Wright writes.....

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

I suspect that while grammarians might not approve

 

I think that's to misunderstand grammarians; they would be fascinated.

[brightspark]

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Since K's made the original DJH kits for the firm (at the time when both establishments were in Banbury), this is hardly surprising. 

I didn't know that, but that explains a few things about the variable quality of that period.

The bit I like is that the holes are starting to break through the edge of the plate.

 

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks for that, Andy.

 

Though the chassis is much-improved, there is still no provision for brakes.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I used the Mainly Trains etch available from Wizard. But there is a better etch with the tender brakes (missing from my model) by South Easter Finecast. But I don't know if this is available on it's own. The brakes for the King Arthurs are what you will be after.

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks for these, Tony.

 

I've been looking at prototype pictures, and the angle of the cylinders on these SR 4-6-0s varies slightly from example to example (I must investigate further). On your top model, the angle is quite steep, yet on the Hornby one the cylinders are almost horizontal (incidentally, the Hornby one has the incorrect 'lean' to the return crank on this side - it should lean forwards at bottom dead centre. That said, it's still an exquisite model, and probably a better one than that which I'm building with my friend). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I thought that I saw the same thing, but came to the conclusion that it is either an optical illusion and/or variations to the shape of the cylinder casing. 

The cylinders are angled, but sometime the casing appear to be flush and almost parallel to the footplate.

That probably explains why the DJH model has them laying horizontal and why some of the scale drawings seem to be variable.

 

Iain Rice discussed this model in his book 'Locomotive kit chassis construction' (I found this book to be very helpful). He points out that the cylinders are at an angle and notes the J hangers. But later photos show that he missed off the J hangers and left the cylinders as per the kit. 

If you do lay the cylinders flat you will find that the J hangers won't fit, so angle the cylinders until they do align.

 

I have found some photo's that I took for my build thread and slowly uploading them.

But this one may be of help as it is my sketch as to where the cylinders should be.

The round shape is for the curve of the front footplate.

Note that I added filler to lengthen the cylinder body to 12,8mm.

The other positions are for the J hangers and the end of the slidebars.

 

This page on the Hornby website is also helpful as there is a low resolution drawing of the loco and tender.

https://uk.Hornby.com/community/blog-and-news/engine-shed/s15-class-decorated-sample-and-tts-king-class-sound-test

 

"Me fail English, that's unpossible."

[Barry Ten]

1 hour ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

The thang be that English not ours but everyones.  Across the North Sea, I have been one of the most 'relaxter' of UK nationals these last forty years. Elsewhere far away  I was much amused to hear of suspected felons departing on 'fleet foots'; and while in yet another location, happily remember the taxi tout that asked me 'If I wanted a driving where too?'.  I suspect that while grammarians might not approve, it did the job and he magicked me a taxi very swiftly, when there hadn't been a vehicle in sight  during the previous quarter hour.

 

That makes perfectly senselylode. Deep joy.

[Methuselah]

14 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

I tend to be fairly relaxed about shifting English usage but one that does grate with me lately is "aircrafts". Has it now

been decided that "aircraft" is singular only, or is it simply ignorance? I've seen it employed in both BBC news reports and in The Guardian.

Ditto. Yet another Americanism creeping in - that and the wretched 'Train station'. Arrgghhh.....

[St Enodoc]

4 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

the taxi tout that asked me 'If I wanted a driving where too?'.

Too many words there. As always, Singlish is most concise: 'Go where?'.

[Richard_A]

16 hours ago, Richard_A said:

Regarding fitting the axle bushes, are they best fitted from the outside, like shown in the picture attached, or from the inside? 

 

Also, do I need to file them flat to the frame, once soldered in? 

I'm hoping to get stuck into this today, but first, I have another question about the axle bushes. 

 

I have been reading a thread about building a k's coal tank, where it was suggested that to increase sideplay to allow the loco to negotiate tighter curves, some of the bushes should be fitted from the inside and filed flush to the frames on the outside. 

 

Is this something that anyone does, or would recommend? 

[Chuffer Davies]

53 minutes ago, Richard_A said:

I'm hoping to get stuck into this today, but first, I have another question about the axle bushes. 

 

I have been reading a thread about building a k's coal tank, where it was suggested that to increase sideplay to allow the loco to negotiate tighter curves, some of the bushes should be fitted from the inside and filed flush to the frames on the outside. 

 

Is this something that anyone does, or would recommend? 

Sounds a bit extreme to me but might be necessary if you want it to negotiate near right angled curves.  What is your minimum radius likely to be?  E.g. if your minimum radius is 3ft then you only need about 0.3mm either way on the centre axle.  Most kits will easily provide that and more.

 I normally add washers to restrict side play on the outer axles and only allow the centre axle/s to move sideways.  This reduces the risk of buffer locking.  

Once you have the basic chassis assembled you can experiment to determine the optimum number of washers needed to achieve sufficient side play by pushing the chassis around a length of radiused track.

Frank

[Richard_A]

1 minute ago, Chuffer Davies said:

Sounds a bit extreme to me but might be necessary if you want it to negotiate near right angled curves.  What is your minimum radius likely to be?  E.g. if your minimum radius is 3ft then you only need about 0.3mm either way on the centre axle.  Most kits will easily provide that and more.

 I normally add washers to restrict side play on the outer axles and only allow the centre axle/s to move sideways.  This reduces the risk of buffer locking.  

Once you have the basic chassis assembled you can experiment to determine the optimum number of washers needed to achieve sufficient side play by pushing the chassis around a length of radiused track.

Frank

 

Thank you, Frank. 

 

I'm building in em gauge, but don't have a layout as yet, I'll build it as initially suggested and worry about that later. 

 

 

[Michael Edge]

8 hours ago, brightspark said:

I didn't know that, but that explains a few things about the variable quality of that period.

The bit I like is that the holes are starting to break through the edge of the plate.

 

I used the Mainly Trains etch available from Wizard. But there is a better etch with the tender brakes (missing from my model) by South Easter Finecast. But I don't know if this is available on it's own. The brakes for the King Arthurs are what you will be after.

I thought that I saw the same thing, but came to the conclusion that it is either an optical illusion and/or variations to the shape of the cylinder casing. 

The cylinders are angled, but sometime the casing appear to be flush and almost parallel to the footplate.

That probably explains why the DJH model has them laying horizontal and why some of the scale drawings seem to be variable.

 

Iain Rice discussed this model in his book 'Locomotive kit chassis construction' (I found this book to be very helpful). He points out that the cylinders are at an angle and notes the J hangers. But later photos show that he missed off the J hangers and left the cylinders as per the kit. 

If you do lay the cylinders flat you will find that the J hangers won't fit, so angle the cylinders until they do align.

 

I have found some photo's that I took for my build thread and slowly uploading them.

But this one may be of help as it is my sketch as to where the cylinders should be.

The round shape is for the curve of the front footplate.

Note that I added filler to lengthen the cylinder body to 12,8mm.

The other positions are for the J hangers and the end of the slidebars.

 

This page on the Hornby website is also helpful as there is a low resolution drawing of the loco and tender.

https://uk.Hornby.com/community/blog-and-news/engine-shed/s15-class-decorated-sample-and-tts-king-class-sound-test

 

"Me fail English, that's unpossible."

S15s have cylinders inclined at 1 in 24, clearly stated on the GA and they are all the same.

[Michael Edge]

1 hour ago, Richard_A said:

I'm hoping to get stuck into this today, but first, I have another question about the axle bushes. 

 

I have been reading a thread about building a k's coal tank, where it was suggested that to increase sideplay to allow the loco to negotiate tighter curves, some of the bushes should be fitted from the inside and filed flush to the frames on the outside. 

 

Is this something that anyone does, or would recommend? 

If you fit them that way round there's a lot less metal to file away, I do it if the frame width requires a lot of filing.

[Richard_A]

11 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

If you fit them that way round there's a lot less metal to file away, I do it if the frame width requires a lot of filing.

Is this something I would need to do for em gauge with a radius of 3'? which I think is the accepted minimum from what I have read. 

[Bernard Lamb]

5 hours ago, Methuselah said:

Ditto. Yet another Americanism creeping in - that and the wretched 'Train station'. Arrgghhh.....

But ironically, Arriva buses go to the railway station in my neck of the woods.

Bernard

[Dunsignalling]

6 hours ago, Methuselah said:

Ditto. Yet another Americanism creeping in - that and the wretched 'Train station'. Arrgghhh.....

 

Not really something else to blame on our transatlantic cousins, who usually refer to "airplanes" in my experience.

 

[MJI]

Memorable ITV coverage of Hungarian grand prix 10/08/1997

 

Damon Hill overtook Michael Schumacher during the adverts.

[westerner]

Just thought I drop this in as you indulge me my occassional photos of Blackney.

Wishing Tony and Mo and all other Wright Writers a Happy Christmas. I think the photo was taken at the beginning of that very cold winter of 1963.

 

[gwrrob]

Morning Tony @Tony Wright and compliments of the season. It was nice to see Mo in your article in the latest BRM and your acknowledgement that you couldn't have this hobby without her. How this resonates with me too, the unsung heroes of our hobby.

 

Happy Christmas to all on Wright Writes.

[Tony Wright]

11 hours ago, brightspark said:

I didn't know that, but that explains a few things about the variable quality of that period.

The bit I like is that the holes are starting to break through the edge of the plate.

 

I used the Mainly Trains etch available from Wizard. But there is a better etch with the tender brakes (missing from my model) by South Easter Finecast. But I don't know if this is available on it's own. The brakes for the King Arthurs are what you will be after.

I thought that I saw the same thing, but came to the conclusion that it is either an optical illusion and/or variations to the shape of the cylinder casing. 

The cylinders are angled, but sometime the casing appear to be flush and almost parallel to the footplate.

That probably explains why the DJH model has them laying horizontal and why some of the scale drawings seem to be variable.

 

Iain Rice discussed this model in his book 'Locomotive kit chassis construction' (I found this book to be very helpful). He points out that the cylinders are at an angle and notes the J hangers. But later photos show that he missed off the J hangers and left the cylinders as per the kit. 

If you do lay the cylinders flat you will find that the J hangers won't fit, so angle the cylinders until they do align.

 

I have found some photo's that I took for my build thread and slowly uploading them.

But this one may be of help as it is my sketch as to where the cylinders should be.

The round shape is for the curve of the front footplate.

Note that I added filler to lengthen the cylinder body to 12,8mm.

The other positions are for the J hangers and the end of the slidebars.

 

This page on the Hornby website is also helpful as there is a low resolution drawing of the loco and tender.

https://uk.Hornby.com/community/blog-and-news/engine-shed/s15-class-decorated-sample-and-tts-king-class-sound-test

 

"Me fail English, that's unpossible."

Good morning,

 

Thanks for your observations.

 

A glance at the bottom picture on page 62 of The Book of the H15s and H16s, by Peter Swift, Irwell Press, 2012 will reveal that while the cylinders on an S15 might be inclined, the tops of their casings are horizontal; thus parallel with the valence.

 

That's how I'll be arranging them on the DJH build, because most prototype S15 shots show this feature.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Mark Laidlay]

Question from a foreign prototype modeller (Victorian Railways - the state, not the era).

Why did so many railway companies have ramps at the end of passenger platforms at most stations?

 

Here in Australia we imported plenty of British engineers to build our railways but they largely didn't bring this feature with them.  Some stations had limited ramps down to a barrow crossing but not the full on slopes seen in the UK.

[Barclay]

3 hours ago, Richard_A said:

Is this something I would need to do for em gauge with a radius of 3'? which I think is the accepted minimum from what I have read. 

I tend to leave the flange on the wheel bearing as it keeps the tyre away from the frame, and minimises risk of shorting. I just make sure the chassis is thin enough that there is a little sideplay and then remove it from front and rear with axle washers. You really don't need much though. Below is my own coal tank in EM. You can see there isn't a lot of sideplay, just a little on the centre axle is enough, though the rear part of the chassis was narrowed by a couple of mm to help the trailing wheels negotiate a 3' curve.

 

Edited December 22, 2023 by Barclay

[sandra]

25 minutes ago, Mark Laidlay said:

Question from a foreign prototype modeller (Victorian Railways - the state, not the era).

Why did so many railway companies have ramps at the end of passenger platforms at most stations?

 

Here in Australia we imported plenty of British engineers to build our railways but they largely didn't bring this feature with them.  Some stations had limited ramps down to a barrow crossing but not the full on slopes seen in the UK.

I think it was a Board of Trade requirement dating from the early days of the railway. It no longer applies and most new platforms in Britain don’t have ramps. 

[Dunsignalling]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning,

 

Thanks for your observations.

 

A glance at the bottom picture on page 62 of The Book of the H15s and H16s, by Peter Swift, Irwell Press, 2012 will reveal that while the cylinders on an S15 might be inclined, the tops of their casings are horizontal; thus parallel with the valence.

 

That's how I'll be arranging them on the DJH build, because most prototype S15 shots show this feature.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Hi, Tony,

 

All the other photos of Maunsell S15s I've found in 'The Book of the H15 and S15 4-6-0s', (starting with a shot of No.827 on the cover) clearly show the rear of the upper edge of the cylinder casing lower than the front by 1.5" or thereabouts, and the gap between it and the underside of the running plate having a distinct taper. The Hornby model replicates this.

 

The flat-top/parallel interface is evident on many (about half) of the older Urie locos (499,501/2/12/14 definitely), at certain points in their careers and the slope at others. Most match the Maunsell ones, though, suggesting the sheet-metal covers might have been swapped around at overhaul or replaced.

 

ADDITION: Check out the picture of 30846 on page 229. It shows clearly the shape of the wrapper, and I think that could create either impression, depending on how the light fell on it.

 

Regards

 

John

Edited December 22, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

6 minutes ago, sandra said:

I think it was a Board of Trade requirement dating from the early days of the railway. It no longer applies and most new platforms in Britain don’t have ramps. 

Round here, at least, most existing platforms have acquired security gates at the top of the slope in the past couple of years.

 

John 

[Steamport Southport]

On 20/12/2023 at 23:03, brightspark said:

The DJH frames that came with my S15 kit.

 

Snap!

 

 

Bought one of these a few weeks ago, just checked it and it's got those chassis plates. Can't really complain as it was only £40 and has a set of wheels.

 

 

Anyone know whether the PDK chassis will fit? Seems a possible alternative.

 

http://www.pdkmodels.co.uk/Chassis Kits.html

 

 

Jason

[Jol Wilkinson]

11 hours ago, Methuselah said:

Ditto. Yet another Americanism creeping in - that and the wretched 'Train station'. Arrgghhh.....

 

Yet we have no problem with "Bus Station" where people go to catch a bus. Likewise we go to a petrol station to buy petrol (or diesel, or groceries, etc.).

 

Is it because a Railway Station is a Station on a railway?

[Clive Mortimore]

12 hours ago, Methuselah said:

Ditto. Yet another Americanism creeping in - that and the wretched 'Train station'. Arrgghhh.....

I don't think you would find it is an Americanism. Apart form in the big cities where there are Railroad Stations most line side buildings we would call a station are refereed to Railroad Depots.