TerryD1471

I do enjoy your posts, but I have to ask what the word "cromulent" means? It ain't in my Oxford English documentary. Could it be credible, or am I jumping to concatenations?

You're quite right, they are a bit "preachy", but then what do you expect from a clergyman? I ask, as an unpaid cleric myself! Frankly, I found that the older I got, the more I drew from the stories about human nature and the more understanding I gained. OK, I can well understand that "preachy" stuff is not to everyone's "comfort" taste; for many years it didn't do much for me! But I still think that there is much to be gained from the gentle appreciation of human nature and its frailties.

What an exercise in nostalgia! Harold Elliott always came across as a kindly gentleman and his exhibition layout obviously appeared in many locations. My parents took me to see it in Bingley Hall, Birmingham in the early 1950s and I was enchanted. Harold gave a running commentary and whenever Sammy misbehaved, Harold used to swat him with a rolled-up newspaper. Great fun! The layout itself was very impressive because of the large amount of quality 0 gauge stock. What's not to like? The Sammy the Shunter books by Eileen Gibb were fun, but as someone else has observed, the books by Wilbert Awdry struck a more realistic chord. Am I being over-picky in not wanting to call them Thomas books? He wasn't even in the first book! The only named engines there were Edward, Henry & Gordon. Rant over!

I don't claim to have started that club, but I've certainly been a member for a very long time!

Hi That is a problem! I've never seen or heard of paintwork being affected like that, and I'm as certain as I can be that it would not be the neodymium magnet which has caused this. Is it possible the loco has been packed in bubble wrap? I've heard that this stuff can sometimes give off chemicals which affect paintwork. In any event, this gives you an opportunity to strip the rest of the paint off, should you choose to do so. It might be the basis of a different project! Terry

I've seen some interesting comments on this thread. One contributor made mention of the excessive gap between loco and tender, but to my mind that is of far less importance (and so easily corrected) than the following:- 1 The great lumpen forward part of the firebox just above the running plate which was designed to accommodate the huge H/D magnet pole pieces. This is so obvious that it has to be carved down as far as possible. There is quite a bit of scope for thinning it down to a (more) realistic profile, even if you are retaining the original H/D-Wrenn chassis-motor combination. If you are replacing the chassis, there is even more scope for correcting the firebox profile with drills, files and filler. 2 The trailing pony truck is pretty inaccurate, because the real loco had fixed frame extensions from just behind the coupled wheels up to the back end of the cab. The actual Bissell truck was quite a small item, pivoting in between these frame extensions. 3 The "skirt" between the base of the boiler and the footplate can be removed with drills and fine files. Quite laborious, but really worthwhile because it creates the illusion of a round boiler pretty well. 4 The cab windows are too small. These can be opened up with small files and the change is well worthwhile. All of these points are illustrated on page 2 of this thread, so I would suggest that if my written word gets too tedious (yawn), the pictures are worth 1000 words! Best wishes and happy filing/drilling! Terry D

It's absolutely great to see old H/D locos and stock still doing what they were intended to do. I still rate the 8F as the best (most realistic) and finished up with 4 (all with the old 1/2 inch motor). These motors were later superseded by the ring field motor, but my experience of them was not good. Too temperamental. I had Cardiff Castle a long time ago and a 5th 8F with one. The Castle I sold, while the 8F had a "heart transplant" with a Scalespeed motor which transformed its performance. All my H/D locos have had their wheels changed for scale size Romfords. A Duchess on 5ft 6in wheels just doesn't look right! I have 3 which still have the original chassis, although two have since been revived with neodymium magnets. If your old H/D Duchess/A4/4MT/N2 is tired or depressed or listless, you can replace the magnet and its performance will be transformed! Although I have many more recent locos from the current manufacturers' ranges, nothing quite has the robustness and sense of gravitas of the old H/D models.

Sounds exactly like the kind of modification I would do, but (Morecambe & Wise) not necessarily in that order! It is a pity that the Hornby Dublo chassis was found wanting, since the original motor was prodigiously powerful, as long as it wasn't de-magnetised. The Mashima motor is fine, as indeed are the other aspects of the "rebuild", so I congratulate the builders on the work they've done.

Interesting question! I always thought that they were all positioned so that they started just after the 3rd boiler band and extended backwards over the 4th, but referring to my (too) extensive library, the majority seem to start ON the 3rd boiler band and typically extend back for about a quarter of their length beyond the 4th one. Short names like Queen Mary and City of Leeds still seem to be the same length, with larger gaps at the front and back of the names. Even Cities of Nottingham and Birmingham seem to fit into this "standard" length. HOWEVER when you get to names like Alexandra, Gloucester, Buccleuch and Sutherland, (i.e. more than about 18 letters/gaps) the plates are definitely longer and especially so (as per Iain) for Sir William and Stoke-on-Trent. My guess would be that they are all centred on the same spot (about 2/3 of the way back between the 3rd & 4th boiler bands) and longer plates overlap forward & backward correspondingly. But it is a guess based on observation! Hope this all makes sense.

This is a fascinating conversation; not least because I am aware of many talented people who have become "tortured geniuses" (should that be genii? Don't answer that!) and suffered much as a result. Just think Van Gogh among many others. Life is a minefield, with many a snare to trap the unwary, but my belief is that we are here to undergo many a trial. One of the trials is, I think, to use your given talents to the best effect. No-one ever gave you any credit for saying "I could have done that!" Just get on with what you think is worthwhile.

Very pleased that I have been able over the years to find 4 8Fs with the old half inch motor. One was stripped of its paint and the supposedly lumpy rivets proved to be down to an overly thick coat of paint. Now resprayed, re-numbered, fine handrails and Romford wheels fitted, and it's really satisfying. It encouraged me to fit the other three with Romfords and also to alter the slide bars to a more accurate shape. The 5th 8F was a ring field motored one which someone else had fitted Romfords to and repainted quite nicely. However the ring field motor was always temperamental; sometimes it was superb, sometimes not and it was always sensitive to controller settings, either stalling or running away. I eventually acquired a Scalespeed motor which was a straight replacement and this now performs superbly. All of the above can handle 45 wagon trains, the longest my layout can store. I also have a couple of the most recent Hornby 8Fs which look very good, but don't quite match the H/D ones for haulage, even though those are over 60 years old!

Peripherally relevant to this topic: I acquired a Buhler can motor a long time ago which had a plastic cradle to allow it to fit directly in place of an XO4 motor. The motor itself is fantastic, but I have no recollection of whom I bought it from. Anyone have an idea?

I have just revisited this site and seen your question. I have used both options; my earliest effort was to drill out the crankpin sockets in the 26 mm Romford drivers sufficiently to accept the H/D-Wrenn crankpins as a force fit, which then held the original coupling rods in place. Later I have used Romford type crankpins together with "homemade" coupling rods &/or Comet rods or rods from kits. The option of using H/D rods with bushes in the holes to accept Romford crankpins has also been used. I think the Romford crank pin option is better since if there is a "binding " problem, it is much more easily solved. Once you have pushed the H/D crank pins into place and found that there is binding, it's far more difficult to solve.

John is right, because Bachmann have never done a 3500 gallon Stanier tender, nor has anyone else RTR. The only one I'm aware of is a K's white metal kit. I have done the same exercise with an old Hornby Dublo tender (mazak cast) with some success, so you should be fine with fine emery on plastic. I hate to add an awkward note, but Bachmann's model of Bahamas used a long firebox body shell to which a double chimney was applied. The real Bahamas is a short firebox loco as per their more recent releases, but ironically Bachmann haven't yet chosen that option to produce. I guess it all depends how "picky" you are! PS The only LFB Jubilee to carry a double chimney was Connaught (5742), one of Bushbury's best, but it lost it in 1956.

Yes, Ian, the nameplates were shorter than on certain RTR Duchesses and in most (if not all) cases the nameplates started or finished behind the 3rd lining boiler band, which means there is some carving to do. There are manufacturers of nameplates who offer "replacement" or scale name plates and the latter are appreciably smaller than the former. I confess I have used both types, but then that just shows how undiscriminating I am. As always, a good look at photos is the best guide.

Yes, Ian, the "windowframe" is intended to support the back end of the tender top on DJH pacifics; I agree with Mike Edge that the loco has to have a sizeable motor just to haul the tender around although my own experience with DJH pacifics is that a D13 with 40:1 gears is fully up to 14 kit built coaches, notwithstanding the heavy tender. Terry

There have been discussions about the layout of Walschaerts valve gear elsewhere. These two pictures of the same loco serve to show just how much the valve rod moves depending on what gear the loco is in. The topmost (at New Street) shows the loco in full forward gear with the valve rod in its lowest position, whereas the next two shows the loco on the turntable (at Camden?) in full backward gear with the valve rod so high it can hardly be seen. Needless to say, unless you can model a loco so that the valve rod can move up and down according to the direction of travel etc. it is almost always going to be in the wrong position, which explains why most RTR manufacturers nowadays tend to put locos in mid-gear.

Hi Ian You are almost correct when you say that the tender is correct for the type 2. The only error with the H/D/Wrenn type plastic bodied tender is that it has a high front cut out, like the Type 1. However, I have rectified this (sort of!) by carving away the high front until it now resembles a low front cut out. If you look at the various tender types, you will see the difference I am referring to. Happy carving! Terry

I have at last managed to conquer my tech inadequacies, and attach some pictures to illustrate my comments above. For Ian, this shows how the Comet frame extensions and pony truck have been constructed; a small brass bracket has been soldered onto the Comet truck assembly and the fixing screw passes through this. The question was raised about the valve gear on the Wrenn/H/D locos. This unaltered gear is on my old City of Birmingham. It shows how the valve rod is attached half way down the "eccentric link". This gives the impression of a loco in full forward gear, a position it would only be in when starting. Here we see how the valve rod has now been re-positioned attached to the top pivot of the "eccentric link."This gives the impression of a loco in mid gear which is close to the position it's in when running fast. It also gives a less exaggerated movement to the combination link, since the valve spindle moves rather less. On to a rather dark picture of a very old H/D Duchess with a scratch brass chassis but retaining the original cylinders and motion. Here again the position of the valve rod has not been altered but is still pivoted at the middle of the "eccentric link". The motion of the valve gear tends to be more exaggerated on this loco too. On to the issue of tender heights. Here we have one of the later H/D/Wrenn Duchesses which has been temporarily paired with the Type 3 tender intended for City of Hereford. If the locomotive does sit a little high, it can't be very much. Also this view is helpful because the rear pony arrangement is more visible. And here is City of Hereford as far as she has got. This is slightly off topic because she is a Ks body kit atop a brass chassis, and not a H/D Duchess, but it makes an interesting comparison. I like the Ks kit, although I have to say the splashers look a bit beefy! I still think that the overall effect is that she is a bit better proportioned than the DJH locos as built. She has been temporarily paired with her original tender which will eventually be put behind and H/D Duchess when her correct Type 3 tender has been finished. Speaking of DJH locos:- This is City of London, built about 15 years ago from a DJH kit. They are lovely to build, being a super composite kit of white metal and etched brass parts. However, they needed quite a bit of fettling, notably because the cab roof needed adjusting downwards and the firebox/boiler joint is tricky. However it was not until she was finished and painted that I realised (a) that the smokebox was too long and (b) the footplate around the inside cylinders was too short. This latter I have attempted to rectify by inserting a piece of 1.6 mm brass bar in between the footplate and the buffer beam. The picture shows how this has been done before fettling and painting. Once again, to finish off, we have a H/D loco correctly paired with a Type 2 (ex-streamline) tender, which she will eventually tow. This too, has had the valve gear altered as above. She will, when finished, be 46248 City of Leeds, one of Crewe North's finest.

I don't doubt that this book is wonderful, but are we not getting a bit off topic? Can we get back to Graham's inspirational layout and see what progress he and his gang have made?

I always find it pleasing when someone works on a "fixer-upper" (Jubilee) in much the same way that I would do. I look forward to seeing the finished loco. As for gardening, I leave that to my wife as I have "brown fingers", being the opposite of green fingers. My hands are the kiss of death to horticulture. I'll stick to soldering!

Hi Ian I have taken some pictures of the various locos I have mucked about with, but sadly technology has got the better of me! I will however persevere and try and get pictures to you. You are quite right about your concerns about ride height, but I have checked the several Duchess locos that I have messed with and the following issues come to mind:- 1 Checking a H/D Duchess (26 mm drivers) against a Comet tender, there is a slight (<1 mm) difference in height, but that same difference is there with the K's loco that is supposed to tow the tender! 2 Sandhole raises the question of whether it's necessary to alter the valve gear. I have done so as the standard configuration of H/D & Wrenn models is in full forward gear. That's the trouble with Walschaerts valve gear; the valve rod moves up and down on the eccentric link according to whether it's in forward, mid-gear or backwards. It is very difficult to model, so if you fix the valve rod, at some point you've almost always got it wrong! (Several of my pacifics have not been altered.) What I did was to unpick the valve rod attached to the eccentric link and fix it instead at the top, so it appears to be in mid-gear. That is the way many proprietary models are set up nowadays, so "you pays yer money and makes yer choice!" 3 You asked about the pony truck; it is a Comet truck, but I had to make a brass bracket to solder to it to allow it to be screwed into the H/D chassis. The Comet frame extensions are soldered to a brass angle underneath the back of the cab floor and that also allows a towing loop to be attached for the tender to hook up to. If only my photos could be attached!

Thanks Ian, I understand where you're coming from; if it's any criterion, I still have a Wrenn City of Birmingham bought new in 1978(ish) and all that has been done to that is a set of Romford 26 mm drivers and bogie wheels. The rest is still "as is" and it still works its turns on Hest Bank. I was a bit perplexed by your comments about the tender of City of London; the 8F tender body is cast mazak and riveted whereas the pacifics all had plastic bodies with flush sides. The tender underframes were the only common parts. As an aside, I still think there's a certain irony in the fact that the best kits (DJH), if built as they are, still don't produce as well proportioned a model as the current Hornby RTR Duchesses (or indeed the old H/D bodyshells) ATB Terry

The body is cast mazak and as previous contributors have noted, does not solder. However superglue &/or araldite is fine. The principal area for attention is the forward lower part of the firebox which is too fat, to allow clearance round the motor magnet pole pieces. It can be slimmed down using files &/or dental burrs in a mini electric drill, but don't go too far or you'll go through the metal! See the previous pictures. Also to create the illusion of a round boiler, the skirt where the boiler and the footplate join can be drilled through and filed to shape to allow "daylight" through.

Bear in mind that with the smaller wheels, the ride height was probably a little low anyway and that the increase of 4 mm in wheel diameter only results in a 2 mm increase in ride height, I have decided to accept that the ride height is acceptable. It may be a millimetre too high, but that only enhances the gravitas of the loco for me! It seems to me to go with the ride height of the tender, so I suggest you look at the pictures and judge for yourself whether you find the overall stance of the loco(s) acceptable.