mikemeg Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 We are now into a Dugglebys reunion thread !- Remember the shop,you and Ken Marsden well,and the Alex Dock J72s tearing over Botanic Crossing heading towards Dairycoates lunchtime Saturdays.Crossing threads a little-more of Asselby has survived than your box- the station building is in my loft. Just out of curiosity, your username - tranby. That is a place just outside Hull and was the name of my house at School - Anlaby Primary. Is this coincidence or are you from/still living in that part of th world? Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tranby Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Some forty years ago(is it that long?) lived in Tranby Lane for ten years,before that, Willerby !Still regard it as home,before moving to cider country. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micknich2003 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Some forty years ago(is it that long?) lived in Tranby Lane for ten years,before that, Willerby !Still regard it as home,before moving to cider country. Here are a few pictures, just to remind you of home. I still see from my front garden trains on the H&B. Best Wishes, Mick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 Some forty years ago(is it that long?) lived in Tranby Lane for ten years,before that, Willerby !Still regard it as home,before moving to cider country. I lived in Anlaby until around forty years ago - small world; though I now live in North Yorkshire, near Easingwold. So the next job, on the A6 chassis, is to build the motor housing inside the mainframes. On this model I have used a Comet 50 : 1 gearbox which was in the bits and pieces box. In order to hold this gearbox central on the driven axle, I pack out the insides of the mainframes - invisible when the body is on - with various thicknesses of plasticard, until the gearbox is a snug, though not tight, fit. The driven axle should still revolve freely while slotting through both the mainframe and gearbox bearings. I'd originally hoped to use a mashima 1626 but there is not enough room for this if I fit a flywheel, so a Mashima 1620 has been used. With the motor terminals tilted to their maximum extent, I can just get a 15 mm flywheel inside the body, without fouling the backhead, so that's the drive combination which is being used. So if I said an A6 with a 7P power rating, then perhaps it'll only manage 6P. Should be enough for what it will need to haul. The plasticard spacers, along the top of the mainframes, will also allow a pick up plate to be attached allowing pick up from the tops of the driving wheels, either side, again completely invisible when the body in mounted on the chassis. Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 So now comes the first of those magical moments (or perhaps not!) when the body first sits on its wheels and mainframes, even if I haven't added all of the wheels yet. So does the thing sit level? Does it sit at the correct ride height? Does everything attached to the frames sit inside the body? If yes, then proceed to go, collect ....... Yes, all seems fine so now on to use some of those lovely nickel silver etched parts which Arthur supplied. The brown paint, along some of the seams and joints, is just my way of checking the fit of these joints, and is applied so thinly that it will not show under the first coat of primer. Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 And when I finish the A6 and J73, there's also another T1 to finish, which will be 69912. When I built the A6 body, I also built a second T1 body in the same sequence of building. The T1 is the rightmost model of these two. Will I ever finish building these ex-NER locos - probably not? Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 .... Will I ever finish building these ex-NER locos - probably not? Is a project ever truly finished? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougN Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Thats because the more you learn as you go along the more you want to do n each one. I have 3 coaches....1 is painted...2 is part painted with more details....3 chassis and main body done but bogies are now being sprung rather than compensated..... let alone the locos which are sitting awaiting finishing... oh how I would love the Q6 to be finished.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 Is a project ever truly finished? Oh now that is a really interesting question. Many years ago, when working for a large Computer Manufacturer and Systems Integrator, I looked at why so many IT projects were either over timescale or over budget or, most often, both. Many projects were never completed at all. I won't bore you with the methodology or the two hundred and some page report which ensued but some of the key findings did stick with me :- Definition of what constitutes completion is part of the planning process of any project, before any work is undertaken. Any changes to the project content must, inevitably, affect the completion time and cost but, if they affect the completion criteria, then this is an entirely new project and should/must be replanned. At some point, in every project, the project content must be frozen. No project can accommodate changes throughout the development and implementation phases. It will simply fail. All large projects should be broken up into a number of smaller constituent work packages, for each of which, completion criteria can be defined and achieved. At the completion of each work package, the overall project timescale and cost can be re-estimated, as overall progress proceeds. And these two are the crunchers :- Changes to any project, during development and implementation, will take between one and one hundred times as long and cost between one and one hundred times as much as the same change made at the specification and design stages. At the conclusion of the planning phase, take the timescale estimate and double it; take the cost estimate and double it. Even then the estimates may be wrong but they'll be less wrong. OK you say, so what the hell has all of this to do with making models? Well this project is to build an A6. I don't have a project to build as many ex-NER locos as I can, because of the variables inherent in 'as I can'. I simply have an aspiration to build as many as I can. But the project is/will be A6, then a J73 project, then ... etc. Part of the planning process, for each model (and this is by no means infallible) is to work out from a drawing :- Where will the motor go in relation to the body; on which axle will it be driven? Can I use anything from the bits and pieces box? In short, do some building 'on paper' before the real building begins. I've learned this the hard way by having to re-engineer a few things. Doing some of this stuff once is hard enough; doing the same thing twice is 'difking fucficult'. What level of detail will be adopted and how will this relate to previous models. Clearly we all improve our modelling skills with practice. But if we change the actual level of detail which we adopt, from model to model, then every new model will compromise all of those which went before. So I've tried to establish a 'detailing criteria' for my locomotives, such that this A6 won't force me to consign the T1 or J72 to the cupboard and the next J73 to consign this one to the cupboard. More especially I won't feel the need to go back to previous models and update the level of detail. Finally, and I do this now for all models, is to make an estimate of the overall time to completion. This is often a composite estimate, in that I may estimate the time to build a loco body, which may be the project, and defer from estimating the rest because I know I may build the chassis at a later date. This estimate is not how long will this take but how much effort will be required to do this. If I know I can do twenty hours/week and I estimate a model at around one hundred hours, then I'm not going to do it in three weeks. Chances are I'm not going to do it in five weeks either but it gives me a rough idea of my level of time usage inefficiency, like reading/updating RMWeb, sitting back and 'checking' or drinking the odd glass of Shiraz. Oh bloody big cop-out I hear you say (if you're not bored out of your skulls reading this). Do I do this? Yes, but by a combination of explicit and implicit processes. Has this had any effect? Yes but the most noticable effect is that the chaos, which was my work area, is now much better organised and is actually tidy. And I can still find things! There must be easier ways of achieving an organised working environment, I can hear you say! Oh, and the final thing is always to be realistic. If you know you have an attention span no longer than a month, then don't embark on a project which will take five years, for you'll never ever get anywhere near completion. If your attention span is a month, then plan to do one month projects. Sixty of these one month projects will complete the five year project. There you go; end of this mornings ....... And I still take too long to do things!!!!!!! Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clecklewyke Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 We are now into a Dugglebys reunion thread !- Remember the shop,you and Ken Marsden well,and the Alex Dock J72s tearing over Botanic Crossing heading towards Dairycoates lunchtime Saturdays. Sorry - a "me-too" posting. Ken converted my three rail Duchess of Atholl to two rail. I thought he was a genious, but then, I was only about ten years old! Ian (Back to papier-mache-ing the hill side behind the viaduct on Clecklewyke. Lovely stuff - so tactile and fast.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Pulham Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 oh how I would love the Q6 to be finished.... Hmm........ I have a Q7 that I have the same sentiments for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougN Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Mikemeg, can you explain some (all) of the above to some of the architects I deal with!!!! My hatred is the projects that seem to go on and on. I say that as they change things part way through..... don't design something in the beginning or there is, what I expect now from the left field! Dealing with multi million dollar projects in this way I think some of my buildings finish in spite of me rather than from my input. But this is the life of the construction manager! Actually do you mind if use some of the above I am finding the dicipline to sit down at least 3 times a week if not more you actually get a lot done! Though it doesn't stop the öh I have got the hard bit I'll just go onto some thing else"... My list which I am ashamed of is a Q6 (tender, loco body chassis all built but not running or fully detailed), Black Hawthorn (body painted!) and 3 coachs in different states of completion. I think though the 3 coaches may finish before the loco's. The coaches have my attention at the moment. ALL NER! so that is one thing that is going for me! What I am getting interested by is the lack of tools that I use all the time, scaple, flat file, tweasers, soldering iron,Small drills cutting board, dremel with wire wheel. All the others seem to be nice to haves and do their job when asked. Though the list seems to be a lot shorter than what I would expect Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 ....My list which I am ashamed of is a Q6 (tender, loco body chassis all built but not running or fully detailed), Black Hawthorn (body painted!) and 3 coachs in different states of completion..... *hollow laughter* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium ArthurK Posted January 27, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 27, 2012 Mike on a more serious note (?) can I ask whose wheels you used for the A6? I could only find one suitable wheel in the Gibson list and not being overly worried about the exact number of spokes I used that. It was ihe only one that had a flared boss. My workspace is aways a mess. It starts out fine but the space usable shinks to the minimum that I can possibly work in! ArthurK Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 Mikemeg, can you explain some (all) of the above to some of the architects I deal with!!!! My hatred is the projects that seem to go on and on. I say that as they change things part way through..... don't design something in the beginning or there is, what I expect now from the left field! Dealing with multi million dollar projects in this way I think some of my buildings finish in spite of me rather than from my input. But this is the life of the construction manager! Actually do you mind if use some of the above Doug, Be my guest. This was done twenty years ago but is probably more relevant now than ever; at least relevant in any large project environment. Things take just as long to do but change happens much more frequently and with much greater rapidity. Where'd you find the smiley face that looks like me (though my fork now has four prongs - changed the spec midway through manufacture!)? Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Mike on a more serious note (?) can I ask whose wheels you used for the A6?.... I think Mike has / had a suitable stock of Sharman Wheels before production ceased. You can tell by the moulded-in crankpin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 Mike on a more serious note (?) can I ask whose wheels you used for the A6? I could only find one suitable wheel in the Gibson list and not being overly worried about the exact number of spokes I used that. It was ihe only one that had a flared boss. My workspace is aways a mess. It starts out fine but the space usable shinks to the minimum that I can possibly work in! ArthurK Arthur, The Isinglass drawing gives the prototype wheel as 5' 1 and 1/4" diameter, 16 spoke, with the crankpin in line and an 11" throw. I used Alan Gibson 5' 0" diameter (well within the tyre wear limits), 16 spoke, crankpin in line and they have a 3.3 - 3.5 mm (around 10" to 11") crankpin throw. Alan Gibson Code Number is 4860E for 18.83. The bogie wheels are 12.0 mm, 3' 0" (s/b 3' 1 and 1/4") twelve spoke (this is a characteristic of NER locos, these twelve spoke wheels) again Gibson G4836C The trailing wheels are 14.7mm, 3' 8" (s/b 3' 9 and 1/4") ten spoke; Gibson G4844. So though none of the wheels are exactly correct, they are all within the tolerance of tyre wear (around 2.5" off the nominal diameter, before wheels were re-tyred) for this locomotive type. In fact all wheels are a scale 1 and 1/4" under their nominal, 'new wheel' or 'just re-tyred' diameter. And I still have to censure myself, constantly, if my work space starts to contract through untidiness. It ain't natural, this tidiness. Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 I think Mike has / had a suitable stock of Sharman Wheels before production ceased. You can tell by the moulded-in crankpin. No, these are Alan Gibson wheels. I fitted the crankpins to each one using a simple, home made drilling jig to ensure consistency and squareness. Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 No, these are Alan Gibson wheels..... Dang. They really did look like Sharmans from where I was sitting! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 Dang. They really did look like Sharmans from where I was sitting! Hey, well wherever you're sitting then that's where the model's going to be photographed; Sharman wheels were not half bad. That said, I've always been delighted with Gibson wheels, though they do need careful drilling for the crankpin and careful fitting onto the axle. Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micknich2003 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Sorry - a "me-too" posting. Ken converted my three rail Duchess of Atholl to two rail. I thought he was a genious, but then, I was only about ten years old! Ian (Back to papier-mache-ing the hill side behind the viaduct on Clecklewyke. Lovely stuff - so tactile and fast.) No, I probably did your conversion, but like the bikes and otherthings I did, Ken was always at the front of the que when it came to the "Brownie Points", especialy if the customer was a women. Hard to believe, he was a proper "Ladies Man". Mick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clecklewyke Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 No, I probably did your conversion, but like the bikes and otherthings I did, Ken was always at the front of the que when it came to the "Brownie Points", especialy if the customer was a women. Hard to believe, he was a proper "Ladies Man". Mick. You must have started young! I'm sure I was barely a teenager when my duchess was converted but maybe the memory is failing... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium ArthurK Posted January 27, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 27, 2012 Thanks for the wheel details Mike. I think those were the ones I used. I made a mess of the first crankpin drilling then redrilled, like yourself, usiing a hand made jig. Arthur Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 So the second of those defining (magical if it works first time) moments when the wheels have all been assembled on the frames, gauged and quartered. The coupling rods have had the holes in the journals eased out just a fraction and then been mounted on the crankpins. One crankpin nut has been attached on the middle set of driving wheels so :- Does the chassis revolve smoothly and without binding? Well, not quite! But after opening out the rear set of couplingf rod journals just a tiny bit more, then it does. I normally quarter an x-6-x as a x-4-x first, and then add the final pair of driving wheels. So then the gearwheel is locked onto the driving axle with the grub screw and then power gently applied, does the thing run smoothly and without binding? It does! So now to remove the rods and add the knuckle joint pins and then replace the rods and trim off the excess on the crankpins. Having made so many inside cylinder locomotives, I had a surfeit of the long Alan Gibson crankpins and crankpin sleeves, so decided to use them up on this loco. It did mean reducing the length of the crankpin sleeves, which was done by inserting each sleeve into the rod and then filing the sleeve back to around .005" proud of the rod journal. Now this loco can begin to take its place on Hessle Haven, where it will spend what is left of its working days. Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemeg Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 So on a very gloomy winter's morning, let's try and take an 'ethereal' photograph. Perhaps the last light of evening is fading as this A6, in a serious state of disrepair, passes a much more complete T1. Just imagine what the photos will be when the second T1 is completed, though this is about fifth or sixth on the build programme. The timbering and weathering on that fogman's hut seems to have worked. Cheers Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.