West Kirby Town: narrow gauge is coming to town.

[Dmudriver]

Edit the first post and then select "Use Full Editor" (at the bottom) this should then allow you to change the title

 

Thanks, beast, for that. I've tried doing as you've suggested and it doesn't work: Clicking on "edit" on the first post gives no reaction whatsoever. I've found a thread elsewhere on RMweb about this, so I'll go back to that later.

 

Thanks again for the suggestion, though.

 

Rod

[Jon Fitness]

To cut a pretty long story short, the culprit was the insulation between the axle and wheel of one of the motor bogie axles. It was a whisp of smoke that gave it away!! There was even flame, too!! That is the first time that I can recall, in all my years of railway modelling, of having that problem. What caused it, I haven't a clue!! The insulation had broken away slightly and it was there that the flame and smoke were appearing - not only on 16v ac, but also on 12v dc!! The unit had been behaving a bit erratically for a week or two, so maybe that was the problem. I'll give it a proper test when the lights are refitted.

 

Hi Rod. Sounds a bit spectacular! Now this is something that has worried me about DCC for a while. This is since I saw a pic of a model wagon that had melted plastic axleboxes and W irons at both ends of one axle. The owner claimed it was a hotbox caused by a lack of lube and a long running session. TBH I can't see that happening but if (as I suspect) it was a slight short that was insufficient to trip out the power supply and it had happened in some hidden sidings....slowly heating up/melting/setting on fire ...on a wooden base board...on a massive layout in an expensive purpose built railway room....

Doesn't bear thinking about...

Jon F.

[Dmudriver]

Hi Rod. Sounds a bit spectacular! Now this is something that has worried me about DCC for a while. This is since I saw a pic of a model wagon that had melted plastic axleboxes and W irons at both ends of one axle. The owner claimed it was a hotbox caused by a lack of lube and a long running session. TBH I can't see that happening but if (as I suspect) it was a slight short that was insufficient to trip out the power supply and it had happened in some hidden sidings....slowly heating up/melting/setting on fire ...on a wooden base board...on a massive layout in an expensive purpose built railway room....

Doesn't bear thinking about...

Jon F.

 

It's a fair point you make, John. I know a lot of our Club members are very wary of DCC and, as a result, jump at any opportunity to run it down. So I'm not making this too public!!! We did have an old Lima loco that we used as a track tester, which got left on the DCC track (switched on) for about 6 hours and that burnt the motor out!! Even though it was a very old motor, the incident did reinforce peoples' prejudices.

 

That's why I tested the wheel and axle on dc as well as ac: as I said, I got the smoke and flame on 12v dc. I'm not convinced that DCC is any more dangerous than dc, but do understand the point you make. I have to admit, too, that I always turn the power off when I leave the shed for a while - maybe that's a subconscious suspicion about it??!! But then, I did the same when it was dc, so maybe it's just a wariness about electricity generally!!

 

It's something to keep our eyes on.

 

Rod

[Dmudriver]

Hi all.

 

I've had a bit of a play an operating session today and I've learnt a few lessons!!! Namely:

 

1 It isn't really sensible to operate a garden railway when the temperature is hovering between 0 and 5 degrees C, however sunny it is and however blue the sky is and however many thermals and hats you've got on!!! You do start to feel the cold!!

 

2 It's time to move to automatic couplings: not just because my fingers were cold (!!) but because I can't see the coupling hooks very well - and that's not made easier by having corridor coaches and corridor NPCS. Dinghams would seem to be favourite - mainly because they can be used with stock fitted with 3-link or screw couplings. However, any advice would be appreciated.

 

3 I must press on with the new pointwork. That which I had made is just unreliable. Stock which doesn't derail thumps and bangs over it and I just can't trust it - I have to watch every train as it goes over. However, I'm thinking about having Peco curved turnouts on the curved trailing crossover and using surplus Peco points to replace the yard ones. I know I'm going back on my original intentions, but I want reliable running!! Only then will I ballast the track and fit the signals and then I can get on with the scenery. It's so frustrating having had the signals made and them still sitting in a box, rather than being operational on the layout.

 

4 I must draw up a sequence of operations. I was going to say "timetable" but I think sequence covers it better - at least for the moment. So, I need to start with the 4 x Mark 1s, the steam special and a couple of locos in the fiddle yard. Then see how it goes from there: I can see myself moving little bits of paper around on a plan of the layout to get the best use of the platforms and sidings!!

 

There's a couple of little immediate jobs to do then it's on to the C&L pointwork.

 

I did take a couple of pics and I've put them in, just to liven up the wordiness of the message! The first is of a couple of DMUs on the stabling point ready to start work. Both 108s: the one on the right still needs the handrails on the cab front and the driver of the one on the left is just about to switch the lights from red to white!! The one on the right has a bit of a lean - that is one of the little jobs referred to and will be attended to shortly!

 

 

The second shows a busy time at the station: 2 dmus in platform 2 for Birkenhead and Chester, the 33 and Mark 1s in platform 1 for Crewe and BIrmingham, and a parcels train for Moreton in the sidings. The 03 shunter waits in siding 2 for its next job and the inspection saloon is stabled in the DMU stabling point. Incidentally, where this is stabled is right in the way of coupling up a loco to a train in the platforms - more support for automatic couplings!!

 

 

More soon. Any comments on automatic couplings will be gratefully received!

 

Rod

 

EDit: I've only just noticed that the 108 buffers are different sizes!! No, I'm not going to change them!!

Edited December 1, 2012 by Dmudriver

[Dmudriver]

Morning all!

 

You may have noticed that the thread has moved!! Andy Y has moved it for me from the Layout Topics forum to the 7mm+ modelling forum as I felt what I'm doing now is more appropriate in the latter.

 

I've made more progress this week - mainly on the pointwork. I decided after my last post that the new points were the priority really. Much as I enjoy building the vans, I do need a reliable layout to run everything on. So van 3 (75% finished) and van 4 (10%) are on the back burner for now.

 

I finished the first point last night and ran a couple of bogies through it and all is well - well, there is one little problem (see below) - but it won't affect the running. I've attached 3 photos: the first is a general view of the completed point (and a bit of my work bench!!):

 

 

The boxes marked R, L and Slide are for the chairs. I've tried to follow prototype practice - as I understand it, anyway - and as the pointwork is bi-directional, I've aimed to have alternate chairs. I've not always managed it, but that was the aim. Unless you look closely, you can't really notice. What you can't see on the pic is the fan that I use to blow the Butanone fumes away from me when I'm working. They are strong!!! As an aside, I bought a new bottle of Butanone with the point kits, and I can't find it. I've put it "somewhere safe" and it's so safe it's disappeared. I'll buy another and then it will turn up!!

 

The second pic is an overhead view of the point. I've used narrow copperclad for the tie bars. I had ordered some of JLTRT's but they only arrived this morning and I wanted to get finished last night. As it happens, I'm quite happy with the copperclad.

 

 

I've soldered the wire to the frog but I don't think I really needed to - I'll leave it off the next ones and solder it on when the points are laid - which is my normal practice, anyway.

 

The "problem" is at the tie bar end of the straight switch blade. You can't easily notice it on this pic but what I have done is to start the straight planing section just a little too close to the heel end of the point. The result is that the switch blade creates a slight gauge narrowing. The very cruel close-up below shows what I mean:

 

 

The stock rail should have been about a sleeper's width to the left. It will be on the next ones!! However, it's no real running problem. I have a couple of vehicles with some strangely profiled wheels which will just not run at all over the existing pointwork. The wheels lift slightly at this narrower point but nowhere near enough to derail them. Heljan wheels are fine. It's just a bit annoying - and maybe a bit finicky - but I do like to get things right!!

 

So, that's it for now. The parts for point 2 are on the work desk and I'll start it when I've fitted a sound chip and speakers to a Class 45 for a friend. More soon.

 

Rod

Edited December 8, 2012 by Dmudriver

[Jon Fitness]

Morning all!

 

You may have noticed that the thread has moved!! Andy Y has moved it for me from the Layout Topics forum to the 7mm+ modelling forum as I felt what I'm doing now is more appropriate in the latter.

 

I've made more progress this week - mainly on the pointwork. I decided after my last post that the new points were the priority really. Much as I enjoy building the vans, I do need a reliable layout to run everything on. So van 3 (75% finished) and van 4 (10%) are on the back burner for now.

 

I finished the first point last night and ran a couple of bogies through it and all is well - well, there is one little problem (see below) - but it won't affect the running. I've attached 3 photos: the first is a general view of the completed point (and a bit of my work bench!!):

 

 

The boxes marked R, L and Slide are for the chairs. I've tried to follow prototype practice - as I understand it, anyway - and as the pointwork is bi-directional, I've aimed to have alternate chairs. I've not always managed it, but that was the aim. Unless you look closely, you can't really notice. What you can't see on the pic is the fan that I use to blow the Butanone fumes away from me when I'm working. They are strong!!! As an aside, I bought a new bottle of Butanone with the point kits, and I can't find it. I've put it "somewhere safe" and it's so safe it's disappeared. I'll buy another and then it will turn up!!

 

The second pic is an overhead view of the point. I've used narrow copperclad for the tie bars. I had ordered some of JLTRT's but they only arrived this morning and I wanted to get finished last night. As it happens, I'm quite happy with the copperclad.

 

 

I've soldered the wire to the frog but I don't think I really needed to - I'll leave it off the next ones and solder it on when the points are laid - which is my normal practice, anyway.

 

The "problem" is at the end of the straight tie bar. You can't easily notice it on this pic but what I have done is to start the straight planing section just a little too close to the heel end of the point. The result is that the switch blade creates a slight gauge narrowing. The very cruel close-up below shows what I mean:

 

 

The stock rail should have been about a sleeper's width to the left. It will be on the next ones!! However, it's no real running problem. I have a couple of vehicles with some strangely profiled wheels which will just not run at all over the existing pointwork. The wheels lift slightly at this narrower point but nowhere near enough to derail them. Heljan wheels are fine. It's just a bit annoying - and maybe a bit finicky - but I do like to get things right!!

 

So, that's it for now. The parts for point 2 are on the work desk and I'll start it when I've fitted a sound chip and speakers to a Class 45 for a friend. More soon.

 

Rod

 

Hi Rod,

Nice looking point there and if it solves your running problems, even better. I usually forgive my layouts visual shortcomings as long as it runs well. I'm not brave enough to attempt track building but I have been given a couple of Marcway points to mend with a view to use on my bit of the layout. My preference would be to solder the wires to the points first as they are on the bench. I admit that drilling holes in the baseboard to feed them through would have to be accurate but it helps you to hide them!

Your reference to Dinghams caught my attention! I have a bit of experience with them. They are pretty good for wagons as minimal modifications are required; they just fit where the 3 links go but I would recommend tougher springs and/or less movement through the buffer beams.

Bogie vehicles and diesel locos, depending on how tight your reverse curves are, may require the couplings to be fitted to the bogies and to swivel with them. This unfortunately precludes any hanging pipework being fitted to the bufferbeams but you may be ok with conventional mounting of the couplings if your curves are not too tight.

I use permanent magnets to uncouple purely for simplicity but electro magnets may suit you better.

Dinghams are ideal for terminus working and I have a hook and loop on each end of the locos and a plain hook at each end of a fixed rake of coaches. At a pinch a Dingdong will just about couple to a conventional 3 link/screw coupler and the hook part of a dingham will accept a shackle or 3 link so they are a good compromise...as long as you don't mind the appearance of them!!

Jon F.

[deltic17]

Just to comment - what a brilliant modern image O guage layout this is - 1st time I've come across the thread - I see it's recently moved here - very inspirational. I will follow with interest.....

[alant]

Hi Rod,

 

Only just discovered this one myself as well. Will now follow with interest.

 

Alan.

[Dmudriver]

Hi Rod,

Nice looking point there and if it solves your running problems, even better. I usually forgive my layouts visual shortcomings as long as it runs well. I'm not brave enough to attempt track building but I have been given a couple of Marcway points to mend with a view to use on my bit of the layout. My preference would be to solder the wires to the points first as they are on the bench. I admit that drilling holes in the baseboard to feed them through would have to be accurate but it helps you to hide them!

Your reference to Dinghams caught my attention! I have a bit of experience with them. They are pretty good for wagons as minimal modifications are required; they just fit where the 3 links go but I would recommend tougher springs and/or less movement through the buffer beams.

Bogie vehicles and diesel locos, depending on how tight your reverse curves are, may require the couplings to be fitted to the bogies and to swivel with them. This unfortunately precludes any hanging pipework being fitted to the bufferbeams but you may be ok with conventional mounting of the couplings if your curves are not too tight.

I use permanent magnets to uncouple purely for simplicity but electro magnets may suit you better.

Dinghams are ideal for terminus working and I have a hook and loop on each end of the locos and a plain hook at each end of a fixed rake of coaches. At a pinch a Dingdong will just about couple to a conventional 3 link/screw coupler and the hook part of a dingham will accept a shackle or 3 link so they are a good compromise...as long as you don't mind the appearance of them!!

Jon F.

 

Hi Jon.

 

Thanks for your comments. I've just fixed the sleepers for point 2 onto the double sided tape!! Can't keep away from it at the moment!!

 

I've just got a couple of queries on your experiences with Dinghams. How tight is too tight for reverse curves that cause trouble with the couplings? Mine will be mainly the B6 points that I am building now. The reverse curves are mainly in the station throat, although there is one in the fiddle yard. The B6 point, as I understand it, is about 7'6" to 8'0" radius: is that too tight? The fiddle yard one is basically 2 Peco points.

 

Also, how obvious are they? I've seen the odd one or two and I don't remember them being too intrusive - paticularly if they are blackened. Have you any photos at all?

 

I plan (if I go ahead) having the hook and loop at one end only of locos and a hook at the other: the layout being end to end the locos wouldn't be reversed anyway. If I use them on either "Apethorne Junction" or "Oldham King Street Parcels" they wouldn't be turned either. The Mark 1 coaches will be a fixed rake with Dinghams at the outer ends only (I've got Kadees within the rake). The parcels stock will have the Dinghams, but the DMus and the steam special won't. The only 4-wheel stock on the layout will be the 5 ex-Insulfish parcels vans!!

 

Finally, do permanent magnets uncouple stock if it's being pulled? I would assume not, but it's best to ask and be sure!!

 

Rod

[Dmudriver]

Deltic17 and alant.

 

Thanks for your comments: glad you like the layout. I've just had a look at your thread, Alan, and the difference between our layouts is tremendous!! I'd love the detail you've put into yours: it'll be years before I get to that stage!! Fortunately I have a friend who's said he'll build the station and surrounding buildings so that will speed the process up a bit. Buildings and scenery has never been my forte, but we'll see what happens when I've got the track sorted and the layout running properly.

 

Rod

[Jon Fitness]

Hi Jon.

 

Thanks for your comments. I've just fixed the sleepers for point 2 onto the double sided tape!! Can't keep away from it at the moment!!

 

I've just got a couple of queries on your experiences with Dinghams. How tight is too tight for reverse curves that cause trouble with the couplings? Mine will be mainly the B6 points that I am building now. The reverse curves are mainly in the station throat, although there is one in the fiddle yard. The B6 point, as I understand it, is about 7'6" to 8'0" radius: is that too tight? The fiddle yard one is basically 2 Peco points.

 

Also, how obvious are they? I've seen the odd one or two and I don't remember them being too intrusive - paticularly if they are blackened. Have you any photos at all?

 

I plan (if I go ahead) having the hook and loop at one end only of locos and a hook at the other: the layout being end to end the locos wouldn't be reversed anyway. If I use them on either "Apethorne Junction" or "Oldham King Street Parcels" they wouldn't be turned either. The Mark 1 coaches will be a fixed rake with Dinghams at the outer ends only (I've got Kadees within the rake). The parcels stock will have the Dinghams, but the DMus and the steam special won't. The only 4-wheel stock on the layout will be the 5 ex-Insulfish parcels vans!!

 

Finally, do permanent magnets uncouple stock if it's being pulled? I would assume not, but it's best to ask and be sure!!

 

Rod

 

Right... our layout has 2 terminii and a continuous run so it suits us to have a hook and loop at each end of the diesels and smaller steam locos. The larger ones are turned on shed. The fixed rakes have just a hook at each end so that they always present the right type of coupling whatever way round the locos and stock are.

Near enough all our points are peco but some of our tighter curves are way down towards 5ft or even 4ft6" in the lower goods yard. When the back end of the locos were swapping direction before the coaches did, they were dragging themselves or the stock off the track. Entirely cured by bogie mounting the couplings. 2 of our tank engines can't have bogie mounted couplings (Fairburn and Stanier 2-6-4s) and have to be carefully driven through crossovers. I widened the loop on the back of the Stanier 2-6-4 which worked..sort of but it doesn't look brilliant.

Permanent magnets work quite well providing you have smooth running locos! The couplings will hold under tension over them unless the loco hesitates at the wrong time...Shunting seperately fitted wagons is quite satisfying as the couplings generally stay together in compression over permanent magnets, necessitating a stop at the right place and a gentle ease back to release the tension. Once uncoupled you can also propel wagons beyond the magnet and reverse leaving them further up the siding.

I'll sort out some more pics for you but there are some here and here in an old blog and here where I fitted some to my Ixion saddle tank.

 

Cheers

JF

[alant]

Deltic17 and alant.

 

Thanks for your comments: glad you like the layout. I've just had a look at your thread, Alan, and the difference between our layouts is tremendous!! I'd love the detail you've put into yours: it'll be years before I get to that stage!! Fortunately I have a friend who's said he'll build the station and surrounding buildings so that will speed the process up a bit. Buildings and scenery has never been my forte, but we'll see what happens when I've got the track sorted and the layout running properly.

 

Rod

 

Hi Rod,

 

Thanks for your comments, I'm sure things will progress quickly once you get the basic landscaping in place. I quite enjoy making the buildings actually but have to be in the right frame of mind.

 

Alan.

[Dmudriver]

Right... our layout has 2 terminii and a continuous run so it suits us to have a hook and loop at each end of the diesels and smaller steam locos. The larger ones are turned on shed. The fixed rakes have just a hook at each end so that they always present the right type of coupling whatever way round the locos and stock are.

Near enough all our points are peco but some of our tighter curves are way down towards 5ft or even 4ft6" in the lower goods yard. When the back end of the locos were swapping direction before the coaches did, they were dragging themselves or the stock off the track. Entirely cured by bogie mounting the couplings. 2 of our tank engines can't have bogie mounted couplings (Fairburn and Stanier 2-6-4s) and have to be carefully driven through crossovers. I widened the loop on the back of the Stanier 2-6-4 which worked..sort of but it doesn't look brilliant.

Permanent magnets work quite well providing you have smooth running locos! The couplings will hold under tension over them unless the loco hesitates at the wrong time...Shunting seperately fitted wagons is quite satisfying as the couplings generally stay together in compression over permanent magnets, necessitating a stop at the right place and a gentle ease back to release the tension. Once uncoupled you can also propel wagons beyond the magnet and reverse leaving them further up the siding.

I'll sort out some more pics for you but there are some here and here in an old blog and here where I fitted some to my Ixion saddle tank.

 

Cheers

JF

 

Thanks for the reply, Jon. I've looked at your other threads and they've convinced me to give Dinghams a go! But, it will be after I've finished the pointwork - I don't want distracting from that!! I've been working out that I'll have to move pretty well all of the Tortoise motors when I put the new points in as the new ones are about 2" longer than the existing. However, I can't start yet as the spacing will all depend on the single slip which will be the last one I build: that will go in first and then the other points will fit around it. I need to maintain the layout of the main lines and the platform roads, otherwise I will spoil the effect of the layout.

 

Plenty to do!! (Although I didn't get much done yesterday, having gone to Goodison Park and then celebrating an unbelievable win for the Toffees!!! COYB!)

 

Rod

[Dmudriver]

Hi all.

 

Point no.2 is now finished! I've removed the copper clad stretcher bars from no.1 and replaced then with JLTRT bars I have fitted to no.2. I got help and encouragement from a couple of other members on a thread I started asking if these stretcher bars are compatible with Heljan wheels: the consensus is "Yes".

 

I had problems with insulating the 2 parts as they are made of brass, but solved it by sandwiching a thin piece of plastic strip between and glueing them together with epoxy.

 

The first pic is the 2 together:

 

 

The second is a close up of the JLTRT stretcher bars:

 

 

The final one is of the straight switch blade of the 2nd point which lies much closer to the stock rail than the first point I built - purely by moving the start of the straight planing a few mm towards the toe of the point:

 

 

Point no.3 is itching to get out of the bag and onto the worktop, but I've some Christmas cards to finish and some presents to buy first!!

 

More soon.

 

Rod

Edited December 15, 2012 by Dmudriver

[David Siddall]

Looks like you've thinned the ends of the blades Rod... and included a 'set' in the curved stock rail (which I didn't realise should be there until too late for my first two turnouts!). Nice, nice, nice... in fact so nice I might just have to get some JLTRT tie bars for my next two :-)

 

David

 

PS: I'm guessing that one of your DMUs is Westdale and one is Easybuild? You couldn't post a three-quarter view of the Westdale could you (...if you've got one that is?). I'm now pondering whether attempting to modify an Easybuild 121 to get the side profile closer to prototype is the way to go?

Edited December 16, 2012 by David Siddall

[Dmudriver]

Looks like you've thinned the ends of the blades Rod... and included a 'set' in the curved stock rail (which I didn't realise should be there until too late for my first two turnouts!). Nice, nice, nice... in fact so nice I might just have to get some JLTRT tie bars for my next two :-)

 

David

 

PS: I'm guessing that one of your DMUs is Westdale and one is Easybuild? You couldn't post a three-quarter view of the Westdale could you (...if you've got one that is?). I'm now pondering whether attempting to modify an Easybuild 121 to get the side profile closer to prototype is the way to go?

 

HI David.

 

The filings you can see weren't from the point blade: they're from one of the JLTRT bars - I'd overdone the solder which was being hit by wheel flanges!! I hadn't noticed them until I cropped and enlarged the photo!!

 

Re the DMUs. You're right - Westdale left, Easybuild right (I still haven't put the handrails on yet!!) Some pics of the Westdale one as requested: the first taken on the club's exhibition-layout-that-was (it's now been retired): DTCL leading.

 

 

Second one also on that layout:

 

 

The third on the builder's workbench:

 

 

I raised the bogie sides a bit after I'd taken delivery as I thought they looked too low.- although the buffers (and therefore the underframe) were at the right height.

 

The model represents the unit that is preserved on the Llangollen Railway and is the one I had my Driver Experience course on, which led to joining the Group and thence eventually qualifying for DMU driving 12 years ago. I've driven it often in that time!! Hope the pics are useful.

 

Rod

[Softvark]

Points looking very good, Rod!

 

Julian

[David Siddall]

Thanks for the pic's Rod, much appreciated. I think that confirms several reasons for me to head down the Westdale route.

 

David

[Dmudriver]

Thanks for the pic's Rod, much appreciated. I think that confirms several reasons for me to head down the Westdale route.

 

David

 

When are you planning to set off on the route, David? And will there be photos on the way?

 

Rod

[David Siddall]

Well.... I'm thinking that Westdale were at the Bristol Show last year Rod and so hopefully will be again in January. And I suspect there will inevitably be photos as it'll be my first attempt at motive power kit-building in 7-mil and therefore the outcome will almost certainly be enhanced if at some point in the process I allow my friends to point out that I've stuck something important on upside down ;-)

Twixt now and then I've set myself the challenge of looking at as many photos (prototype and model) as I can lay my hands on because I'm not convinced that even Westdale's cab-ends are sufficiently 121-ish for my tastes and I need to work out what it is that's bugging me about them. I have a feeling that the upper section is a bit too vertical as cast and that the corner radii of the cab-front windows may also need reducing. I further suspect that some builders have had a bit of a battle with the join between the top of the cab front and the roof – I've seen a couple of models that seem to have what I can only describe as 'eaves' – if I've got good references and a clear picture in my mind of what things 'should' look like I'm hoping I'll be able to produce a reasonable representation.

Meantime I've planning to build a traverser (third time lucky?), to comple and wire my first full-length run of track (14' turns out to be rather more time-consuming than I'd imagined since I'm hand-building it all apart from in the fiddle yard), powering at least one point and maybe even finishing that blessed brake van!

A 'to do' list that some of the more prodigious modellers on here could probably rattle through on Boxing Day afternoon, but for me... well, we'll have to see ;-)

All the best... David

Edited December 24, 2012 by David Siddall

[Jon Fitness]

As long as Rod doesn't mind, here's my take on Arrivas pet bubble car 121032.

Westdale with a few added extras. Extra window each side, etched window surrounds, Peter Clark lights front and back and door interlock lights, Brass door handles, etched hinges from Easybuild and some Custom transfers from Frank Warner.

 

 

Cheers

Jon F.

Edited December 19, 2012 by Jon Fitness

[Dmudriver]

Well.... I'm thinking that Westdale were at the Bristol Show last year Rod and so hopefully will be again in January. And I suspect there will inevitably be photos as it'll be my first attempt at motive power kit-building in 7-mil and therefore the outcome will almost certainly be enhanced if at some point in the process I allow my friends to point out that I've stuck something important on upside down ;-)

 

Twixt now and then I've set myself the challenge of looking at as many photos (prototype and model) as I can lay my hands on because I'm not convinced that even Westdale's cab-ends are sufficiently 121-ish for my tastes and I need to work out what it is that's bugging me about them. I have a feeling that the upper section is a bit too vertical as cast and that the corner radii of the cab-front windows may also need reducing. I further suspect that some builders have had a bit of a battle with the join between the top of the cab front and the roof – I've seen a couple of models that seem to have what I can only describe as 'eaves' – if I've got good references and a clear picture in my mind of what things 'should' look like I'm hoping I'll be able to produce a reasonable representation.

 

Meantime I've set myself the challenge of building a traverser (third time lucky?), completing and wiring my first full-length run of track (14' turns out to be rather more time-consuming than I'd imagined since I'm hand-building it all apart from in the fiddle yard), powering at least one point and maybe even finishing that blessed brake van!

 

A 'to do' list that some of the more prodigious modellers on here could probably rattle through on Boxing Day afternoon, but for me... well, we'll have to see ;-)

 

All the best... David

 

Hi David

 

I understand what you mean about the cab-ends. Comparing my 2 108s in the photo in the post above above does show differences. One thing I do think, though, is the effect that the headcode box can have on the look of the front end. The size of them as manufactured and where they are placed by the modeller does alter the look.

 

I did have a look on Google for 121s and came up with these photos of the prototype of Jon's model!! Hope it's useful.

 

http://www.urban75.o...rdiff-bay-line/

 

And no, Jon, I don't mind you putting that pic of 121032 on: DMUs are relevant to my layout - though maybe not as modern as yours!! I do like it, though: how's it powered?

 

David, I do know what you mean about "to do" lists: I've got one on my desk here dated 18/10/12 entitled "Stock jobs to do" - 19 items - only 6 done so far!!

 

Rod

[David Siddall]

Hi David

 

I understand what you mean about the cab-ends ...One thing I do think, though, is the effect that the headcode box can have on the look of the front end. The size of them as manufactured and where they are placed by the modeller does alter the look.

 

I did have a look on Google for 121s and came up with these photos of the prototype of Jon's model!! Hope it's useful.

 

http://www.urban75.o...rdiff-bay-line/

 

Great reference pic's Rod and much appreciated – they confirm everything I've been thinking and I've not seen them before. And I certainly agree with you about the roof boxes!

 

Looking at all the photos carefully I feel that trying to get the front edge of of the cab roofs on a Westdale model to sit back flush with the top edge of the cab fronts might be worth a shot. I don't want to detract from anybody's efforts (if I could produce something even a fraction as good I'd be very, very happy) however even Brian Daniel's pair of 121s (photos here and here) show a similar degree of overhang in that area to your model and to Jon's. This suggests to me that perhaps there's something about the kit as it comes which leads builders in this direction?

 

And Jon, that's a superb model of 121032. I've actually traveled to and from 'the 'Bay' on the real thing. Sadly though, as I recall, it didn't stay as pristine as in the photos Rod found or as you've modeled it for very long after introduction (particularly internally ;-)

 

David

Edited December 21, 2012 by David Siddall

[DavidB]

This suggests to me that perhaps there's something about the kit as it comes which leads builders in this direction?

 

I agree David - the Westdale attempt at the Derby standard GRP roof domes is not the best. The biggest error is that the angle of the downward curve towards the front is far too sharp, giving a hunched appearance, while the guttering is too pronounced and the whole thing sits slightly too far forward. Getting the castings closer to the real thing involves removing large amounts of whitemetal from the rear, the front and the top. The best photo that I've found to help with this is on page 12 of Bradford Barton's album DMUs Countrywide. This has a large side profile view of the roof dome, showing that the downward curve towards the front starts level with the rear edge of the driver's side window - ie almost twice the distance from the front compared to the Westdale casting. Adjusting for this produces a much gentler and more rounded shape; shaving the excess whitemetal from the rear of the casting then allows it to sit in the correct location, and replacing the guttering with brass or plastic strip helps to improve the front appearance.

 

DMUs are a bit tricky in 7mm - the body side profiles are another issue, with the Westdale lightweight 108 lacking the gentle Mark 1 profile and looking like a heavyweight ScR 107 because the aluminium shells have been pressed to the wrong shape, and the opposite being the case with the EasyBuild suburbans, which have been incorrectly moulded to the Mark 1 profile. It's all a bit like 4mm modelling back in the 70s when MTK kits were the only answer for modelling most DMU classes, so I have maximum respect for 7mm modellers who manage to produce such great-looking results from these kits.

 

David

[Jon Fitness]

And no, Jon, I don't mind you putting that pic of 121032 on: DMUs are relevant to my layout - though maybe not as modern as yours!! I do like it, though: how's it powered?

 

Rod

 

Hi Rod, The powerbogie is Westdales standard nickle silver fold up job with a mashima motor driving both axles (worm and gear both ends) It picks up on all wheels (HOG steel wheels) and luckily it runs very smooth and quietly!

 

Jon F.