Gingerbread

Ian Thanks for your comments. You are right regarding the chimney - it should be copper capped, but I don't have copper, so brass was the nearest I could get. I suspect you are right about steel for the smokebox hinges/handles, and quite possibly on the handrails - at present I have no steel paint, so they will remain black/brass respectively until the next repaint. Looking again at my original livery guide at the GWR modelling site I interpreted the handrail as brass, but I think steel is more likely. However, a couple of other pictures (of models) suggest otherwise - this one by Malcolm Mitchell (probably the same model) looks almost black, whilst this one by Martyn Welsh looks as if it is green along the sides (but perhaps it's just the green of the tanks reflecting from the handrails?). There is some guidance (for the 1918 onwards period) on the Malcolm Mitchell site here, which generally agrees with your suggestions, though it specifies the handrails are green (except that the rear cab handrails are steel), if I interpret the list correctly. David

A little more progress on providing some motive power. Some time ago I bought the Dean Sidings resin body for a 1701 saddle tank, which is intended to fit on the Farish 57xx pannier chassis. There was already a kit available from the 2mm Association to convert that chassis to 2mm standards, but it had a poor reputation. There was an etched chassis replacement intended for release "sometime soon", so I decided to build the body and procrastinate until the chassis kit arrived. The 1702 body kit was straightforward to assemble. As I recall there only a few minor problems - the instructions specified wrong drill size for one of the holes toolbox is too large to fit comfortably between the footplate and tanks I have left off a few of the final fittings - eg steps - until I can see how well the body fits onto the etched underframe. It's probably going to be too light - there's a couple of whitemetal weights to insert into the tanks, but I intend to add as much lead as possible to increase the weight. Unfortunately the paint job was poor, even by my modest standards, so it has subsequently been stripped and repainted, with some improvement in quality. Initially I have left the handrails as bare brass wire, as the ones in photograph I was using as reference appeared to be brass (it was a photograph of a model, but I have yet to find a colour photograph of GWR tank loco in pre 1910 livery). Subsequent photographs, also of models (probably including the same model from a different angle) suggested they were painted - green along the side, not sure about the front but I assume black. For the present I am invoking rule 1 that they look much nicer to me in brass, but I would like to find the correct scheme and attempt to follow it. Perhaps another argument in favour of getting a copy of Great Western Way, as none of the references I have consulted seem to cover this point. I am a little mystified by the provided fireman - his shovel bears little resemblance to the usual GWR shape and his stance looks more suited to paddling a dragon boat (Chinese Year of the Dragon?). The long-awaited Association etches were released about three weeks ago, so a cheque was dispatched to Shop 3, an exchange of emails followed to resolve problems with some of the out-of-stock items, and most of the ordered items arrived shortly afterwards. On the right is the 57xx pannier kit, which is the one to be used here. In the middle is the optional "advanced" version, which puts the motor in the boiler and leaves the cab free - I am going to try this, as the cab is going to be open, and it would be useful not to fill it with a motor. On the left is the etch for the 14xx chassis - to be used in conjunction with another Dean Sidings body for a '517 locomotive, but unfortunately that size of wheels is currently out of stock. First problem is that the provided parts list was rather too vague for the newcomer at which these kits are aimed. For example - "Association frame PCB spacer" - but is it the 3-156 which is 6.4mm wide or the 3-157 which is 7.0mm wide (in fact it's the 3-157). Or "2xgear muffs" - but which ones of the four types on offer (the answer depends on which gear option you chose, imperial or metric, among other things...) There's a rather neat jig which folds up ready to hold the frames in place for soldering. Unfortunately I understand that 3 of the new etches have jigs that don't quite line up right, and have been withdrawn pending the production of replacement jigs, but the 57xx one looks fine. Feeling bold/foolhardy I then chose to use the advanced frames, so I cut them out of the optional "extra" etch, then tried to fit the frame bushes. Rather too tight to fit, and the holes were much too big for my cutting broaches, but careful use of a small circular file seems to have opened them up correctly. Bushes soldered in place, then the gearbox folded up. Instructions don't make it clear whether the top goes inside or outside, but accompanying photos suggested outside and that seemed to fit slightly better than inside, so that's what I did. Next step is to gap the PCB spacer, and cut off pieces to solder in the appropriate places. Photograph below illustrates this stage. I can foresee some interesting questions about the assembly of the gearbox, on which the instructions don't seem very forthcoming. So far as I can see: 1 The shaft on the recommended motor (the new Association flat can) is 1.0 mm in diameter, but the bearings and worm are 1.5 mm in diameter. Adaptors ordered from Nigel Lawton to handle this, but need to work out how to fix the various parts together. 2 The worm gear is about twice the length of the gearbox - apparently it is plastic, and should be easy to cut. 3 The motor shaft is rather shorter than the gearbox, so doesn't appear to reach the bearing at the far end (and there's also the diameter issue from 1 above). If I read the instructions right, the solution is to make a short 1.5mm stub axle (from the various bits of axle steel that I bought to use as alignment aids), and insert it into the worm form the end opposite to the motor (ie from the cab). David

Thanks for the various comments about the prospective coach painting. It's useful to discuss the potential problems of my next blog post before I make it rather than after - perhaps I will get it mostly right Using one of my Didcot Gallery images to illustrate the problem: On the model, the pillar between compartments is about 1 mm wide - this is the equivalent to the pillar below the number 416 in the image. Ideally it needs to have wide venetian red lines on each side, then narrow black lines, then a wide cream line - all within the limit of 1mm. I will certainly be following Don's advice to ignore the thin brown lines around the edge of the cream panels - and I may follow his earlier advice to omit the vertical black lines, reducing the pattern to venetian red/cream/venetian red. The situation around the doors is a little different. The pillar is about the same width, but there is one wider black line instead of two narrow ones, so I think it will be worth having the black line there (subject to my eyesight and painting/drawing skill, and patience). I still think that I will need most of black lining on the upper part (above the windows) - but I reserve the right to change my mind after I have actually tried it. Looks like I will be trying a few alternatives, stripping and trying again... David

Ian - I've heard that the David Eveleigh toad kits are out of stock at present, but I assume he will be producing more in due course, as the popularity of early GWR modelling grows (plus their use as departmental stock on later GWR layouts). Your coach looks good - but unfortunately the pillars on mine seem much more cramped, so more difficult to paint (as well as being half the size, 2mm against 4mm). Sounds like a Rotring pen should be on my shopping list to try your method for the black lining, rather than trying to paint it. I agree that a gold line round the lower panels would look good, but that trying to paint it would be impracticable. I think some 2mm modellers achieve this by scraping a thin line through to the underlying brass. David

Agreed - some close up photos which I took at Didot confirm that. However, when seen from a distance it's very difficult to distinguish from chocolate (see my Didcot 2011 gallery for examples), so I will experiment with both and see which looks best from normal viewing distance. The problem with the third class coaches is small compartments -> narrow pillars, so very difficult to squeeze in the required five lines, consisting of: venetian red (for which I am using red oxide at present), black (or chocolate), cream, black, venetian red. The edges of the doors are slightly better, with one less line to include (omit one of the black ones). As you imply, all a bit challenging in 2mm - I should probably have tried one of the other coaches first (first and two brake thirds). The ends will need black beading (on chocolate ends)- I think the flooding technique is worth trying there, as the panels are large (relatively speaking). David

I recently stumbled across an interesting article covering old Toads. It was written by John Lewis, apparently published in January 1983 in a publication called "Scale Trains" (which I don't recognise), and formed the first part of a five-part series. A couple of copies of these articles are available in the files section of the Yahoo GWR-elist, in different formats. It provides some useful background information for the one I modelled, so I thought it worthwhile to summarise that here. The type of Toad which I modelled is referred to by John Lewis as the 1882 type. The earliest type covered is the 1871 type, which was of the same general design (wooden outside frames for the body), but with wooden underframe and only 15'6" long with 9' wheelbase. Axleboxes were grease, and brakes were of wagon type, with four wooden blocks. Initially they had no roofs to the verandahs, but roofs appear to have been added to some of them between 1880 and 1885. Various heights were recorded in the register, between 5'6" and 8', but it's not clear whether this represents variation in construction or just in method of measuring (inside/outside, including/excluding solebar, etc). About 300 appear to have been built, and typically they lasted until about 1900. Photographs are rare. Next comes the 1874 type, where dimensions increased to the same as my model - namely 18' long, 11'6" wheelbase. In other respects they seem to have been like the 1871 type - wooden underframe, grease axleboxes, initially no roof to the verandah, and probably wooden brake shoes, though some roofs fitted later, and later vans built from new with verandah roofs and probably with iron brake shoes. About 220 were built, generally withdrawn over period 1890-1914, though one lasted until 1922, one found its way to the Kent and East Sussex Railway (via Shropshire and Montgomery?), one to London & India Dock Co, one to Burry Port and Gwendraeth Valley Railway. The 1882 version switched to iron underframe - initially 9" bulb angle, later 9"x3" channel. Whereas the earlier versions appear to have retained grease axleboxes, most of these appear to have switched to oil around 1900. Just under 400 were built, over the period 1882-7, and generally lasted until the 1920s and 1930s. An unknown number were upgraded and given the diagram number AA16 around 1915-22, which involved switching to self-contained buffers and/or clasp brakes. These generally lasted until the 1930s, with one lasting to 1950. Some were converted to tools vans for the Signals Department, 13 such examples are listed, typically converted in the 1920s and lasting until the 1930s, with the last one condemned in 1946. Though not specifically mentioned in the text, photographs suggest that the AA16 and Engineers' versions had extra handrails, and the handrails changed from grey to white - not clear if these changes were specific to those versions or were general by the later date. I think Richard Brummitt suggested earlier that the handrails became white around WWI. I was impressed by Missy's model of a toad (of the more modern variety) at St Albans recently - complete with hollow chimney. My earlier variant appears to have had a conical cap (presumably to keep out the rain?), so I'm not convinced that a hollow chimney would be justified for me. Currently the main challenge is that I think my toads should be branded "Wellington", which seems rather a long name to squeeze into the space available - not that it's likely to be very legible at that size, specially in an italic script. Perhaps I could justify using "Crewe" or "Oxley" instead. Unfortunately only one picture in this blog entry - the quality of the pictures in the copy of the article is poor, and their copyright status isn't clear. And there's not enough progress on my models to justify a new photo - but I included one anyway, mostly to show the initial stage of my next project, an S9 4-wheel third coach from Worsley Works on a David Eveleigh underframe. I blame Mikkel's recent blog post for inspiring me to tackle this one from my pile of outstanding kits. But I don't think but his painting techniques are going to work on this particular model as the cream areas appear to be too small to "flood fill", so I'm trying the "start with cream upper works and add chocolate lines" approach, with limited success. There's a couple of brake thirds with much larger areas of cream which look promising for a trial sometime later... David

That's an impressive start - I look forward to reading news of further progress. I know Richard Brummitt was recently debating what to produce etches for next, and the Metro Tank was one of the candidates, but I suspect he has settled on the Steam Rail Motor. Which motor are you intending to use? 70:1 gearing looks quite high for a model with relatively large wheels, but if it's one of the high-revving Nigel Lawton ones, it's probably about right. Using the downloadable speed calculator by Richard Benn from http://www.festiveroad.net/rail/software.htm and entering 30,000 rpm (no load rating for the micromotor), 70:1 gear ratio, and 10.5mm wheels gives a maximum scale speed of 80 mph. David

I'm not certain about the muffs, but I think you will need: 3-100 axle muff for drivers 3-101 gear muff In addition, I would suggest you need: 3-107 Flanged crankpins (alternatively 3-106 unflanged) 3-109 Crankpin cap washers etched (alternatively 3-108 turned) 3-110 Axle steel (approx four lengths for alignment checking - or use drills if you have them - but at least one for spur shafts) 3-383 is marked on the shop list as TOS, so I chose the 3-362 Gearset 100DP 30:1 rather than your choice of 3-359+3-383, which means I also needed from Nigel Lawton a 1.0mm to 1.5mm adaptor for the motor shaft (probably best to buy at least 2, in case one escapes). I think you probably need those adaptors anyway, to make the 1.0 mm shaft fit the 1.5 mm bearings at either end of the worm - but you might also have problems that the shaft doesn't reach the "far" bearing - haven't checked the geometry closely enough yet. I was advised to use 3-157 for frame spacer, rather than 3-156 Mine is barely started, so I can't yet confirm that all the pieces fit together correctly, but I can confirm that the jig appears to line up without the problems reported for some of the others (J94, 03/04, 4F). Good luck with it David

Thanks for the corrections Andy. I thought I had read somewhere that 9mm track was used on part of Chiltern Green - but perhaps that used stock to slightly narrower than normal standards (or perhaps I misunderstood or misremembered). Anyway, I've not actually tried it myself so won't disagree with your experience. David

See http://www.2mm.org.u...-in-wheels.html for details of which drop in wheelsets are available and which models they should suit. David

Part right, part wrong. 2mm and N stock and plain straight track should be interchangeable - 2mm stock should run on plain N track, and N stock should run on plain 2mm track. The problem arises with points, where the clearances are rather different (and also with tight curves - 2mm stock often won't handle tight curves well). In many cases you can use alternate wheelsets to convert between the two gauges - this should work for most coaches and wagons, and for modern Farish diesels. These should be available from the 2mm Association shops. I also know one N builder who uses N wheels on 2mm axles to run 2mm models on N track, where there isn't a suitable ready-made wheelset. Unfortunately I don't know of a satisfactory way to run steam locomotives on both types of track - converting from one to the other is difficult to reverse. Subject to your soldering skills, you should be able to make 2mm handmade points to match the geometry of Peco streamline ones - or any other geometry that you want. The clearances should be different, to match 2mm FS standards, rather than N practice (not sure that there are any N standards, or whether Peco complies with them). Another possibility that might be worth investigating is the "hybrid" system. I believe that Noel Leaver, who is a member of both the N gauge Society and the 2mm Association, has arranged for some jigs to be made allowing the construction of track to 9mm gauge but 2mm FS standards (for clearances etc). I am not sure how compatible it is with either pure N or pure 2mm FS. David

I would suggest the GIMP as a possible software solution - it has virtually all of the capability of Photoshop, but it's a free download. Not everybody likes it, but probably worth a download to see if it suits you. I would agree with Tequila's comments above - looks to me like you have faded the sky too much. David

Looks just like most of my models - unpainted, no roof, and missing most of the difficult bits like axleboxes and footboards . Though my siphons haven't even progressed that far yet. Can't help feeling that brake van doesn't look entirely at home there, but I know that Jerry Clifford entertains lots of strange visitors on Highbury Colliery nearby... I was actually discussing with him at St Albans how to justify siphons on Highbury Colliery, and suggested claiming that they were carrying Broccoli from Cornwall, and were being diverted for unexplained reasons. I don't think he was convinced. David

Mikkel You may have found an alternative solution in the year since this was posted, but if not then my alternative may be of interest to you. It's something of an acquired taste, but I find that the GIMP does all that I need, and it's free. Proficient Photoshop users tend to hate it - mostly because it's different, as far as I can see. To be fair to them, there are a few Photoshop features that the GIMP lacks, but I can't say that I have ever noticed their absence. David

See a blog article by Guy Hamilton at http://wealden.2mm.org.uk/ on 11 January 2009 - unfortunately the critical photo is rather blurred. Another incentive to improve those soldering skills David

An update on the Y2 fruit van. I have now read the article by David Geen in an early (1991) copy of the Pannier (magazine of the Great Western Study Group), which gives details about the history of individual vans. Firstly there were two slightly different body styles (one of which was itself subdivided into two): The early vans had multiple slats, like the one pictured. The later vans had a single line of slats at the top, as described in Atkins et al - an example is preserved on the Severn Valley Railway, and there's a photo of it at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GWR_6_ton_fruit_van_2303_severn_valley_railway.jpg The version with single line of slats was itself split into two subversions - the distinction isn't clear to me from the article, but I think it relates to the distance from the slat to the top of the side - either half-plank or full-plank. There's a broadly similar split in the brakes originally fitted - the first lots had lever brakes, later lots had Thomas brakes (earlier version of DC brakes), and both were converted to DC brakes from about 1909 onwards. Unfortunately nothing about whether the original livery was red or grey, merely the change from grey to brown and accompanying renumbering from freight series to coach series. There is an interesting comment that the earliest known ("official"?) photo for the van, which is the one reproduced in Atkins et al, is wrongly numbered (blamed on signwriters error) - it shows 47950, which is the number of a Mica meat van, and should probably have been 47900. David

Richard Brummitt has produced some Dean Bogies (etched kits) for 2mm FS which might be of interest - he did 6'4", 8'6" and 10', and I think the PBVs probably used the 8'6" version. Construction appears to be non-trivial, but the end result looks excellent (I saw an example recently, but unfortunately it didn't emerge on Highbury Colliery for photos, and my limited photography skill probably wouldn't have done it justice anyway). Demand was a high, so I think he has probably sold out, but it's worth contacting him if you are interested to see if/when he is planning to produce any more. David

I don't see why not. I am intending to follow the advice in the "Beginners Guide", which suggests neodymium magnets sliding in a channel below the track, and indicates that they should also work below the baseboard. I haven't looked seriously at the "conventional" implementation - using electromagnets - but I don't see why they couldn't be mounted below the baseboard after the track has been laid (as long as you don't have obstructions like crosspieces or supports in the way). David

Katier asked "What is the benefit of the 2mm motor over the almost identically sized Mashima 1015?" According to the statistics in the 2mm Yearbook: 4mm - namely the height is 8mm against 12mm Power - 0.9w against 0.35w Additionally it's available from the 2mm shop, which represents "one stop shopping" for members, rather than Branchlines. Not sure of the Mashima price (I've seen £10-75 quoted from 2008) but the Association motor is competitive at £10, specially if you are shopping there anyway. Against that, the 2mm motor is faster, 20,000 rpm at no load against 14,800 rpm, so may require higher gearing (but 128:1 should be sufficient...). Also the 2mm motor has a 1mm driveshaft instead of the usual 1.5mm, so may needs an adaptor (available from Nigel Lawton at £1 each, plus £2 p&p). David

Nick Bastable wondered if it would fit in a Ford railcar, to which Missy responded "What's that?". Possibly he meant one of Colonel Stevens' innovations - see http://www.colonelstephenssociety.co.uk/Modelling%20Railcars.html [A more challenging project would be to use it to make a 2mm model of Gazelle, used on Colonel Stevens' Shrewsbury and Montgomery Railway - see a photo at ] Pugsley commented "That motor looks rather useful too!". I think it's the latest addition to the range available from the 2mm Association - it has had some very favourable comments (another good reason to join...) David

Most impressive piece of work. You need another photograph with the obligatory small coin, to show just how small it is. Your photographs make it look far too big (and still show no obvious defects, even under such cruel enlargement). It was great to see it at St Albans yesterday (and to talk to you on a wide variety of other topics). David

Not forgotten, as this thread is dedicated to Highbury Colliery - though perhaps I should have worded one of the captions differently (the caravan was visiting from ... the balcony above). I had spent an enjoyable couple of hours chatting to Missy earlier. Also I spent an hour impersonating her (with permission) at her demo stand whilst she queued for lunch. Definitely missed a commercial opportunity there - several would-be-buyers for her little narrow gauge tipper trucks went away disappointed! David

According to recent posts on the VAG, small faults have been found in three of the new etches - 04 and J94 have errors in the assembly jigs (apparently the two sides don't quite match), and there is an error in the tender jig for the 4F. The etches are being re-done (not sure if it's the whole etches or just the jigs), so there may be some delay in obtaining your J94 etch from shop3 (or you may receive a slightly faulty one). No doubt Chris Higgs or shop3 or chief shopkeeper can provide further information. David

Highbury Colliery was flying the 2mm flag at the St Albans Exhibition this weekend, and the Brummitt twins were helping during Sunday. Happy/silly hour saw a few GWR visitors: The two 14xx locomotives were struggling with the GWR freight train - partly because they were too light (or the trucks were too heavy), but mainly because they were wired in opposite directions, so one was pulling forwards and the other was pushing backwards (or was it vice-versa?). An additional locomotive was added, and with the aid of a downhill slope and a following wind the train eventually made its way off the layout. A flying banana made an appearance - wandering through the sidings which provided better lighting for photography. Three siphons - those miners must drink lots of milk! Backlighting means that the chocolate and cream livery is barely visible, so avoid upsetting the sensibilities of the locals. The caravan is reputed to be a visitor from Highclere - through a timewarp from the 1960s to the 1920s? David

Haven't got that far myself (yet), but I believe there are two types - you want "raw" which conducts electricity - the other type (I think it is "anodised") doesn't... David