The Derby Line, Gladiator LNER O4/3

[dibateg]

At the end of the day, good progress, there were a few minor issues, the cupboards roof was too short, so a new one was made up, the tender front was too high, so that was cut back to the level of the roof. The coal space floor is narrower than the bulkheads for some reason.. The left side is yet to be attached in the 2nd view.

 

 

 

[dibateg]

So ... moving on and beginning to fit out the tender detail. You could drive a tube train through the holes for the handrails, so these were all plugged with short lengths of fine brass tube. Everything sort of fits, but location slots are somewhat wide, so it does allow for adjustment.. I also fitted Griffin lamp irons and MOK self contained buffers. The fire iron tunnel is not quite right and the coal divider took a bit of fettling to fit. I also relocated the forward lifting eyes from the bunker sides to the back of the bulkhead and scratched up some mounting plates.

Edited July 24, 2015 by dibateg

[ozzyo]

Hello all,

 

one thing that I've never understood about these B.R. divided coal space tenders is why did B.R. not 

a) increase the water space by adding a extension to the top of the rear tank top to the division plate?

 b  ) add a cover plate over the part of the coal space that the coal would not work down the normal coal hopper?

 

I have seen a few photos of the closed off part of these types of tender having a good amount of coal behind the division plate that can't be used. Not a few cwt. but a few tons.

 

A nice looking build up to now,

 

OzzyO. 

Edited July 23, 2015 by ozzyo

[Horsetan]

... seen a few photos of the closed off part of these types of tender having a good amount of coal behind the division plate that can't be used. Not a few cwt. but a few tons....

 

It all went to waste.

[dibateg]

What to do on a rainy Sunday? - Ah yes, finish the Crostie tender. Well, nearly, I just need brake pull rods and crank from Ragstone ( I forgot those in the last order ) .Items of note:-

The ladder had huge holes for the rungs, so each was plugged with brass tube and filed up clean, then 0.7mm rings fitted.

Coal spray protective angle on the back of the bulkhead. Yep - I've left the pipe off...

Modified Ragstone brake gear ( as the hangers are designed to fit to the outside frames as per prototype ), each assembly has the hanger mounting pips soldered into the ends of brass tube, which is then soldered to the frames.

The axlebox castings have slightly more detail than the DJH ones, as they have the mounting plate represented for the spring hangers.

I also added the little 2 port oiler on the frames just behind the front steps - I think they are Griffin castings.

The underframe stretchers screw to angle section on the inside of the frames - the rear one is trapped by the scoop lifting rods, so rattles around loose until it's screwed in place.

 

Not the neatest view underneath, but only you and I have seen that..

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dibateg]

Loco Chassis:- I toyed with the idea of fitting Slaters hornblocks, but decided to go with the compensation as designed in the kit - it work ok on the MOK Ivatts, yes with fewer wheels I know. As designed it seemed to take up a lot of space and have the potential to be wobbly, so I changed it so that the axle compensation beams are flush against the frames. They were blackened so that when soldering in the bearings it didn't all stick together. lets see if it works.

 

 

 

 

[Mike Boucher]

Loco Chassis:- I toyed with the idea of fitting Slaters hornblocks, but decided to go with the compensation as designed in the kit - it work ok on the MOK Ivatts, yes with fewer wheels I know. As designed it seemed to take up a lot of space and have the potential to be wobbly, so I changed it so that the axle compensation beams are flush against the frames. They were blackened so that when soldering in the bearings it didn't all stick together. lets see if it works.

 

If I'm looking at it correctly, its the front axle which is fixed?  Seems odd, as that means that the driven axle will be compensated.  While I know that generally isn't an issue, seems like if you're going to have one axle fixed you might as well make it the driven axle...  (not your "fault", but a strange decision by the designer, IMHO...)

[dibateg]

Actually, the front axle is probably the best one to be fixed, as it is behind the slide bars, where clearance can be an issue. So keeping that wheel set steady can be a great help. I have plenty of Locos that have the motor mounted on a 'floating' axle and have not had any problems. The MOK Ivatt 4s are designed in this way and as long as the motor is held steady but allowed to move with axle there is no problem.

Radical perhaps? But it works for me.

[david.hill64]

Actually, the front axle is probably the best one to be fixed, as it is behind the slide bars, where clearance can be an issue. So keeping that wheel set steady can be a great help. I have plenty of Locos that have the motor mounted on a 'floating' axle and have not had any problems. The MOK Ivatt 4s are designed in this way and as long as the motor is held steady but allowed to move with axle there is no problem.

Radical perhaps? But it works for me.

When you have a floating motor, how do you fix a torque reaction arm?

[dibateg]

It can be anything from a sophisticated motor cradle with slots that locate on to pins in the chassis, to a bit of wire wrapped around the nearest frame spacer! 

[david.hill64]

It can be anything from a sophisticated motor cradle with slots that locate on to pins in the chassis, to a bit of wire wrapped around the nearest frame spacer! 

Thank you. The reason I asked is that I was worried that if you made the link from the chassis to the motor too stiff, it would stop the compensation (or springing) doing its job. Having said that I did use scrap etch between the motor and frame on theFinney A4 that I built and that seemed to be OK. I suppose ideally the reaction should go to the axleboxes on the driven axle, but if all works then that is fine by me! 

[dibateg]

Hopefully we'll catch up at Telford David -

 

The chassis work continues, I used the Hobby Holidays jig to assemble the frames - not easy when the bearing positions are already fixed in place, but it helps get things square. I don't like motion arrangements that are permanently attached to the chassis. Giving it some thought overnight, I decided the cylinders don't need to come off as long as the slide bars can. So the slidebar bracket is bolted to the frame via a screw which being in the darker recesses won't be seen. I shortened the cylinder wrappers - they don't need to go all the way to the frames and it makes them far easier to fit. There is some cleaning up to do now on those cylinder ends and I'm using Ragstone slidebars and crossheads as they are crisper than those in the kit..

Edited August 14, 2015 by dibateg

[dibateg]

After a week away working, its back on with the Crostie to get the frames progressed. Unfortunately after cleaning up, the cast brass cylinder covers are too small and are a bit rough in places, so it's Ragstone to the rescue again.. The two motion brackets are now on the frames. Roger had warned me that the drivers side one is too wide, so the whole thing was trimmed by about 2mm. I also thought that the vertical triangular bit that sticks up was outside the running plate flange, but on closer observation of the photos there is actually a cut out in the flange to accommodate it......

The slots to mount the firemans side were in the wrong place, but that was easily remedied using an old .6mm drill as a slot cutter. The instructions missed out the internal web that's sits just inside the big oval hole. With a bit of trimming it fitted ok. I also notice that the expansion link bracket should 'droop' down - for want of a better word rather than it's lower surface being horizontal. So that was tweaked.

So whilst I'm waiting for Telford and more Ragstone bits I began work on the running plate - nothing to report so far except that I broke the fold where the front plates drop away from the horizontal running plate to get a better join and the position better.

 

[dibateg]

I cant get the text in between the photos, I dunno why, I only used to work in IT.

 

[Jintyman]

I cant get the text in between the photos, I dunno why, I only used to work in IT.

Lovely build and a novel compensation set up.

 

As for your problem in fitting text in between the pictures, if you go to the small switch symbol on the top left hand side of the reply box (The BBCode mode), the switch symbol, click that and write your replies out in that format, you'll be able to insert text in between pictures etc.

 

It works for me, hope it helps you.

 

Jinty

[dibateg]

Thanks David - I'll try that!

 

Monsoon season in Wales meant a whole day on the firebox. Making up the former and shaping the cladding sheets. I put the washout plugs on the insides of the sheets instead of outside as per instructions. Photos show them as behind the cladding. Layers of etching are used to create the insets for the mud holes, which is quite effective. Apart from having to grind away clearances for stuff soldered on the insides of the sheets I rather like the way it goes together.

 

 

POR today....

 

 

 

(Press on Regardless )

[dibateg]

One advantage (?) of the rubbish weather is that I've been able to crack on with the Crostie boiler. The firebox cladding went on ok, with a bit of persuasion. I made a cock up of the smokebox, opening out the slots where the 'wings' go to accept the interior former, except that the former doesn't go into the slots, they are merely a cut to allow the flair. So the remedy was to solder in some 0.6mm copper wire in to the gap to replace what I'd taken away and clean it up. The boiler took quite a lot of work as there are several inset cut outs and these are created by layers of etchings soldered in place internally. At least all the fittings can be soldered on from the inside. This is something that the one piece DJH boiler rather lacks, the cut outs for the clacks being under represented.

 

There's been some hefty filing in places, 'cos things sort of fit in most cases, but not always. I don't mind that, it just takes a bit more care in the assembly and it is a fascinating prototype, one I'd never build for myself. The instructions are comprehensive almost amounting to a small book and I am following them as there are several places where one could go off on completely the wrong course...

 

I've placed the smokebox, boiler and firebox together for the photo, but the firebox/boiler interface is going to be 'interesting' to get right and neat... that is the next job, hopefully Heyside, new bike and good weather will put that task off for a bit...

 

[dibateg]

Relationships can be tricky and getting the cab/firebox and running plate altogether and correctly positioned is critical. BR Standard cabs are always difficult, because of the multitude of angles. So the boiler/firebox join has to be right before I can make up the front of the cab. So a first fit has been made and it looks quite impressive sat on the frames, but there is a way to go yet.

 

 

The cab is loosely sat on the frames, there was a lot of manipulation with folding bars and rollers to get anywhere near the right shape. I got to the point yesterday when it was time to go and do something else.. POR today.

 

[ozzyo]

It does look like you have a way to go yet, as the bottom part of the ash pan has to fit between the frames! So that the bottom of the firebox fits on to the shaped part of the frames.

OzzyO.

 

PS. out of interest what is the gap between the frames, as the 9Fs and some more of the standards had less than the normal 4'1" and had the frames above the centre line of the axle box.  

Edited August 28, 2015 by ozzyo

[Dave Holt]

OzzyO isn't quite right about the boiler position. It is true that the inner section of the ash pan fitted between the frames, but the bottom of the firebox did not sit down on top of the frames. There was a gap of 9 to 12 inches (sorry, don't have the exact dimension) and the outer parts of the ash pan sloped down at a fairly shallow angle, all as illustrated on the attached drawing. The problem of getting a suitable ash pan design was crucial in the decision to go for a 2-10-0 rather than a 2-8-2.

 

 

As OzzyO says, the frames on these locos were only 3' - 21/4" apart and 11/4" thick.

 

Dave.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Dave Holt

[dibateg]

Thanks guys - useful info and yes more fettling as I think the ashpan is currently the same width as the frames....

 

So after a day - the smokebox, boiler and firebox are all one now. I had to shorten the boiler by about 2mm and adjust the angle of the smokebox. I couldn't get on with the half etched boiler bands, they looked awful, just too thick. So these are slightly thinned Slater phosphor bronze. They are slightly too wide but look far better with half the profile of the etched ones. Its all just chucked together here on the shelf, so nothing is lined up properly yet, but it's going in the right direction.

 

Edited August 28, 2015 by dibateg

[Horsetan]

.....PS. out of interest what is the gap between the frames, as the 9Fs and some more of the standards had less than the normal 4'1" and had the frames above the centre line of the axle box.

The 9Fs, Clans, Britannias and the DoG all had frames spaced at 3'2.25"

[ozzyo]

So on the model the gap between the frames should be 22.3mm.

 

OzzyO.

[Horsetan]

...or about 13mm in 4mm scale.

[Dave Holt]

From an appearance point of view, I would think it's the width across the outside of the frames that is more relevant to a model.

Dave.