Wright writes.....

[Barry Ten]

I did time on Motortorpedo boats(Old German E-boote) with three  twenty cylinder Mercedes 3000 horsepower diesel  engines each.

I  will hate Diesels to my dying day.

Whereas a front drive three cylinder 4-6-0 steam locomotives is pure music.

My only footplate ride was on a Heissler along Pacific coast in Tillamouk .

Memory is still swimming.It was lovely.

 

I got to enjoy a ride between a three cylinder pacific yesterday, via Braunton/Lord Dowding on the West Somerset Railway. "My" 7F, 53808, was also in attendance. It was magic to hear the three cylinder beat as the Bulleid got a heavy train moving. A glorious day out!

 

 

Al

[Niels]

I got to enjoy a ride between a three cylinder pacific yesterday, via Braunton/Lord Dowding on the West Somerset Railway. "My" 7F, 53808, was also in attendance. It was magic to hear the three cylinder beat as the Bulleid got a heavy train moving. A glorious day out!

 

Bulleid.jpg

 

Al

Lovely picture and I was mis-guided by Your Diesel avatarl

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony, Can you elaborate on how you tuned the chassis for decent running, please?

I've had many locos through my hands which have needed a tweak or two to get them running to my satisfaction.

 

In the case of the ones recently featured, these tweaks included replacing the pick-ups. Hopeless bits of bent phosphor bronze wire or strip were removed and replaced with .45mm nickel silver wire, sleeved with small bore PVC tubing to prevent shorts. 

 

Noisy gearboxes/gear drives were removed (stripping down the chassis), investigated, cured (by adjustment) or replaced (a DS10 and Branchlines multi-box - what a racket!). 

 

Where necessary, the rods were removed and tight spots cured by enlarging the bearings for the crank pins. 

 

Material was removed (not much) from behind the cylinders and front frames to prevent interference/shorts on tighter curves, and a smear of Araldite applied to the inside of the cylinders, just for good measure. 

 

A compensated chassis (which wobbled like jelly when running) was made solid, curing the 'jellyness' instantly. 

 

Other than that, they were OK. 

[Tony Wright]

.. so long as we stop short of actually discussing politics, which can be divisive - and anyway modelling is so much more fun.

But it can be just as divisive! 

[Lecorbusier]

A compensated chassis (which wobbled like jelly when running) was made solid, curing the 'jellyness' instantly. 

 

I would be interested to know what made that happen. My admittedly basic understanding of compensation is that so long as the track is true all is balanced and it will run true. Only when there are dips and rises to be accommodated will the compensation cut in with the compensated wheels pivoting to keep contact with the track. Why would it wobble? genuine question. My Barney has a Perseverance compensated chassis and I wouldn't describe its progress a wobbling, though admittedly a couple of the Gibson wheels are not entirely concentric and if you watch closely this is noticeable.

Edited September 14, 2018 by Lecorbusier

[Chamby]

I too had a very pleasant afternoon with a 3-cylinder pacific and other equally interesting stuff yesterday, courtesy of the local gauge 1 chaps.

 

 

 

 

 

[Barry O]

Tony

 

Nickel silver wire squeeks when used on pick ups. Phosphor bronze pick ups are, in effect, "self lubricating".

 

I take Nickel silver pick ups off and fit phosphor bronze ones. There is also an option of using beryllim bronze wire- OK so long as you are not allergic to beryllium.

 

Baz

[Tony Wright]

Tony

 

Nickel silver wire squeeks when used on pick ups. Phosphor bronze pick ups are, in effect, "self lubricating".

 

I take Nickel silver pick ups off and fit phosphor bronze ones. There is also an option of using beryllim bronze wire- OK so long as you are not allergic to beryllium.

 

Baz

Thanks Baz,

 

One of the reasons I removed the phosphor bronze pick-ups was because they squeaked.

 

Ask Tony Geary. We always knew when one of his locos was running on Stoke or Charwelton. 

[Tony Wright]

I would be interested to know what made that happen. My admittedly basic understanding of compensation is that so long as the track is true all is balanced and it will run true. Only when there are dips and rises to be accommodated will the compensation cut in with the compensated wheels pivoting to keep contact with the track. Why would it wobble? genuine question. My Barney has a Perseverance compensated chassis and I wouldn't describe its progress a wobbling, though admittedly a couple of the Gibson wheels are not entirely concentric and if you watch closely this is noticeable.

Tim,

 

It wobbled because the degree of compensation was far too much. About four mil' in total, for the first and second drivers to deflect. I put the whole chassis on a piece of plate glass and just tacked the tops of the bearings (after cleaning off the oil, of course). 

 

It doesn't wobble now. 

[Headstock]

B16s are cool, I don't get the ungainly thing, unless ungainly means sleek, no nonsense proper fast freight locomotives that out lived lesser pre grouping wannabes. Though I am a fan of all things GC as well, Mr. Robinson did build a couple stinkers, both in terms of performance and appearance. I would post an image of the GC Quasimodo that has recently been in for repair on my workbench. However, I fear it would frighten those modelers who prefer more dainty, frilly and poncified locomotives common in the west of our great Nation and to the south of the plowed field were the GN mainline came to an abrupt halt.

 

However, I may one day acheive some sort of model railway nirvana as I behold the sight of a B7 (to be built by my self) at the head of the 10.35pm Manchester (already built by myself) Marylebone express  I depart to dream of such things and plan there realization.

Edited September 14, 2018 by Headstock

[Barry Ten]

Thanks Baz,

 

One of the reasons I removed the phosphor bronze pick-ups was because they squeaked.

 

Ask Tony Geary. We always knew when one of his locos was running on Stoke or Charwelton. 

 

 

No sniggering at the back here, but my King developed an annoying squeak soon after I made a few "mods" to it. I spent ages

oiling the tender, checking the wheels etc, trying to find the source of the unwanted audible intrusion, which was like a hamster

being repeatedly prodded with a sharp skewer.

 

Then I turned off the sound-decoder. You've guessed it, said squeak was part of the sound file...

 

Al

 

no anti-DCC sentiment implied here. Terms and conditions apply. The value of your sound decoders can go down as well as up.

[Chuffer Davies]

Tim,

 

It wobbled because the degree of compensation was far too much. About four mil' in total, for the first and second drivers to deflect. I put the whole chassis on a piece of plate glass and just tacked the tops of the bearings (after cleaning off the oil, of course). 

 

It doesn't wobble now.

 

I’m guessing that the wobble was mainly observed when running through the code 100 pointwork in the fiddle yard? It (the wobble) would also be exaggerated if the method of compensation was based on a fixed driven axle which is generally the way it is done in OO because there isn’t enough space to fit beams between the gearbox and the inside of the frames. Compensated models are best suited to fine scale track work such as on the scenic areas of LB because the frogs are much finer and the wheels do not drop into them.

 

I would add that the amount of vertical play in a compensated chassis is not material to how well it runs and is really just a feature of the horn blocks being used.

 

Frank

[Lecorbusier]

I’m guessing that the wobble was mainly observed when running through the code 100 pointwork in the fiddle yard? It (the wobble) would also be exaggerated if the method of compensation was based on a fixed driven axle which is generally the way it is done in OO because there isn’t enough space to fit beams between the gearbox and the inside of the frames. Compensated models are best suited to fine scale track work such as on the scenic areas of LB because the frogs are much finer and the wheels do not drop into them.

 

I would add that the amount of vertical play in a compensated chassis is not material to how well it runs and is really just a feature of the horn blocks being used.

 

Frank

Thanks for the clarification Frank. My Perseverance chassis is a Rod Neep design, a simple 0-6-0 with a fixed rear driven axle. The movement of the horn blocks is quite considerable but all seems to balance level without wobble when on the track which is P4 gauge.

 

So in a way you are saying it runs more smoothly than the one Tony adjusted in all probability because of the trackwork rather than the compensation set up itself?

[St Enodoc]

I disagree (with the suggestion that it was not a political comment), the comment quite clearly included party political bias.

 

I might equally make a "personal observation" that if the named party is the "wrong" one then the most obvious alternative is far more wrong

Alan has apologised. Let's move on.

[jrg1]

I would be interested to know what made that happen. My admittedly basic understanding of compensation is that so long as the track is true all is balanced and it will run true. Only when there are dips and rises to be accommodated will the compensation cut in with the compensated wheels pivoting to keep contact with the track. Why would it wobble? genuine question. My Barney has a Perseverance compensated chassis and I wouldn't describe its progress a wobbling, though admittedly a couple of the Gibson wheels are not entirely concentric and if you watch closely this is noticeable.

I could be that there is too much play-ie too much compensation or too soft compensation; coupled with an inadequately weighed engine can produce a Donald Duck effect-entertaining, but depressing for the builder.

[Lecorbusier]

I have a conundrum to lob into debate which I hope some one might have some suggestions on.

 

I have a Johnson 1f tank kit to build and I am keen to find a reason to be able to run it on Monsal Dale.

 

The station itself is bracketed by Bakewell and Millers Dale (the one an important Market town - goods shed and sidings - and the other a large station and major junction facilitating the link to Buxton whilst also serving the limestone quarries, lime works, and local dairy & agricultural trade) I assume there were watering facilities at Millers Dale but perhaps not at Bakewell. Sheds were at Rowsley (7 miles) and Buxton (11 miles) either side of Monsal Dale. I assume that there will have been 1fs shunting the quarry and lime works sidings at Millers Dale - presumably shedded at Buxton. I have a photo of one shunting at Bakewell but have no idea if that was a regular occurrence. 

 

I have no idea of the range of a 1f ..... either in terms of coal or watering. Can anyone think of a believable scenario by which you might see a 1f pootling through Monsaldale and what it might be doing/pulling.  

[jamie92208]

I have a conundrum to lob into debate which I hope some one might have some suggestions on.

 

I have a Johnson 1f tank kit to build and I am keen to find a reason to be able to run it on Monsal Dale.

 

The station itself is bracketed by Bakewell and Millers Dale (the one an important Market town - goods shed and sidings - and the other a large station and major junction facilitating the link to Buxton whilst also serving the limestone quarries, lime works, and local dairy & agricultural trade) I assume there were watering facilities at Millers Dale but perhaps not at Bakewell. Sheds were at Rowsley (7 miles) and Buxton (11 miles) either side of Monsal Dale. I assume that there will have been 1fs shunting the quarry and lime works sidings at Millers Dale - presumably shedded at Buxton. I have a photo of one shunting at Bakewell but have no idea if that was a regular occurrence. 

 

I have no idea of the range of a 1f ..... either in terms of coal or watering. Can anyone think of a believable scenario by which you might see a 1f pootling through Monsaldale and what it might be doing/pulling.  

 

I don't know enough about the range of such locos but can add a couple of points.

 

Firstly in my researches for Long Preston and Lancaster Green Ayre I found that there were 1F's at Skipton, Carlisle, Lancaster and Carnforth but nowhere in between. In fact the only evidence of Tank engines working over either the lines to Carlisle or Lancaster/Carnforth are a coupe of photos of 0-4-4T's hauling passenger excursions to Morecambe.   There is I think a photo of an 0-4-4T at Hellifield.   They certainly didn't work the local pick p goods or the quarry trains.

 

They would have had to work back to Derby for works attention at some points though minor repairs would have been done at the major sheds.   

 

I do have the shed allocation book that the MRS published and would happily research the allocations of 1F's for you to see where the nearest ones were allocated. I would suspect Buxton, Manchester and Derby.

 

Hope this is of use.

 

Jamie

[Lecorbusier]

Thanks Jamie,

 

I have the allocation books for both Rowsley and Buxton and a fair few are shedded at both.

 

I don't think we would be looking at an ordinary working .... rather just an excuse as a rareish occurrence as to why one might be passing through. I thought there might be something doing on the track repair and maintenance front .... work crews, ballast repair etc. I also vaguely wondered about a breakdown train of some sort? Maybe even sent out to bank an engine in trouble for whatever reason.

 

It would be interesting if anyone else had any other thoughts or ideas. If we are looking at PW maintenance what might be the make up of the train etc.

[Tony Wright]

I’m guessing that the wobble was mainly observed when running through the code 100 pointwork in the fiddle yard? It (the wobble) would also be exaggerated if the method of compensation was based on a fixed driven axle which is generally the way it is done in OO because there isn’t enough space to fit beams between the gearbox and the inside of the frames. Compensated models are best suited to fine scale track work such as on the scenic areas of LB because the frogs are much finer and the wheels do not drop into them.

 

I would add that the amount of vertical play in a compensated chassis is not material to how well it runs and is really just a feature of the horn blocks being used.

 

Frank

Horn blocks?

 

The ones I've soldered solid had two pivoting strips with bearings in them. They moved up and down through slots in the frames. The design first appeared (in my experience) in Crownlines original Bulleids' chassis. 

 

Regarding the two types of trackwork on LB. Any compensated vehicles I've had (locos and stock) ride (rode) equally badly through both the finescale track on the scenic side and the Peco in the fiddle yard. Wagons/vans with three-point suspension were the only ones which derailed and wobbled along (not my build, I hasten to add). They don't now, because everything is soldered up solid. Locos the same (again, not my build).

 

This business of compensation v rigid has come up time after time, and I can only reiterate my own findings. I can find absolutely no merit in compensation. Perhaps it's necessary in P4, but not, in my own experience, in OO and EM. Nor, in my experience in O Gauge FS. I state again, any poor-running locos/vehicles on LB have been compensated. 

 

I have built about three/four compensated/sprung locos in OO (dictated by the design of the kit). All took at least four times as long to put the chassis together and none ran to my satisfaction until they were made rigid. 

 

The proof of the pudding? Anyone who saw the locos and stock running on Stoke Summit. Or, visitors who've watched the running on Little Bytham.

 

I rest my case! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Edited to include this anecdote........

 

I was once shown at a Scaleforum a loco which could ride over the end of small screwdriver placed on the rail, such was its level of compensation. 'Can yours do that?' said the proud builder. 'I solve that problem in a different way' said I. 'How?' 'I don't leave screwdrivers lying on the track! 

Edited September 15, 2018 by Tony Wright

[jamie92208]

Thanks Jamie,

 

I have the allocation books for both Rowsley and Buxton and a fair few are shedded at both.

 

I don't think we would be looking at an ordinary working .... rather just an excuse as a rareish occurrence as to why one might be passing through. I thought there might be something doing on the track repair and maintenance front .... work crews, ballast repair etc. I also vaguely wondered about a breakdown train of some sort? Maybe even sent out to bank an engine in trouble for whatever reason.

 

It would be interesting if anyone else had any other thoughts or ideas. If we are looking at PW maintenance what might be the make up of the train etc.

 

There are a few photos of PW type wagons in the Midland Wagons books.   They used 3 plank wagons lettered ED with what look like canvas covers over the axle boxes. I've run a PW train with a sleeper wagon, 3 ballast wagons and an ex WD warflat with lengths of rail on it, plus  a ballast brake that a friend built for me.  Possibly some point parts or even something lie a signal post would be a convincing load, plus a van for the PW crew.  

 

Jamie

[Lecorbusier]

Horn blocks?

 

The ones I've soldered solid had two pivoting strips with bearings in them. They moved up and down through slots in the frames. The design first appeared (in my experience) in Crownlines original Bulleids' chassis. 

 

Regarding the two types of trackwork on LB. Any compensated vehicles I've had (locos and stock) ride (rode) equally badly through both the finescale track on the scenic side and the Peco in the fiddle yard. Wagons/vans with three-point suspension were the only ones which derailed and wobbled along (not my build, I hasten to add). They don't now, because everything is soldered up solid. Locos the same (again, not my build).

 

This business of compensation v rigid has come up time after time, and I can only reiterate my own findings. I can find absolutely no merit in compensation. Perhaps it's necessary in P4, but not, in my own experience, in OO and EM. Nor, in my experience in O Gauge FS. I state again, any poor-running locos/vehicles on LB have been compensated. 

 

I have built about three/four compensated/sprung locos in OO (dictated by the design of the kit). All took at least four times as long to put the chassis together and none ran to my satisfaction until they were made rigid. 

 

The proof of the pudding? Anyone who saw the locos and stock running on Stoke Summit. Or, visitors who've watched the running on Little Bytham.

 

I rest my case! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Edited to include this anecdote........

 

I was once shown at a Scaleforum a loco which could ride over the end of small screwdriver placed on the rail, such was its level of compensation. 'Can yours do that?' said the proud builder. 'I solve that problem in a different way' said I. 'How?' 'I don't leave screwdrivers lying on the track! 

To be fair Tony I don't think I was questioning whether your loco's ran beautifully or not .... they self evidently do. Nor was I suggesting compensation was in any way better. I was just interested in trying to find out if there was something wrong with the compensation on the loco which made it wobble .... to safe guard against it on my own modelling.

 

My own anecdote is that the coach and one of the wagons I have so far built had issues running on my recently built P4 test track which my compensated loco and Bill Bedford sprung wagon didn't. I fitted Bill Bedford sprung W irons to both and to my eyes they now run sweet as a nut. So for me given my ability level & given my P4 track, I think CSBs will perhaps be the way to go.

[thegreenhowards]

Tony,

 

Regarding an RTR B16, isn’t the problem the wide swing necessary for the front bogie and the resultant problem in getting it to go round train set curves? I.e. the same as for the Thommo pacifics. On that basis I think you’re safe from RTR invasion.

 

Have you ever built such a loco for a client which will go round very tight curves?

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Tony Wright]

To be fair Tony I don't think I was questioning whether your loco's ran beautifully or not .... they self evidently do. Nor was I suggesting compensation was in any way better. I was just interested in trying to find out if there was something wrong with the compensation on the loco which made it wobble .... to safe guard against it on my own modelling.

 

My own anecdote is that the coach and one of the wagons I have so far built had issues running on my recently built P4 test track which my compensated loco and Bill Bedford sprung wagon didn't. I fitted Bill Bedford sprung W irons to both and to my eyes they now run sweet as a nut. So for me given my ability level & given my P4 track, I think CSBs will perhaps be the way to go.

I didn't think you were questioning the running at all Tim,

 

If, as is clear from your experience, compensation works, then I'm delighted. But then it is P4. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

Regarding an RTR B16, isn’t the problem the wide swing necessary for the front bogie and the resultant problem in getting it to go round train set curves? I.e. the same as for the Thommo pacifics. On that basis I think you’re safe from RTR invasion.

 

Have you ever built such a loco for a client which will go round very tight curves?

 

Regards

 

Andy

I've built about five, Andy,

 

And all were done under sufferance (he who pays the piper and all that). They included an A2 where I had to use flangless centre driving wheels, smaller diameter bogie wheels and make the rear trucks' Cartazzi outside frames pivot. Ugh!!!!!!! A J6 where there was so much sideplay that the loco crabbed along, and gaps between locos and tenders so wide as to need a long jumper for a fireman.

 

In fairness, the curves on the M&GNR bit of LB are down to two foot radius, so I have to have plenty of sideplay on the locos for that. But then, they're only small. 

[bbishop]

B16s are cool, I don't get the ungainly thing, unless ungainly means sleek, no nonsense proper fast freight locomotives that out lived lesser pre grouping wannabes. Though I am a fan of all things GC as well, Mr. Robinson did build a couple stinkers, both in terms of performance and appearance. I would post an image of the GC Quasimodo that has recently been in for repair on my workbench. However, I fear it would frighten those modelers who prefer more dainty, frilly and poncified locomotives common in the west of our great Nation and to the south of the plowed field were the GN mainline came to an abrupt halt.

Hey, what about Robert Urie's S15 class for the LSWR. Nothing poncy or frilly here (and two are preserved on the Mid Hants). Both the B16's and S15's were designed for fast freights, where the most important factor was stopping the train, and were also happy on medium paced passenger trains.

 

Bill