Motive power for Camden Shed

[92220]

Thanks Mike, I was a bit concerned about that. I may need to remove a bit of lead. How do I test safely whether the loco can spin its wheels? I can hold onto ithe drawbar and see whether it breaks traction or simply stops? Or is a motor replacement more sensible?

 

The other thing is that the unmodified DJH tender weighs about 220g, so I might be better off to build a Comet tender or a chassis at least, to go with it. The huge whitemetal chassis block must weigh 100g at least on its own. Very happy to be guided by your expertise, which exceeds mine by some distance.

 

Hope that it does look like it runs smoothly enough, and that I got the shape of the cab right.

 

Iain

[jrg1]

When those (and other significant railway items) were scrapped, it was during a much different period. The railway preservation scene was just starting, mainly by enthusiasts with little money. Personal transport and disposable income were much less than today and the need for spoon fed leisure activities had not yet been discovered.

 

The people running the railways were doing so under difficult and challenging circumstances and they were not historians, so why would you expect them to spend time and money in preserving "obsolete" locomotives.

 

That "Sir William Stanier" was not preserved is rather ironic. During an inspection of Crewe Works when he was appointed LMS CME, Stanier spotted some LNWR locomotives that had been retained and kept back from scrapping. When told what they were he had them broken up.

The people at BR had no idea of heritage value, either in engineering or buildings.

Starting with the likes of Alan Pegler, advances in preservation have been by the public, and without public spirited people like that, the preservation scene would be very bare indeed today.

We have lost so much-locomotives, carriages, buildings that all form part of our history and heritage-as if no one in authority cares.

I recommend you research Sir John Betjamin's battles with authority to save the Coal Exchange and Euston's Great Hall and Arch-failure to achieve this at least led to the Sociey for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.

Over in Lincolnshire, the grandaddy of all modern metal bridges, Torksey Viaduct, was allowed to rot for 50 years, before being restored for Sustrans-why is officialdom so insensitive?

[Michael Edge]

Thanks Mike, I was a bit concerned about that. I may need to remove a bit of lead. How do I test safely whether the loco can spin its wheels? I can hold onto ithe drawbar and see whether it breaks traction or simply stops? Or is a motor replacement more sensible?

 

The other thing is that the unmodified DJH tender weighs about 220g, so I might be better off to build a Comet tender or a chassis at least, to go with it. The huge whitemetal chassis block must weigh 100g at least on its own. Very happy to be guided by your expertise, which exceeds mine by some distance.

 

Hope that it does look like it runs smoothly enough, and that I got the shape of the cab right.

 

Iain

 

Yes, hold on to the drawbar and see if it slips at full power, otherwise it can stall and burn out the motor. All the Carlisle Duchesses have Portescap RG4Ms, one of the Princesses has the Comet MGB1 (Maxon motor and skew gears) which Geoff developed not long before he died. I don't know if Andrew can still supply this but it's at least as powerful as the Portescap and a lot quieter.

[Brocp]

Just to change the topic slightly from 46256 but in the same ball park, did ypu finish the Royal Scot with the comet chassis yet Iain and if so, how does that run/pull?

[Jol Wilkinson]

The people at BR had no idea of heritage value, either in engineering or buildings.

Starting with the likes of Alan Pegler, advances in preservation have been by the public, and without public spirited people like that, the preservation scene would be very bare indeed today.

We have lost so much-locomotives, carriages, buildings that all form part of our history and heritage-as if no one in authority cares.

I recommend you research Sir John Betjamin's battles with authority to save the Coal Exchange and Euston's Great Hall and Arch-failure to achieve this at least led to the Sociey for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.

Over in Lincolnshire, the grandaddy of all modern metal bridges, Torksey Viaduct, was allowed to rot for 50 years, before being restored for Sustrans-why is officialdom so insensitive?

I agree that the people at BR gave little or any thought to the heritage value of the company's assets.

 

As a long time member of the LNWR Society and a former Committee Member I am well aware of the impact of the destruction of the Euston Arch etc. The Euston booking hall and station complex would, in all likelihood, not have lent itself readily to modernization as St Pancras or Kings Cross have done. Remember that it was the second mainline station built in London (after London Bridge), fifteen years before KX and twenty nine years before St Pancras. Much changed in those early years of the Victorian railways and Euston was was not well suited to the level of expansion that it went through. I take some consolation from the fact that the destruction of the Euston buildings probably saved others that might have suffered the same fate.

 

What you seem incapable of recognising is that what today's society wants is not what it wanted - or thought important - forty or fifty years ago. In addition, those running any business are tasked to provide a product or service within financial constraints. It is therefore not surprising that BR concentrated their efforts in a different direction to what, with the benefit of hindsight, you think they should have done.

 

I am also aware of John Betjeman's (note spelling) efforts in preserving our railway heritage. We stayed in his former London Residence in Cloth Fair last year, as a sort of pilgrimage. 

[92220]

Yes, hold on to the drawbar and see if it slips at full power, otherwise it can stall and burn out the motor. All the Carlisle Duchesses have Portescap RG4Ms, one of the Princesses has the Comet MGB1 (Maxon motor and skew gears) which Geoff developed not long before he died. I don't know if Andrew can still supply this but it's at least as powerful as the Portescap and a lot quieter.

  

 

Hi Mike,

 

46256 does slip its wheels when held by the drawbar on full power, so hopefully it will be ok. It waltzes away with 14 on a curve so I don't think I'll be overloading it: 14 will probably be the maximum load. Camden Shed mk2 will have wider radius curves and all the FY pointwork will be on the straight, so hopefully it will have lower frictional resistance too.

 

I'll keep to 600-650g in future though.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Just to change the topic slightly from 46256 but in the same ball park, did ypu finish the Royal Scot with the comet chassis yet Iain and if so, how does that run/pull?

I've not finished that yet, but will report back when I do.

 

Iain

[jrg1]

I agree that the people at BR gave little or any thought to the heritage value of the company's assets.

 

As a long time member of the LNWR Society and a former Committee Member I am well aware of the impact of the destruction of the Euston Arch etc. The Euston booking hall and station complex would, in all likelihood, not have lent itself readily to modernization as St Pancras or Kings Cross have done. Remember that it was the second mainline station built in London (after London Bridge), fifteen years before KX and twenty nine years before St Pancras. Much changed in those early years of the Victorian railways and Euston was was not well suited to the level of expansion that it went through. I take some consolation from the fact that the destruction of the Euston buildings probably saved others that might have suffered the same fate.

 

What you seem incapable of recognising is that what today's society wants is not what it wanted - or thought important - forty or fifty years ago. In addition, those running any business are tasked to provide a product or service within financial constraints. It is therefore not surprising that BR concentrated their efforts in a different direction to what, with the benefit of hindsight, you think they should have done.

 

I am also aware of John Betjeman's (note spelling) efforts in preserving our railway heritage. We stayed in his former London Residence in Cloth Fair last year, as a sort of pilgrimage. 

I am capable of recognising that other countries respect their heritage and preserve it accordingly-I was made aware of this when last in Spain, and saw buildings dating from the 18th century being restored using traditional skills, taught today to enable preservation.

i am also capable of recognising that the BR board and the church commissioners acted like vandals with the UK's heritage.

With Euston, there was a proposal to move the Arch sideways-away from the approach road.  The cost was peanuts compared to the total cost of rebuilding.    

[Jol Wilkinson]

I am capable of recognising that other countries respect their heritage and preserve it accordingly-I was made aware of this when last in Spain, and saw buildings dating from the 18th century being restored using traditional skills, taught today to enable preservation.

i am also capable of recognising that the BR board and the church commissioners acted like vandals with the UK's heritage.

With Euston, there was a proposal to move the Arch sideways-away from the approach road.  The cost was peanuts compared to the total cost of rebuilding.    

If you were in Spain recently, then that would not be surprising. Most "Western" nations have realised the value of restoring/maintaining old and interesting buildings, especially for the benefit of the economy through the holiday/leisure trade.

 

Moving the Arch sideways would have preserved it. However, the station "facilities" including that wonderful booking hall, would still have needed considerable investment to make them practical for the modern travelers' needs. 

 

Edited to add:

 

This is doing nothing to benefit Iain's thread on his great modelling, so I suggest we call it quits.

Edited February 22, 2017 by LNWRmodeller

[jonny777]

There was no kudos in preservation in those days, let alone any political mileage in it.

 

The Americans had sent a man into space, were building 16-lane highways and 50+ storey skyscrapers;  and the 'cool, with-it' British wannabees were going to copy that technology for the space-age society, not waste their time on preserving old Victorian technology.

 

BR management seemed to know what they wanted - a sleek and fast railway to compete with the airlines - but did not really have the technology to be able to get it precisely when they wanted it. Hence the apparent financial incompetence of chopping and changing with different ideas about traction along the lines of "Oooh, they look modern, lets order lots of those" followed a little later by "Oooh, those newer ones are even better, lets order lots of those, and scrap the previous ones"... and repeat.

[92220]

The production line rolls on while I wait for painting and lining weather for Sir William.

 

I bought a DJH Black 5 kit at the Southampton show, and seeing as it included a full set of new-type RP25 Markits as well as the supplied Romfords, it was definitely a bargain. The Romfords will go in the spares box, and away we go.

 

The body had been part-constructed, and not quite to the standard I'd have liked:

 

 

so into a few pots of boiling water, and it gradually receded to its parts.

 

The frames went together as easily as I've come to realise these thick DJH frames do: barely even a use for the Poppy's jig. Bearings reamed, wheels and rods on and without even a minor fettle, it rolls under its own weight down a slight slope.

 

 

 

I solder the screwed spacers to the frames and then remove the screws.

 

 

Some questions arise from the fact that this kit comes with a different crankpin fixing than the usual Markits/Romfords one that I'm becoming used to. The crankpins are Markits, but the holes in the rods are 2mm plus, to accommodate this arrangement:

 

 

So:

Do I go with this, and if so, do I simply solder the crankpin fixing on, trusting that the solder will only run down the join between crankpin and fixer if I apply the iron to the crankpin?

If I do this, do I reduce the thickness of the crankpin fixing, as there is a huge amount of sideplay on the rods as they are?

Or, do I bush the rods and use the normal crankpin fixing, using a piece of paper to provide a barrier?

Or, (and I've not checked the distances) do I substitute a set of Comet rods?

 

Thanks for any advice.

 

Iain

Edited February 22, 2017 by 92220

[jrg1]

I agree that the DJH frames are easy to set up-even when modifying for P4-nothing wrong with thick frames at all, in my opinion.  As for the rods, I have substituted Alan Gibson on the Brit I am building, as the kit rods are quite inferior.  So, I would advise fitting Comet rods.

[92220]

I ended up bushing the DJH rods on the Black 5 and using the normal Markits crankpin and washer.

 

Some progress made.

 

 

 

 

And then further:

 

 

 

 

I made tender pickups for this one: the mounting points for the pickup pads on the loco frames are very high and so exerting the right pressure is difficult. Hence making some for the tender to be on the safe side. I made the loco-tender connector as in Iain Rice's Wild Swan book on Chassis Construction.

 

 

 

 

This kit goes together with a minimum of fuss to be honest. The fit of most of the parts is very good indeed - the steam pipes are a good example. Many of the white metal castings are very clean and accurate. I replaced the crossheads with spare Comet ones from 46248's chassis kit, because as supplied, the piston rod was too short and the channel for the slidebars to run in was incompletely formed. I also had the LMS drop links from the Markits fret for the same model.

 

And overall, I think it captures the look of a Black 5 pretty well. I've got a few Hornby versions, which are dimensionally decent and scrub up well with a significant amount of work to thin plastic, remove odd ledges and add a load of Brassmasters bits. Next to one of those, this shouldn't look out of place. It might even look better if I can do it justice!

 

Iain

[Barry O]

Iain

The DJH black 5 will pull more than a Hornby one and you don't have to spend time sorting out the tender and under the smokebox skirt seen on the current Hornby Black ones.

Hornby ones sell for more on eBay...

 

Baz

[92220]

Iain

The DJH black 5 will pull more than a Hornby one and you don't have to spend time sorting out the tender and under the smokebox skirt seen on the current Hornby Black ones.

Hornby ones sell for more on eBay...

Baz

You're right there Baz. The Hornby ones scrub up well enough, but they do need a fair bit of work. I certainly won't chuck or sell the ones I've done, especially the two Caprottis, but I'm getting a lot of enjoyment from building this DJH one. It's probably not really necessary for me to have any more, but then it's hardly necessary for me to have as many as I have anyway. I can guarantee I'll fail to resist the temptation to build another, since I've managed to acquire two sets of Comet frames and motion, and the relevant sets of Markits wheels.

 

Getting close to finishing it:

 

 

https://youtu.be/KClfvXo-Yw8

 

As for haulage, this is with no added weight, not yet oiled or run-in, and the same 14 on as 46256 had. I very much doubt I could get a Hornby one to move off so cleanly. I can't run it for a longer run as part of the circuit is dismantled.

 

https://youtu.be/D4sd8bYMukI

 

Iain

[92220]

Hopefully this will embed the videos properly:

 

 

 

 

 

Iain

[lanchester]

I agree that the people at BR gave little or any thought to the heritage value of the company's assets.

 

As a long time member of the LNWR Society and a former Committee Member I am well aware of the impact of the destruction of the Euston Arch etc. The Euston booking hall and station complex would, in all likelihood, not have lent itself readily to modernization as St Pancras or Kings Cross have done. Remember that it was the second mainline station built in London (after London Bridge), fifteen years before KX and twenty nine years before St Pancras. Much changed in those early years of the Victorian railways and Euston was was not well suited to the level of expansion that it went through. I take some consolation from the fact that the destruction of the Euston buildings probably saved others that might have suffered the same fate.

 

What you seem incapable of recognising is that what today's society wants is not what it wanted - or thought important - forty or fifty years ago. In addition, those running any business are tasked to provide a product or service within financial constraints. It is therefore not surprising that BR concentrated their efforts in a different direction to what, with the benefit of hindsight, you think they should have done.

 

I am also aware of John Betjeman's (note spelling) efforts in preserving our railway heritage. We stayed in his former London Residence in Cloth Fair last year, as a sort of pilgrimage. 

I'm a bit late to the fair on this on, but I think one of the problems with the 'official preservation list' of the 19502/60s was precisely that it was run by historians out of the Science Museum, who valued original condition and authenticity. I'm given to understand that's why Ben Alder was eventually scrapped - replacement (Caledonian?) boiler and so not sufficiently original. The same thinking would have rejected an A3, even Flying Scotsman, because what survived only held a passing resemblance to the 'historic' locomotive of circa 1928. Given restraints on resources, and the remit of the Science Museum at the time, you can sort of understand the thinking - they were after preserving definable landmarks in railway engineering, not interested in a machine with a complex multi-decade history of evolution.

 

In other fields there is the opposite problem. Many old houses are 'listed' but the listing includes all sorts of hideous later accretions from Victorian to quite modern, and getting permission to bring the property back to something like original condition is almost impossible to obtain. There is an argument, put forward by people like Sir Roy Strong, that the recent obsession with preserving anything that has a touch of age in it may be almost as damaging as our previous obsession with sweeping everything old away. Not sure I go that far, but spreading the limited preservation effort over so many near-identical locomotives or carriages (or houses for that matter) may merely ensure that far fewer of them end up with a long term future?

[Jack P]

Just spent the last little while scrolling through this thread, absolutely excellent! Have followed for future updates

[92220]

Just spent the last little while scrolling through this thread, absolutely excellent! Have followed for future updates

Thanks Jack, very kind.

 

DJH Black 5 is off to the paint shop.

 

 

 

I tried to work out how to add at least the prominent sandpipes between the middle and rear drivers but decided against it. The sandboxes are a fraction too deep and placed too far out for OO at least, so the clearance from the base of the sandbox behind the rods is too tight. So they are going to be left off.

 

This is the first waft of weathering over 73274 - the Caprotti Crosti 5:

 

 

 

 

I think it will need and receive a bit more. I'll be trying to capture the Crosti look of being a little cleaner ahead of the side exhaust, but pretty filthy behind it.

 

I reconnected part of the layout to test 46248:

 

https://youtu.be/h6ajyCp8v3E

 

Really pleased with the way it eases away with a decent load. I'll try a couple more combinations of Comet chassis and Hornby Coronation body, maybe including the Comet tender. Painting is the stumbling block in my mind: not certain about the exact shade of red. These two photos are from Graham's Grantham thread, firstly a Mike Edge 46256:

 

 

Secondly, a link to http://www.bundesbahnzeit.de/page.php?id=HS2016-01-17_England#Teil1 showed this one of 46244:

 

 

I know the shade of red for these big pacifics varies a lot with lighting and how new the paintwork is, but I'd be happy to hear people's experiences with different paints.

 

Iain

[92220]

 

Trying again with the same link as above.

 

Iain

[jrg1]

I really do like the Crosti-Caprotti-these might-have-beens are fascinating for me, and this one is the tops.  The crostis were always a lot filthier that that, and we disliked intensely by the crews, I believe.  Have you posted a description of the build?

[Barry O]

Iaian that nice cleaned one Mike built is now a bit......weathered.

 

I may have some hornbyduchess bodies and DJH blk 5s available. PM me if you need anything

 

Baz

[92220]

I really do like the Crosti-Caprotti-these might-have-beens are fascinating for me, and this one is the tops.  The crostis were always a lot filthier that that, and we disliked intensely by the crews, I believe.  Have you posted a description of the build?

Thanks - build is here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/99006-br-caprotti-crosti-standard-5/

It was originally in the 2015 challenge but it sat on a shelf for a while. It runs pretty well and I tested it on the rake of 14 above without any slip.

Definitely planned to be further dirtied though.

 

Iain

[92220]

Iaian that nice cleaned one Mike built is now a bit......weathered.

I may have some hornbyduchess bodies and DJH blk 5s available. PM me if you need anything

Baz

Thanks Baz. You wouldn't happen to know what colour it was painted before you cast your magic weathering spell over it, would you?

Iain

[Barry O]

I will check my records and let you know.

Baz

[92220]

I just can't help myself.....

 

 

Will be 45025 ("domeless" boiler, plain rods, riveted tender, plain axleboxes)

 

I don't have clear photographic evidence that it still had its original wheels with the extra webbing around the crankpin spokes, but I'm going with these as they were included with the kit and they are new Markits.

 

Iain