chaz Posted November 12, 2012 Author Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) Soldering is definitely worth having a go at, because it's a hugely useful skill to have in your repertoire and also because, when you do get it right and the solder flashes neatly along that seam in an almost magical fashion, it's tremendously satisfying. My manual skills are somewhat......er......basic. However, having read Jim McGeown's various booklets which can be downloaded from Connoisseur's website, I decided that etched brass looked pretty doable and bought a couple of Jim's wagon kits, a cheap 80W soldering iron (probably overkill, but the general consensus seems to be that more heat than you need is better than less), a roll of 145 solder and a jar of suitable flux. Following Jim's comprehensive instructions everything went together fine. Whilst I wouldn't make any claims to perfection for my first efforts, they are far from scrap and it's amazing what a coat of etch primer will hide . I was sufficiently encouraged that I'm now building one of Jim's LNER Y7s and looking with great interest at Agenoria's new Manning Wardle 0-4-2T as another suitable power unit for a freelance northern light railway. For me, the great thing about etched brass is that it is practically impossible to destroy most of the kit components. I'm a messy git and, when working with plastic and solvents, tend to apply obvious and permanent fingerprints to every finely detailed surface. Great for providing future owners with a means of identifying the model's builder but less good for realism. With brass, that's just not going to happen. I do still have difficulty soldering on whitemetal parts without melting bits of them (no, I wasn't using the 80W at full heat) so Araldite still plays a role. However, I am improving in this regard, especially having become sufficiently enthusiastic about this construction method that I've sprung for a basic Hakko soldering station from DCC Concepts. Not essential at all, but awfully nice to use. I agree with what you say Pat, particularly the bit about it being tremendously satisfying. However there is one warning worth giving. There are a few bad etched brass kits around. Either they don't fit, or are difficult to build because the design is faulty (and often bad kits have worse instructions). I have struggled to finish a few dodgy ones and it was tremendously satisfying to eventually complete them. How is a beginner to know which ones to avoid? I would suggest before buying post a request on the forum - "Anybody built a....". If the purchase is at a show I would also ask the vendor how easy it is to build. The answer may be revealing. If you ask Jim McGowan (Connoisseur Models) how easy a kit of his is to build you will get an honest answer. He will tell you about any tricky bits and offer advice when you need it. A beginner could do a lot worse than start with one of his kits. Chaz Edited November 12, 2012 by chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 12, 2012 Author Share Posted November 12, 2012 As I was making a comparison between the etched brass kit and Slater's plastic one it only seems fair to show a snap of my build of the latter.... The photo was taken before the van got weathered but otherwise it looks good. There is one error in the Slater's kit - any brake van buffs spot it? Chaz 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Siddall Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) As I was making a comparison between the etched brass kit and Slater's plastic one it only seems fair to show a snap of my build of the latter.... The photo was taken before the van got weathered but otherwise it looks good. There is one error in the Slater's kit - any brake van buffs spot it? Chaz That's very nice Chaz... having finally got the chassis of mine flat, square and running smoothly – despite the fact I initially built it banana-shaped – I now hold slightly higher hopes of completing the wretched thing. I've even managed to (not particularly elegantly) solder the handrails on one side without melting gurt holes in it. I used wooden coffee-stirrers to protect the plastic and act as spacers. Oh, and on the subject of errors... in my world if it looks like a brake van, it is a brake van. Life's too short and there seem to be numerous detail variations between individual examples anyway ;-) David ...and thanks for the supportive advice on the subject of soldering gents. it's much appreciated. Edited November 12, 2012 by David Siddall Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 12, 2012 Author Share Posted November 12, 2012 David, thanks for the comments. You say ....on the subject of errors... in my world if it looks like a brake van, it is a brake van. Life's too short and there seem to be numerous detail variations between individual examples anyway..... I have a great deal of sympathy with your view (indeed I intend to leave well alone with my LNER van), however with a modelling project like the kitbash (actually more of a kit-tickle!) it's attention to the fine details that makes the difference. I can best sum up my attitude as - If it's as easy to get it right as wrong then get it right. If you have to compromise then decide for yourself what is acceptable to you; critics can go away. (I cleaned that last bit up). If you find out later that you have made a mistake decide for yourself if you want to rectify it or not. Wrong number of spokes on a loco's wheels? Can you tell when they are revolving? Wrong shade of green? Are you basing your judgement on a colour photo, which was shot on film that (inevitably) had a colour bias, or on the memory of someone who last saw the prototype forty years ago? No valve gear between the frames? Well that boiler isn't nearly full of boiling water either... The ultimate critic stopper is - "Oh, you're right of course. How did you do the one you made?" Ho hum......now it's back to the cobbles for me.......ZZZZZzzzzz Chaz 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatB Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 I agree with what you say Pat, particularly the bit about it being tremendously satisfying. However there is one warning worth giving. There are a few bad etched brass kits around. Either they don't fit, or are difficult to build because the design is faulty (and often bad kits have worse instructions). I have struggled to finish a few dodgy ones and it was tremendously satisfying to eventually complete them. How is a beginner to know which ones to avoid? I would suggest before buying post a request on the forum - "Anybody built a....". If the purchase is at a show I would also ask the vendor how easy it is to build. The answer may be revealing. If you ask Jim McGowan (Connoisseur Models) how easy a kit of his is to build you will get an honest answer. He will tell you about any tricky bits and offer advice when you need it. A beginner could do a lot worse than start with one of his kits. Chaz I've certainly no doubt that there are a few turkeys out there that would put me off etched kits for life if I tried one at my current stage of competence. I went with Connoisseur for my first efforts because of a couple of good write ups on the net and in magazines (Phil Parker's build of the Y7 in the December 08 Railway Modeller springs to mind) and also because I was able to get a good look at the instructions before buying. I'm sure that other manufacturers are equally good but I'm less than certain about which ones. However, having had a couple of qualified successes, I'm less worried about solving the odd problem as it arises. A minor point about the Y7 is that, being an early kit, the instructions supplied are a bit basic for the beginner (ie me). No problem, though, because the much more comprehensive instructions for the very similar "Nellie" starter loco are available for download and provide most of the necessary supplementary information. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 12, 2012 Author Share Posted November 12, 2012 I was lucky Pat. Foolishly ignoring all advice to start with a wagon, my first etched brass kit was a Connoisseur J50 0-6-0T. I reasoned that if I couldn't build a loco then 7mm wasn't for me. The second loco kit I bought was the Walsworth Models J52 saddle tank. Luck? Well, if I had taken on the saddle tank first, as a complete beginner, it would probably have defeated me. Chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 13, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 13, 2012 I presume you were familar with soldering or was the J50 a real baptism of fire. Sink or Swim is a brave policy but I wouldn't recommend it for all. Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Siddall Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 The ultimate critic stopper is - "Oh, you're right of course. How did you do the one you made?" Reminds me of Jonathon Whaley's stock ripost to anyone who grumbled about the colour scheme of his gloriously rainbow-hued Hawker Hunter 'Miss Demeanour' which he registered P-SST (short for Personal Supersonic Transport)... "OK, so what colour's yours?" ;-) Sorry, way OT... grabs coat and departs in haste! David 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) I presume you were familar with soldering or was the J50 a real baptism of fire. Sink or Swim is a brave policy but I wouldn't recommend it for all. Don Hmmm. Now you're asking Don. Well, as I recall the only soldering I had ever done was masses of electrical and electronic work. So yes "a real baptism of fire". I have never had much patience. I just bought the kit at the Home of O Gauge shop, read a few MRJ articles and then started making mistakes, lots of them...... The worst "mistake" I made was to build the frames with rigid axles. The loco ran well enough but was very sensitive to dirt on the wheels. Eventually (after a year or two) I bit the bullet, dismantled the frames and put in sprung hornblocks. Now, when it stalls, the wheel treads will be really dirty. A couple of snaps of this first try.... Must have taken these snaps just after I built it as it still has 3 link couplings. I am still quite proud of this first effort in etched brass - but I will say again much of my success can be attributed to the excellent Connoisseur kit. All the parts fitted as they should, I didn't have to modify or replace anything and the instructions were helpful. Incidentally, the loco is a J50/3, built by the LNER in 1930. Unlike my other J50 (68891 - see above) it did not have vacuum brakes. I chose 68973 as it was one of the locos that I saw in my youth - it was shedded for a time at Hornsey. Chaz Edited November 13, 2012 by chaz 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N15class Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Chaz I wish my first attempt had look as good as that. Very well done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 Chaz I wish my first attempt had look as good as that. Very well done. Thanks, Peter. I did worry for a while about the joins in the cab-sides half way down the "window" openings, which I had great difficulty in hiding. Then I noticed in some pictures of J50's that the join on the real thing, which was in the same place, was often very obvious, a prototypical imperfection...... Chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alant Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Hi Chaz, Looks good to me. I have the Connoisseur J50 on my shelf to build at some point and hope mine turns out looking this good. I have previously built Jim's starter loco, Jinty and 4F, all with rigid axles though, not yet tried any form of springing. The finish on the two wagons shown with the J50 looks great also. Alan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) Hi Chaz, Looks good to me. I have the Connoisseur J50 on my shelf to build at some point and hope mine turns out looking this good. I have previously built Jim's starter loco, Jinty and 4F, all with rigid axles though, not yet tried any form of springing. The finish on the two wagons shown with the J50 looks great also. Alan. Thanks for your comments Alan. Nothing much wrong with building locos with rigid axles, I just found that locos pickup reliably for longer if they are sprung or compensated. They also track a bit more smoothly through Peco pointwork. I have changed to beam compensation (the saddle tank has twin beams supporting the front two axles). Both of the wagons you refer to were built from Coopercraft kits. These are excellent basic kits with some very nice details, although you have to find wheels and axles and are well advised to discard the buffers provided. I use the Peco ones as substitutes. I enjoyed getting the unpainted wood and rusting metalwork look on the wagons. Chaz Edited November 13, 2012 by chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3 link Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 As I was making a comparison between the etched brass kit and Slater's plastic one it only seems fair to show a snap of my build of the latter.... The photo was taken before the van got weathered but otherwise it looks good. There is one error in the Slater's kit - any brake van buffs spot it? Chaz Hi Chaz, I have one of the Slaters brake vans but I did not know about the error and I cannot see the error, so can you please put me out of my misery . ATB, Martyn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) I have one of the Slaters brake vans but I did not know about the error and I cannot see the error, so can you please put me out of my misery . Martyn. OK Martyn. You need to have your anorak ready..... Look at the van on the right - the BR one. You will notice that the vertical handrails either side of the verandah opening are different. The ones towards the outer ends stop just above the bottom of the body - the inner ones carry on down a little and are supported on a bracket that projects below the body. I believe all the BR vans were like this - but Slater's van isn't. The Connoisseur kit includes the bracket (it's part of the side). The van on the left, portraying an LNER built van is different again - having the vertical handrails divided into two sections - long above and short below. So when I did my kit-bash I had to cut the bracket off. There was one other difference in the handrails between the two vans - the horizontal rail that runs below the ducket was in one length on the BR van - the earlier LNER van had it divided into three. One last thing to say - there was a transition period during the war when the LNER van started to resemble the later BR van in some respects. For instance the scrap-iron ballast was replaced by the concrete weights on the platforms (I presume the metal was just too valuable in wartime to use as mere ballast). Here endeth...... Chaz Edited November 13, 2012 by chaz 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Siddall Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) Now that's interesting... I've gone for the two-part rails on what will be a BR vac-fitted van based on a selection of Paul Bartlett's photos... this one in particular. A bit of a fiddle, hence at the moment only one side completed (work in progress pic on my thread here) David Edited November 14, 2012 by David Siddall Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) Now that's interesting... I've gone for the two-part rails on what will be a BR vac-fitted van based on a selection of Paul Bartlett's photos... this one in particular. A bit of a fiddle, hence at the moment only one side completed David You learn something everyday! Obviously I was wrong to assert that all BR vans had the arrangement of handrails that I modelled. I had a look at your reference photo and it indeed it contradicts what I said - mea culpa! However in my defence B950655 is not typical of the majority of BR brake vans. I will say that I have never seen a photo of a van with handrails like my unfitted Slater's van (there's a challenge for you!) Your post highlights three points Don't assume that all vehicles of a type were identical in their details - especially if they were numerous It's best to work from a photograph to build a model of a particular prototype (as you are doing & I did with both of my vans) It's very easy to get small details wrong What is quite clear is that the LNER/BR brake van has a complicated history with numerous detail changes both when first built and also in later modifications. Now, I'm off to have breakfast - humble pie! Chaz Edited November 14, 2012 by chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Donw Posted November 14, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 14, 2012 They are very nice models Chaz and if you have built them based on some photos they are right. It just meansd that someone else could build them differently to different photos and also be right. It is never wise to be dictatorial about these things. Engineers are by nature bodgers and find ways and means to do things. There are photos of wagons with odd axleboxes and I am sure they were not made like that. I am very impressed if that J50 was your first etched kit. Don Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3 link Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) Hi Chaz, Oh dear, I see what you mean now and the fact that my one is now weathered and varnished I think I will put that one down to modellers licence ( life's to short ). I have also got one of Jim's on the go what a coincidence !! and like you say the bracket is part of the side ( see below ). This particular brake van I am very pleased with as it is being built by my 26 yr old son who up to now has never shown an interest in railways, and this is the first time he has ever used a soldering iron and a fine job he is doing under my watchful eye ( David take note ). It started off with him bringing round his laundry as usual and he popped his head round the door of my workshop to say hello and he noticed I was soldering a joint on a WEP fruit d, and he was amazed at how the solder flowed and reacted and the strength in the completed work. So I said would you like to try so he started with two pieces of scrap brass and since then has never looked back . ATB, Martyn. Edited November 14, 2012 by 3 link 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alant Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 This is interesting, I didn't realise there were detail differences such as this. I built the Slater's version a few years ago now and my photo below shows the handrails going below the body. I cannot remember how I ended up doing this but presumably I just followed the instructions and drawings as I have no knowledge of the prototype(s)! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatB Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 I guess whether you sweat small details depends on the intended purpose of your modelling. If the object of the exercise is to produce a perfect representation of a real place and time, with all vehicles representing a prototype which actually existed, it matters. If, like me, the aim is more towards creating an impression of a railway, much of which is fictional anyway, if your variant of a vehicle is, at least, plausible, and is not actually in direct contradiction with available historical records, it probably doesn't. Or, at least, the extent to which it matters is up to the individual. Considering how long was the working life of most railway equipment and how many different repair shops were involved in its maintenance, what is plausible in any given wagon type can be pretty broad. Mind you, given that my original efforts in 0 gauge were heavily reliant on the products of Triang, Lima and even some repainted Hornby tinplate, maybe I'm not as discriminating as I should be . That said, I am going to try and make my Y7 a reasonable representation of members of the class which ran on the North Sunderland Railway so it won't be going together quite as supplied. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 Hi Chaz, Oh dear, I see what you mean now and the fact that my one is now weathered and varnished I think I will put that one down to modellers licence ( life's to short ). I have also got one of Jim's on the go what a coincidence !! and like you say the bracket is part of the side ( see below ). This particular brake van I am very pleased with as it is being built by my 26 yr old son who up to now has never shown an interest in railways, and this is the first time he has ever used a soldering iron and a fine job he is doing under my watchful eye ( David take note ). It started off with him bringing round his laundry as usual and he popped his head round the door of my workshop to say hello and he noticed I was soldering a joint on a WEP fruit d, and he was amazed at how the solder flowed and reacted and the strength in the completed work. So I said would you like to try so he started with two pieces of scrap brass and since then has never looked back . Martyn. As you say Martyn, life's too short. I just put jobs like that on the very bottom of the list - which gets longer rather than shorter. Your son is doing very well with his first build. You might want to get him to check out the ends of the body. There should be holes for the horizontal handrails that run along the tops of the concrete platform weights - which I seem to remember aren't there! They are easier to drill before the weights are added. I have built the WEP Fruit D - nice kit - although I seem to recall there is a lot of work in one. Chaz 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 This is interesting, I didn't realise there were detail differences such as this. I built the Slater's version a few years ago now and my photo below shows the handrails going below the body. I cannot remember how I ended up doing this but presumably I just followed the instructions and drawings as I have no knowledge of the prototype(s)! very convincing scene in your photograph Alan. I have no need of a Jinty as they never appeared on GN metals, to my knowledge (dangerous statement?), but I have often admired the one on Jim McGowan's display. Can I ask you about the rather nice yard lamps - where did they come from - whose kits? Or are they your own creations? Chaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 They are very nice models Chaz and if you have built them based on some photos they are right. It just meansd that someone else could build them differently to different photos and also be right. It is never wise to be dictatorial about these things. Engineers are by nature bodgers and find ways and means to do things. There are photos of wagons with odd axleboxes and I am sure they were not made like that. I am very impressed if that J50 was your first etched kit. Don Thanks Don. The two brass vans were built from photos, it's the Slater's one that I just built following their instructions - hence the handrail error - but it is a very small error...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) I guess whether you sweat small details depends on the intended purpose of your modelling. If the object of the exercise is to produce a perfect representation of a real place and time, with all vehicles representing a prototype which actually existed, it matters. If, like me, the aim is more towards creating an impression of a railway, much of which is fictional anyway, if your variant of a vehicle is, at least, plausible, and is not actually in direct contradiction with available historical records, it probably doesn't. Or, at least, the extent to which it matters is up to the individual. Considering how long was the working life of most railway equipment and how many different repair shops were involved in its maintenance, what is plausible in any given wagon type can be pretty broad. Yes Pat - I completely agree. A full answer as to whether it matters could go on for several pages and drag in the philosophical basis for modelling but..... 1) it's supposed to be fun (why else would we do it? 2) "the extent to which it matters is up to the individual" 3) Rule One applies at all times (really the same as point 2) - and critics can go away (best rendered as the Anglo-Saxon version) Chaz Edited November 14, 2012 by chaz 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now