Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

There will always be someone reading such an article for the first time, for whom the phrase 'the wheels were quartered in the usual way' will be immensely frustrating...

They'll only be frustrated if they've never used Romford/Markits driving wheels. 

 

Which makes me wonder how 'basic' one needs to be in a loco-build description. Though I thought it axiomatic that folk would know that 90 degrees was the angle for opposite cranks, one guy who was a pupil where I was acting as a tutor 'quartered' his driving wheels at 180 degrees. Another chap, one club night, 'quartered' his drivers exactly the same both sides. Needless to say the running in both cases was hopeless. 

 

What I always tell my pupils is ' 3 o'clock one side, 12 o'clock the other' (or other combinations of 90 degrees). Since I only use Romford/Markits drivers, this always works - if they listen!

[allan downes]

Good morning Mark,

 

I will do, but I'm not writing an article about it.

 

It would seem that a loco-build article in the 'traditional' sense is not so popular in the model press as it once was. I was told not long ago by someone in the industry at a show that it's a bit too 'niche'.

 

I suppose, like everything else, such things have had their day. What could I say that's new about the A7, especially with regard to getting clearance behind the cylinders? That all I do is 'cheat', as I have done when building B16/1s and an A8, by making the chassis electrically-dead, taking off metal from the backs of the cylinders (so that they're no longer round in end elevation, but it's difficult to see) and putting a thin layer of Araldite on the inner surfaces, just to ensure no shorts? And, by restricting the swing of the bogie?

 

All other procedures have been explained by me on many occasions - how to put together a motor/gearbox assembly, how to erect the frames squarely, how to fit pick-ups, how to ensure no binding in the rods/motion, how to get a loco body straight/square/round and all the other usual dodges for producing a 'reasonable' end result.

 

Does anyone think that some of the more recent articles in the mainstream model press are becoming less-challenging, or even less relevant to 'railway modelling'? Or, as is more likely the case, I'm getting less perceptive and even more reactionary. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

When everybody gets a 3D Printer, Tony, we'll all be out of work, magazines included !

 

And is that likely you may ask ?

 

Well once upon a time if you bought a computer you'd have needed a barn to put it in yet here we are today with such technology hanging out of our back pockets for the price of a good week end in Paris  with Lilly la Femme  - and that's not to mention Lazers in the living room with Winnie the Wife !

 

Allan

[MarkC]

Good morning Mark,

 

I will do, but I'm not writing an article about it.

 

It would seem that a loco-build article in the 'traditional' sense is not so popular in the model press as it once was. I was told not long ago by someone in the industry at a show that it's a bit too 'niche'.

 

I suppose, like everything else, such things have had their day. What could I say that's new about the A7, especially with regard to getting clearance behind the cylinders? That all I do is 'cheat', as I have done when building B16/1s and an A8, by making the chassis electrically-dead, taking off metal from the backs of the cylinders (so that they're no longer round in end elevation, but it's difficult to see) and putting a thin layer of Araldite on the inner surfaces, just to ensure no shorts? And, by restricting the swing of the bogie?

 

All other procedures have been explained by me on many occasions - how to put together a motor/gearbox assembly, how to erect the frames squarely, how to fit pick-ups, how to ensure no binding in the rods/motion, how to get a loco body straight/square/round and all the other usual dodges for producing a 'reasonable' end result.

 

Does anyone think that some of the more recent articles in the mainstream model press are becoming less-challenging, or even less relevant to 'railway modelling'? Or, as is more likely the case, I'm getting less perceptive and even more reactionary. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hi Tony

 

Thank you. Appreciated.

 

Cheers

Mark

[drmditch]

 

 

A further comment re the X 4-8-0 by Drmditch that these did not have brakes on the front axle overlooks the fact that the none of the NER 0-8-0s had brakes on the leading axle. 

 

ArthurK

Of course! - I should have remembered that having built a Q6 and a Q7, and having one of ArthurK's lovely brass Q5s to build. (When I have completed a bit more of the boring but necessary task of railway construction!)

 

The point I was trying to get to was this:-

The Class Y was the first NER class to be built with three cylinder propulsion all driving onto the leading driving axle.

(That is apart from the solitary M Class rebuilt as a three cylinder Smith Compound.)

 

Was there some perceived engineering benefit in opposing driving and braking forces on the driven axle?

 

If so, of course, it was not 'perceived' for very long, as all the subsequent NER three and four cylinder engines had brakes applied to the front of the wheels - as far as I can check!

 

The NER must have been used to braking different wheels in front and behind, because the Worsdell 4-4-0s (like No.1621 which I had the pleasure of standing beside this very afternoon) had/has  a Westinghouse cylinder between the coupled wheels, pushing onto the trailing edge of the leading wheel, and the leading edge of the trailing wheel!

Edited August 4, 2017 by drmditch

[drmditch]

As regards the inconvenient legacy of Mr Worsdell, Mr Robinson, and Mr (later Sir Vincent) Raven of producing engines with outside cylinders inconveniently placed between the bogie wheels - my solution is posted on this thread as #12831

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64295-wright-writes/page-514&do=findComment&comment=2507670

 

I do have a craving for more NER outside cylinders - but time will tell!

 

(I should add that (so far) my engineering is not to the standard displayed by other contributors to this thread, but my locomotives do work reliably and perform the tasks required of them!)

[Mallard60022]

When I was working in Research we used to have the expression "A cluttered work bench is the sign of a tidy mind".  A tidy desk was the sign of a Bureaucrat

Around 1982/3 a new 'brand new' Teacher arrived at the school at which I was working. He was a talented man and an amazing musician and was adored by the children (except for the ones who couldn't get into the rather elite choir and music groups). At that time there were very good staff  relationships (professional) and a lot of fun was had with various things. I am afraid I was guilty of padlocking his desk and chair together one day as his desk was just a complete shambles and the chair piled with 'stuff'. He didn't use it I suppose? At least three weeks later, at the end of the Summer Term the chair was still 'attached' to the desk! So why mention this? Well, he was a very successful man but actually relied on a team to support his 'success' and he did actually come to understand this. The cleaning staff and Caretaker used to leave his room most of the time as it was impossible for them to get at properly.  Thus I tend to accept the thinking that a cluttered workbench is the sign of a tidy (creative?) mind.

Andy Broom.

[mullie]

Around 1982/3 a new 'brand new' Teacher arrived at the school at which I was working. He was a talented man and an amazing musician and was adored by the children (except for the ones who couldn't get into the rather elite choir and music groups). At that time there were very good staff  relationships (professional) and a lot of fun was had with various things. I am afraid I was guilty of padlocking his desk and chair together one day as his desk was just a complete shambles and the chair piled with 'stuff'. He didn't use it I suppose? At least three weeks later, at the end of the Summer Term the chair was still 'attached' to the desk! So why mention this? Well, he was a very successful man but actually relied on a team to support his 'success' and he did actually come to understand this. The cleaning staff and Caretaker used to leave his room most of the time as it was impossible for them to get at properly.  Thus I tend to accept the thinking that a cluttered workbench is the sign of a tidy (creative?) mind.

Andy Broom.

As a music teacher/musician I can confirm that I don't even have a desk in my classroom, just a simple table on which a certain amount of stuff is dumped. I also don't have a specific chair, it is just one of the class set. When teaching I never sit at this table, it just isn't that type of subject. There was a desk in the room when I took over last year, I got rid of it to create more space!

 

To be honest I don't need a desk as the majority of my resources are stored digitally and in such a way I can access them from anywhere. It is a subject that requires the old fashioned traditional skills and to be able to work comfortably with the latest technology in order to understand how young people relate to music.

 

My workbench is never untidy because I don't have one!

 

Martyn

[coachmann]

Tidiness is next to god(dard)liness...

 

[Killybegs]

There will always be someone reading such an article for the first time, for whom the phrase 'the wheels were quartered in the usual way' will be immensely frustrating...

 

That brings back unpleasant memories!

[Mallard60022]

As a music teacher/musician I can confirm that I don't even have a desk in my classroom, just a simple table on which a certain amount of stuff is dumped. I also don't have a specific chair, it is just one of the class set. When teaching I never sit at this table, it just isn't that type of subject. There was a desk in the room when I took over last year, I got rid of it to create more space!

 

To be honest I don't need a desk as the majority of my resources are stored digitally and in such a way I can access them from anywhere. It is a subject that requires the old fashioned traditional skills and to be able to work comfortably with the latest technology in order to understand how young people relate to music.

 

My workbench is never untidy because I don't have one!

 

Martyn

Excellent, however I should have pointed out that he was a Class Teacher in a Middle School with responsibility for Music in the upper school. We still used Blackboards and I can remember the one Computer that arrived at the School a few weeks before I left !!!!!!!! I used to do Woodwork and 'Games' most of the time but ended up in a Classroom almost all day when my subjects were almost axed as the County had changed their Philosophy. I then decided I would move on and do something else instead; (1986).

Shame really as we had just started building a layout in the Craft Room and a couple of 'Dads' of YP in my class were members of the local MRC.

In fact I now remember that in 1973 I had applied for a job in the Derby area and they wanted someone to take on the School layout as an 'extra responsibility'. Sadly I never took up the offer and went elsewhere..........such is life.

Phil

[The Fatadder]

Very glad to see that the state of my workbench is so similar to so many others. The state of the under construction layout isn't much better (though I do make more of an effort to keep the layout tidy (after a near miss between a soldering iron and a hawksworth coach!)

[St Enodoc]

They'll only be frustrated if they've never used Romford/Markits driving wheels. 

 

Which makes me wonder how 'basic' one needs to be in a loco-build description. Though I thought it axiomatic that folk would know that 90 degrees was the angle for opposite cranks, one guy who was a pupil where I was acting as a tutor 'quartered' his driving wheels at 180 degrees. Another chap, one club night, 'quartered' his drivers exactly the same both sides. Needless to say the running in both cases was hopeless. 

 

What I always tell my pupils is ' 3 o'clock one side, 12 o'clock the other' (or other combinations of 90 degrees). Since I only use Romford/Markits drivers, this always works - if they listen!

Now you're assuming they know how to read a clock with hands!

[Northroader]

With quartering wheelsets, you can then go on to whether the RHS or the LHS leads the other side by 90 degrees. Customarily I do RHS leading, but I gather the LNWR was the odd man out in this. It's extremely rare that a drawing will mention this.

[drmditch]

With quartering wheelsets, you can then go on to whether the RHS or the LHS leads the other side by 90 degrees. Customarily I do RHS leading, but I gather the LNWR was the odd man out in this. It's extremely rare that a drawing will mention this.

I think there was a thread discussing this somewhere. There was clearly a known phenomenon of RH axleboxes wearing faster than LH.  Gresley commented on this, but I don't think he found a solution.

[ArthurK]

Writing instructions for my kits can be very frustrating. Trying to describe exactly what you intend without any possibility of being misunderstood isn't easy. The writer (me) knows very well the way everything goes together. But being so familiar with the bits it is very  easy to overlook the fact that this may be someone's very first attempt at an etched brass kit. The simple instruction fold these bits (referring to a detailed sketch) should be easy- shouldn't it? Well yes is provided you know that most folds are with the half etched line on the inside of the bend. But then we all knew that - didn't we? Well to the raw beginner it is not obvious so I now put a statement to that effect at the beginning of all the instructions that I now write, Brass castings do sometimes.have a bit of investment (the compound in which is cast) left in blind holes preventing the insertion of a mating part. Experienced modellers know what this is and removes it with a pointed tool. Another addition the the instructions.

 

No we cannot assume the the modeller knows what to do, as with the quartering discussion above everyone has to learn from somewhere. Newcomers to the hobby must be taught.

 

ArthurK

Edited August 5, 2017 by ArthurK

[The Johnster]

Writing instructions for my kits can be very frustrating. Trying to describe exactly what you intend without any possibility of being misunderstood isn't easy. The writer (me) knows very well the way everything goes together. But being so familiar with the bits it is very  easy to overlook the fact that this may be someone's very first attempt at an etched brass kit. The simple instruction fold these bits (referring to a detailed sketch) should be easy- shouldn't it? Well yes is provided you know that most folds are with the half etched line on the inside of the bend. But then we all knew that - didn't we? Well to the raw beginner it is not obvious so I now put a statement to that effect at the beginning of all the instructions that I now write, Brass castings do sometimes.have a bit of investment (the compound in which is cast) left in blind holes preventing the insertion of a mating part. Experienced modellers know what this is and removes it with a pointed tool. Another addition the the instructions.

 

No we cannot assume the the modeller knows what to do, as with the quartering discussion above everyone has to learn from somewhere. Newcomers to the hobby must be taught.

 

ArthurK

 

In a perfect world, kit instructions would be written by someone who had built the kit but not designed it!!!  I accept that this is not as easy an ask as it might first appear.

Edited August 5, 2017 by The Johnster

[micklner]

In a perfect world, kit instructions would be written by someone who had built the kit but not designed it!!!  I accept that this is not as easy an ask as it might first appear.

 

It would appear some designers think model  builders are physic 

[Paul Cram]

In a perfect world, kit instructions would be written by someone who had built the kit but not designed it!!!  I accept that this is not as easy an ask as it might first appear.

That is what I am doing at the moment for the J5

[coachmann]

In a perfect world, kit instructions would be written by someone who had built the kit but not designed it!!!  I accept that this is not as easy an ask as it might first appear.

Why?  The bloke building it might not accept he is an idiot and so to him the kit is at fault. In my time i have seen some right abortions and some really nice models............ all built from the same kit. The bloke who designed it knows in what order he intended it to be built.  

Edited August 5, 2017 by coachmann

[96701]

Does exact quartering really matter? I assume the degree of accuracy is only important where the leading / lagging angle is consistent across all axles? Doesn't 180^o work just as well, or does that make the model waddle?

[TrevorP1]

Does exact quartering really matter? I assume the degree of accuracy is only important where the leading / lagging angle is consistent across all axles? Doesn't 180^o work just as well, or does that make the model waddle?

 

 

On a model I think anything would work as long as it's consistent. However, the real thing would not work without accurate alignment.

[Northroader]

No, using siderods to make the wheels move in unison isn't like pedalling a bike, where you use your ankles to impart some turning movement as you pass through the top and bottom position, and youre only giving a downward push. By having the cranks at right angles, there is force through the crank at all times, as you're pulling as well as pushing. Likewise, 90 degrees is the theorectical best position and axles are machined to this, so why try for any other angle, even if consistent? Lastly, any mismatch in angle can only be compensated by increasing the clearances in the crankpin holes, and as you do this, you're getting into a situation where the rods start to bind.

[St Enodoc]

Writing instructions for my kits can be very frustrating. Trying to describe exactly what you intend without any possibility of being misunderstood isn't easy. The writer (me) knows very well the way everything goes together. But being so familiar with the bits it is very  easy to overlook the fact that this may be someone's very first attempt at an etched brass kit. The simple instruction fold these bits (referring to a detailed sketch) should be easy- shouldn't it? Well yes is provided you know that most folds are with the half etched line on the inside of the bend. But then we all knew that - didn't we? Well to the raw beginner it is not obvious so I now put a statement to that effect at the beginning of all the instructions that I now write, Brass castings do sometimes.have a bit of investment (the compound in which is cast) left in blind holes preventing the insertion of a mating part. Experienced modellers know what this is and removes it with a pointed tool. Another addition the the instructions.

 

No we cannot assume the the modeller knows what to do, as with the quartering discussion above everyone has to learn from somewhere. Newcomers to the hobby must be taught.

 

ArthurK

Alan Bunn's (West Coast Models) loco kit building guide is the best generic guide to building whitemetal kits that I have seen. The Comet Models guide to building coaches is equally good for etched kits (not just coaches).

[rowanj]

As a novice at loco kit building, I need instructions which are accurate and reasonably comprehensive. My first,probably too ambitious project, was a PDK B16, which,although I completed, had pretty generic instructions. I'm not averse to supporting them with other guidance and photographs,etc but instructions should be a proper starting point. I thought the PDK stuff was a little light, but I worked through it.

 

The next kit I tackled was an ArthurK J77 where the instructions were very comprehensive. Even then, I supplemented them with photos and additional guidance. My main problem was not always knowing what the part of the loco actually was on such a detailed kit and therefore quite where it fitted. But these instructions also added to my broader knowledge of loco building for when it came to later builds.

 

I sometimes think that some posters here are so experienced, have built so many models, and have developed their own ways to construct, that they forget that others are more in need of guidance. There is rarely a single way of doing things but accurate instructions should offer a way which,if followed, will produce a successful model,all things being equal. After that,one can start to develop personal idiosyncrasies which one finds to work better.

That is not to excuse instructions which are incorrect, for that is inexcusable. And I have no doubt that writing the things is not easy. But most who enter kitbuilding are not idiots,just less experienced than the designers, and need a little help... Unless you prefer they stick to RTR??

Edited August 6, 2017 by rowanj

[thegreenhowards]

Now I'm back from my holiday I've managed to finish off my Gresley non-corridor twin artic which I posted about a couple of weeks ago. It is based on the Kirk kit with MJT underframe and bogies. I acquired it as part of a job lot of abandoned coach projects at the EMGS Bracknell show (seven coaches for £30 - can't be bad!), so can't claim all the credit. I simply re-gauged it from P4, finished it off and painted it. I'm particularly impressed with the MJT articulation unit (shown in the third photo) which is a very neat solution - highly recommended.

 

 

I've also had a rummage through my book collection and finally found a photo of one of these in action post war on a GN suburban service. I can't post it for copyright reasons, but if you have access to 'East Coast from Kings Cross' by Eric Neve, P83 has a lovely photo of an Ivatt Atlantic on a 10 coach suburban set in 1948 - all in teak/ coach brown livery. The formation is:

Twin steel corridor BTK/TK (d.194/5)

Twin Non-corridor T/F (d.124/6)

Twin T/T (d.105/6) - probably

Twin CL/BT (d.107/8) - possibly

Two unidentified non-artic coaches

 

The formation gets increasingly difficult to determine as you go back, so I can't be sure after the first four coaches. If any of the coach experts out there have access to the book and could cast a glance at the photo I would be very grateful. It would be a lovely train to model - although I might have to go a couple of years later as I can't paint teak! I imagine it would have stayed similar to this until the mark 1s arrived.

 

Before anyone points this out, one issue the photo has reminded me of is that my artic should have turnbuckle trussing. Another one for the roundtuit pile - in my defence I inherited it with the steel angle trussing and it's well araldited in!

 

Andy