think, based on the photos of the 51xx chassis, I might plump for the latter. A question for Mark, is the Finney kit designed to be built using a particular suspension arrangement (ie Compensation or springing) or can it be adapted easily to either? Many thanks and keep up the inspiration! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kempenfelt Posted January 13, 2011 Author Share Posted January 13, 2011 That I'd reply according to the subjects this time, firstly the Wickham! One of the simplest ways is to model the version with the sides or with the storm curtains dropped/flapping I have some 140+ images culled over the years most copyright so I will not repost here. The one in the avatar is the one at Didcot sadly the only shot on a rather wet and dull day from a distance. I really should reschedule another visit and try to pick a sunny day. Sadly it isn't always easy to find in the yard. Good luck. I'm toying around with a couple of idea in my head at the moment but the intention will be to model the storm curtains up and complete with crew to resemble the trolley in use and en route. I actually quite fancey the challenge of hiding the motor and drive mech, however this is probably helped by the fact that I haven't actually looked too much in to this so far. Photo wise I must admit these trolley's do appear to be fairly elusive! I have managed to find a few piccies of the S&D ones in books. There is a particularly good portrait of one posed on Midford viaduct in Mike Arlett's book about Midford. I also have found a nice colour picture in Hugh Ballantyne's book "The Somerset and Dorset Remembered" which show's one of the trolley's in the cattle dock at Shepton Mallet. Unfortunately the trolley is not the subject of the photo but it does give me an idea of the final colour, A few more colour photo's closer to the subject, in 50's/60's condition would be much appreciated! Tim has put me onto some very useful articles (much older than me! B) ) however i'm unsure of the origins so cannot quote. Please feel free to add this information Tim! Morning? The time stamp on your post is just after 3AM! Anyway, I'm having trouble remembering how the Wickham goes together, but at least I'm looking at it - it has been quite a while since I did that. Well is was technicaly the morning Tim! Not the part of morning I was planning to see I must admit, however I was getting a bit carried away with some research on lost track of time! I was suprised actually by just how many parts there were in that box! I've still got quite a way to go yet! Will be fun to see how long they take to get round Clutton! I did read somwhere I think that whilst filming "Emergency Single-Line Working" they actually shot some footage from the Trolley. Prehaps during happy hour at one of the future shows Tim we could have the Wickham following a passenger train for filming purposes, or vice versa! Ideal abuse of DCC! Thanks both! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kempenfelt Posted January 13, 2011 Author Share Posted January 13, 2011 Now for the turn of Mark's projects (well predominantly at least!) Paul, This is a very interesting and thought-provoking thread. I'm very interested in your keeper plates for the High Level chassis - I've had a few crankpin issues with my High Level 57xx and the ability to drop the wheelsets out without removing wheels from axles by having removable springs is definitely a modification I'd like to incorporate. Your latest photographs of Mark's 51xx chassis are great - the copperclad is an ingenious way of isolating the axles and hornblocks from the chassis. The only minor drawback I can see with this arrangement is that it might be difficult to combine it with CSB type suspension without shorting everything out. I've been giving some thought to purchasing a late Christmas present for myself and was swithering between a Mitchell 43xx and a Finney 41/51xx - I think, based on the photos of the 51xx chassis, I might plump for the latter. A question for Mark, is the Finney kit designed to be built using a particular suspension arrangement (ie Compensation or springing) or can it be adapted easily to either? Many thanks and keep up the inspiration! Thanks for the kind words LW! As you can probably tell I belong to 2 S4 area groups and have links with a few others, as a result I get to see various methods and building techniques and I am please to be able to share some of these on this thread. I cannot take any credit for the keeper plate idea, however I will quite hapily promote it! I do like this approach to chassis building but you do have to consider this method right at the begining of the build and even then this method can cause a fair amount of head scratching! One such problem I found was where to locate the copperclad stretchers that support the buss bars with minimal visual impact and modification to the inside motion. The other significant problem I came across was catering for the compensation beam, this meant that I had to split 2 of the spring stretchers and thus weakend the integrity of the stretchers as a result. Next time, CSB's should negate the requirment to split the spring stretchers. I wil also have the driven axle removable too as appose to fixed, this will then allow the gearbox to be droped out if neccesary for maintenance. The mogul chassis definitely looked slightly easier to build to my eyes as it obviously removes the need to make the radial truck and doesn't require the narrowing of the frames. Not neccessarily hard to do but more to think about. The body however is quite complex! Mark was explaining how the tanks, cab sides and bunker are all formed formed from one continuous etch! Definitely one of the most challenging assemblies i've seen! Please don't let my comments put you off put do bear it in mind, I'm sure Mark could advise further. I dare say the GW tenders complete with flare are not much easier! Prehaps you should swap to a more friendly region to model, Midland for instance? B) Nice flat Fowler tenders! With the double sided copperclad, I use Araldite to seal the edges and not superglue. Also bevelling the edge slightly also reduces the risk of getting any bridge between the two sides. Thanks for correcting me on the Araldite Mark, I knew I was likely to make some errors trying to recall everything. The Finney 51xx is designed to be used with standard compensation with a beam and one rigid axle. I have used Dave Bradwell springing units in mine. There is no reason why continuous springy beams cannot be used with this method, provided they are insulated from the main frames. Each chassis will no doubt require its own unique solution, but nothing is impossible if you are prepared to try. I was thinking about this earlier, you could always use smaller bits of the copperclad to isolate the mounting for CSB in exactly the same way as the horns, something to think about at least! Best Wishes Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesome_whistle Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Thanks both for the replies. I'll take on board the comments about the relative complexities of the two kits and weigh things up before making a final decision. I'd kind of hoped that the Finney 51xx would be similar to a Mitchell 44xx or 45xx only a bit bigger! I was thinking about this earlier, you could always use smaller bits of the copperclad to isolate the mounting for CSB in exactly the same way as the horns, something to think about at least! Best Wishes Paul I'd sort of come to the same conclusion. The only problem with doing this is that the handrail knob (or whatever is used as the CSB mount on the frame) will only be attached to the surface of the copperclad which I suspect wpoould lead to a much weaker joint than if soldered directly to the frame. Bearing in mind that the copperclad is only 10thou the mounting pin of the knob would also protrude beyond the copperclad and touch the frame. The solution, I suspect, would be to drill out a small hole in the frame itself - and the back of the copperclad - to allow a rebate for the CSB mount (handrail knob) and fill this with araldite or similar when the knob has been fitted. I'm not sure how well I've communicated that but I think I know what I mean!! B) Cheers, Tony Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Could you not just sleeve the CSB with plastic tube and use bigger holes in the bearings? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kempenfelt Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 I'd sort of come to the same conclusion. The only problem with doing this is that the handrail knob (or whatever is used as the CSB mount on the frame) will only be attached to the surface of the copperclad which I suspect wpoould lead to a much weaker joint than if soldered directly to the frame. Bearing in mind that the copperclad is only 10thou the mounting pin of the knob would also protrude beyond the copperclad and touch the frame. The solution, I suspect, would be to drill out a small hole in the frame itself - and the back of the copperclad - to allow a rebate for the CSB mount (handrail knob) and fill this with araldite or similar when the knob has been fitted. I'm not sure how well I've communicated that but I think I know what I mean!! B) Tony, I think I understand! I too thought about drilling a hole in the frames, however I didn't consider the back of the copperclad, thanks for that! Likewise I didn't consider the weakend joint either! It may also be worth allowing the handrail knob to pertrude through the outside of the frames, Araldite and file fush? Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I'd sort of come to the same conclusion. The only problem with doing this is that the handrail knob (or whatever is used as the CSB mount on the frame) will only be attached to the surface of the copperclad which I suspect wpoould lead to a much weaker joint than if soldered directly to the frame. Bearing in mind that the copperclad is only 10thou the mounting pin of the knob would also protrude beyond the copperclad and touch the frame. The solution, I suspect, would be to drill out a small hole in the frame itself - and the back of the copperclad - to allow a rebate for the CSB mount (handrail knob) and fill this with araldite or similar when the knob has been fitted. Unfortunately I'm still very much a CSB novice so I can't speak with any great authority here but I've used small angle pieces soldered to the frames rather than handrail knobs - 7mm scale. A couple of reasons, one I didn't have to drill holes so if I got it wrong I could always move the fulcrum point, second the handrail knobs seem a bit spindely, also just a hole in a bit of angle plate is more of a fulcrum point as it's narrower than the handrail knob. I wasn't sure if the width of the handrail knob would limit the spring wire flexing at the fulcrum. It seems to work fine for me as I've finished a Jinty and now cracking on with a 4MT. The photos in the following post shows the angle plates soldered to the frames. So I'm sure you could do something similar mounted on a small copperclad plate. http://www.rmweb.co....-7/page__st__54 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jol Wilkinson Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I'd sort of come to the same conclusion. The only problem with doing this is that the handrail knob (or whatever is used as the CSB mount on the frame) will only be attached to the surface of the copperclad which I suspect wpoould lead to a much weaker joint than if soldered directly to the frame. Bearing in mind that the copperclad is only 10thou the mounting pin of the knob would also protrude beyond the copperclad and touch the frame. The solution, I suspect, would be to drill out a small hole in the frame itself - and the back of the copperclad - to allow a rebate for the CSB mount (handrail knob) and fill this with araldite or similar when the knob has been fitted. I'm not sure how well I've communicated that but I think I know what I mean!! B) Cheers, Tony London Road Models have supplied an etch of CSB hornblock bearing adaptors and mountings since 2007. It includes a variety of mountings and the larger ones have a series of holes to allow for ride height ajustment. As they don't require a mounting hole in the frames, they can all be "adjusted" as required. A copy of the instructions (with drawings) can be found at http://www.scalefour.org/londonroad/hornblock_spring_adaptor.pdf. In addition to LRM's own hornguide bearing, the etched adaptors will also any hornblock bearings with a 3.8mm spigot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 References for S&D Wickhams can be found at: Railway Modeller August 1965 details converting an old style Minic Motorways car (the one with the brass underframe). There is a 4mm drawing, plus a picture of one on the goods head shunt at Evercreech. The author says that the drawing was made from his notes, and he did not measure one. He talked with the signalman at Midford who told him that there were three allocated to the S&D. Colour was red. Railway Modeller November 1969 contains an official drawing in 7mm of a motor trolley and trailer, plus pictures of two of them, one on them on the far side of the turntable at Evercreech. Please don't ask for copies of these articles - the Mods don't like it, back numbers can be obtained from sites such as http://www.payhost.net/modelling/acatalog/Model_Railway.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kempenfelt Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 Thanks Tim, apologies if I appear to be lazy on the references front but I couldn't find this information in our correspondance. Anyway I found this information useful and some good articles to dig out if you're interested in the Wickham! Thanks Jol, unfortunately I cannot open PDF's on this current computer but will have a look later when i swapped to a better equipted machine! Sounds interesting reading! Adrian, thanks for sharing your experiences, I've been keeping an eye on you're progress and it's all very impressive. If I can get some suitable pictures when i'm next back at my parent's i'll post some shot's of my 5" version. It's currently awaiting my retirement for progression! B) Right, I have a busy weekend ahead away from the workbench so you're unlikely to see any progress this weekend, however I hope to return soon! Bye for now! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Foxit reader is an easy download and a lot better than a certain proprietary PDF reader. http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike G Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Right, I have a busy weekend ahead away from the workbench so you're unlikely to see any progress this weekend, however I hope to return soon! Anything to do with donating a kidney? Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scanman Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 That I'd reply according to the subjects this time, firstly the Wickham! I was suprised actually by just how many parts there were in that box! I've still got quite a way to go yet! Will be fun to see how long they take to get round Clutton! I did read somwhere I think that whilst filming "Emergency Single-Line Working" they actually shot some footage from the Trolley. Prehaps during happy hour at one of the future shows Tim we could have the Wickham following a passenger train for filming purposes, or vice versa! Ideal abuse of DCC! Thanks both! Paul Go the whole hog & fit a minicam to the trolley? Regs Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesome_whistle Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Thanks Jol, unfortunately I cannot open PDF's on this current computer but will have a look later when i swapped to a better equipted machine! Sounds interesting reading! Adrian, thanks for sharing your experiences, I've been keeping an eye on you're progress and it's all very impressive. If I can get some suitable pictures when i'm next back at my parent's i'll post some shot's of my 5" version. It's currently awaiting my retirement for progression! B) ! Paul I'll echo Paul's thanks to Jol and Adrian, both those CSB mountings look like they would fit the purpose nicely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.