Valentin

Julia, It is not clear from your picture if there is some protection under the plastic sheet, to protect the milling bed and the milling bit. If not, is it not necessary? I always use a scrap piece of ply but I would happily not use it as it doesn't help much when I try to align the part I want to mill. Valentin

Thank you all for your feedback. I have some practice as I purchased the machine just over an year ago, I used it mostly to learn how to use it (in process I managed to brake a couple of bits); I know what you say, Julia, about "listening" the machine. Nigel, Andy, I used with some success Henk's method of layered brass chassis.

I am very confused about milling bits. I looked for information online (like this blog) but I still don't know what is the best milling bit for a job. In scratch-building solid brass chassis, what milling bit should I choose? There is a need to create the voids for the axle muffs, for the driving gear, the idlers, the worm-gear, shaping the chassis. I understand the difference between various lengths and diameters, and I am pretty sure I will need an end milling bit with a 3.2 mm diameter shank for the MF70. I still don't know what material the bit should be made of, how many flutes, coating, what end profile, what cut variety (centre, non-centre, up-cut, down-cut, compression). Very confusing for a beginner...

Based on your everyone's experience, what would be considered to be good resins for printing models in 2mm:1ft scale? based on criteria like detail, resilience, priming and painting.

From a couple of private messages I got, related to my chassis donation above, I may have been misunderstood regarding my future in the railway modelling hobby in general, and in the 2mm FS in special (it may come to a surprise to some - - but English is not my native language). I am not going anywhere, I will keep trying to build models, just not replacement chassis based on a N/S or brass etched kit. And I will keep posting my progresses, if any, asking questions, making comments, being inspired by your work...

The components are now gone.

Since I've become a member of the 2mm Finescale Association,nearly 10 years ago, I tried, without success, to build a working replacement chassis (the etched N/S kits designed by Chris Higgs and sold by the Association). Somehow, I managed to ruin them, together with other components: wheels, gears, muffs, etc etc. The last on the list of failures is the chassis for the BR Class 04 shunter. Listening to the more experienced ones, when the project went wrong, I used to put it aside and work on something else, or just taking a break from the hobby, coming back to the failure at a later date, with a clear mind. After some partially successful stages, the failures came back. I was thinking if others can do it, I can do it... but no. I spent hundreds of pounds on trying to achieve something which invariably ended up in frustrations and disappointments. I don't want to spend a penny more, so I GIVE UP! Why bother if there is no joy? Like with the Easitrac system, I'm afraid that these etched N/S or brass kits are not for me. As such, if any beginner in 2FS is interested, the following are up for grabs. The taker needs to pay for P&P only, and to make a donation to his / her chosen charity. I would be happy if they help a newcomer to the 2mm:1ft fine scale to learn something. BR Class 04 plus wheels, gears, and other parts. 0-6-0ST Hunslet Austerity / LNER J94: these are four kits (3-640), more or less complete, with two sets of Mk4, 8.5mm wheels (12 in total), gears, a Graham Farish clone motor, and other parts.

I would be happy to share my designs (currently only one) with those interested. I don't think many would be interested in them though as they don't represent British rolling stock. Here is what I've done so far using Fusion 360 and a Photon S resin printer (I'm sure Keith Armes won't have any issues in identifying the prototype:

Just to be clear: I am happy I found the problem with my chassis and I didn't loose my sanity - I have no intention to claim that any current or former shopkeeper is responsible for this fault with the gears. Obviously, I missed or forgot about the mention in the Newsletter.

Thanks, Jim. Yes, I've tried with the rods off and it was almost the same. Anyway, at Nick's suggestion I compared the worm-gear with others I have and this looks different. Now I have to find the best way to replace the gear with another one and not ruining the quartering or distorting the chassis frames - slim chance, but not impossible . I will probably melt the muff with the soldering iron.

I'm going crazy!!! The Class 04 replacement chassis pictured below runs beautifully, but only under its own wight, on an incline (actually this is my first time in many attempts I managed to get a chassis running so well - the quartering is just perfect). Then, I tried to run it using a motor, in fact many different motors (the Association one, the cheap eBay Graham Farish clone, the very expensive Maxon, a Nigel Lowton), and it's the same outcome with all of them: it looks like the worm gear literally chews the worm-wheel - I can see, under the magnifying glass how very small nylon bits are blown away from the worm. For these tests, I held the motor in one hand and the chassis in the other hand then slowly moving the worm fitted on the motor to the gear-wheel on the chassis; I tried a firm mesh as well as a loose one. Could anyone tell, please, WHAT IS WRONG with my chassis?

I would happily participate to such "webinar". I would kindly ask the tutor(s) if they would choose a free (as in free beer) and cross-platform software (I am using Linux but I am sure there are Mac users around and even more Windows users). LibreCAD meets these requirements and more - it's also Open Source.

From Wikipedia: "Mehrabian's findings on inconsistent messages of feelings and attitudes (the "7%-38%-55% Rule") are well-known, the percentages relating to relative impact of words, tone of voice, and body language when speaking." The online forums users communicate only by using the words - there is no tone, nor body-language, so 93% of the message may have been lost.

They say "Less is More". I have seen 3D designs having a support for every single bit of their downwards facing surfaces. I did multiple prints of the same model at different orientations, resolutions, antialiasing settings. for some of these prints, I used the aforementioned approach; for the rest I manually added far less supports, choosing only the points where I considered necessary. I couldn't see any major difference in the final product, apart from the time consumed with removing the supports, between the two approaches. So, why some modellers choose to add so many supports? 3D printer: ANYCUBIC Photon S Resin: ANYCUBIC Green Translucent (came with the printer)

Julia, you're a gold mine!

What would be considered an optimal thickness for a 3D-printed locomotive / wagon / carriage body shell with no bottom side?

Yes, they are available and I will send them to you within the next couple of days.

This message is not meant to criticise the Easitrac system, nor its developers or those who are using and loving it. For me, Easitrac just doesn't work. I may be biased, as I have been using a soldering iron since I was 8 years old, but I just hate it when it comes to building turnouts. As such I am happy to hand over all my Easitrac attempts to any newcomer to 2mm FS who wants to learn about it or have some hands-on before deciding to heavily invest into it. I am so eager to stop seeing anything reminding me of Easitrac in my workshop, I will even pay for P&P. Below are some pictures with all the Easitrac components I am happy to give away:

Does anyone know if the straight piano wire sold by Eileens Emporium is straight enough to be used for axles and layshafts? I want to use the 1.2 mm diameter wire for wheel axles, and the 2.0 mm diameter as a layshaft.

I am looking to purchase some M0.2 gears from Mikroantriebe (KKPMO) for a small chassis; regarding the material, there are there choices: Polyacetal (POM) - white Polyacetal (POM) - black Brass MO58 Which one to choose? I know that if using brass gears, the resulting chassis is noisier - this doesn't bother me.

Isn't that an odd place, on the outside, for a check rail?

Hi Julia, I used code 30 for the metre gauge test oval and point I built and it looks very good, especially after I weathered the rails. The track is not yet ballasted, maybe it will look even better after ballasting. I would assume that after ballasting and weathering, code 40 will look as good as code 30. As I already have roller gauges for code 40 with the rails spaced at 5mm, I would use code 40 for my future project of a 2'6" narrow gauge based in Eastern Europe. What size are the timbers you're using for the plain track? The ones in the shop are 1.3 mm wide, 12 mm long and 0.85 mm thick - not very prototypical for a 2' or 2'6" narrow gauge line; they could be improved by shortening and ballasting, but how would one deal with them being too wide?

Why wouldn't you use code 40 everywhere, including the narrow gauge lines?

Hi Julia, How do you get the wood grain effect on the timbers?

I couldn't believe how resilient this stretcher bar is. It was greatly stressed while I was trying to fit / unfit (more than once) the wire-in-tube TOU. And the adjustments are very easy to make. Although one of the blades came off, it took a minute to solder it back. I used 188°C solder to join the brass pins to the scarp N/S plates, and low-melt solder (70°C) to join the blades to the N/S plates. The stretcher bar is a strip of 0.4 mm fibre-glass PCB. When operating the turnout, I noticed the blades swivelling around the stretcher bar - I can only imagine how stressed a solid joint would be.