Chris Higgs

If they do, then you can point out that yours is to 2mm scale, not N. Chris

Hmm, yes OK, we have heard this as the conventional line, but there are rather a lot of 2mm models out there that have been powered for years and years using direct drive from coreless motors without adverse effect. Could be that they don't actually do many hours running, spending most of their time in boxes, or perhaps the smaller forces involved in such light models do not produce that much stress. Chris

I'm pretty certain that the space between the frames under the boiler between firebox and smokebox will be open, with the inside valvegear showing. Chris

First version of the bufferstop photos can now be found at https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B7V9MIj3SLTgYlhxcXhrdEVsMWc/edit Chris

If they are in situ and painted, then yes. I am looking to include a few more pictures of them in a finished state. There were some nice SR ones on Annendale Town at the AGM, but I didn't have my camera with me. Chris

Very late to be adding a comment, but as I have researched and produced 2mm etchings of all three bufferstop types, I can clear up their origin at least in part. Type 1 is the LMS wartime design, which went on to widespread use on BR. There was a drawing of this in an HMRS article. Type 2 is what is often known as the straight rail design. There are examples known of it on the LNWR, but it was also used by the GNR, LNER (York division), SR and as observed is still produced today, there is a nice new one outside St Pancras on HS1. In addition to the PHD etch, BIll Bedford does one of the GNR variant. There is a drawing of an example from Oxford Rewley Road in Precision 1973. Type 3 is also a LNWR design, and dates originally from 1879. I have an original drawing and article by David Hanson, although I forgot from where.

I can't seem to find the photos of the GWR bufferstops you built. This was some time ago. Chris

I'm on the lookout for any photos people may have and are willing to share of builds of the etched loco chassis range. I want to create a document of photos with captions to help others. Of particular interest would be things not already covered by the instructions, such as how you mounted the motor, and conversions and modifications. I am also looking for any photos of assembled etched bufferstops from the Association range, to create a similar document. Chris

Geoff Jones did it that way and then complained to me it was almost impossible to get them all lined up correctly. Do you have some trick that us mere mortals don't know about? Chris

Now it has been pointed out that I have been selling the wrong bogies with my full brake kits, I probably will be doing some. It is probably only 10 minutes work to modify the artwork. I have dug out my Slinn book on Siphons and see the error of my ways. Mind you, it didn't help that the book printed a photo of a long spring version (but with short footsteps) in its section on Siphon bogies. That also reminds me that I have some half-done artwork for Siphon underframes somewhere. Andy, if you are coming to the AGM I will bring your Maunsell kits with me. The roofs are still at my brother's house so will have to follow by post the week after. Chris Chris

Indeed they are slightly different. However you have I think misunderstood how the separate axlebox overlays work (at least that's the way it looks, my aging eyes are struggling). The idea is that each layer should be spaced at the correct 9' spacing to match the bogie, so they can be attached both at the same time. Whereas you have created the two sets of three as a mirror image of each other, which means only the centre ones are spaced at 9'. They probably would have emerged if anyone had pointed out to me that the Pressed Steel bogies on the full brakes differed from those on the passenger coaches - it had escaped my attention! Chris

The bogies at bottom right do look rather familar.

Richard, A couple of questions. I see you put in the springing wires after the frames were assembled. How did that go? I know Bob Jones prefers to put them on first, but they would probably foul the assembly jig then. Also do you intend to mount the motor in the tender using the existing Ixion mount? As part of the design of the Black 5 replacement chassis I have produced some motor mounts based on Bob's designs and I am in the process of revisiting the design of the tender chassis for the Collett to work with them. However it will be a while to completion as I need to get hold of the Dapol tender myself to see if there are any other changes that would be beneficial. I am just building up a test etch for a 4mm LNER Gresley suburban coach and am a bit daunted by the number of separate panels, door handles, handrails, droplights and doorstops there are. I think I will go back to building loco chassis, it is just so much simpler! Chris

There are (or were) two sets of frames supplied with the kit, one for centre axle drive, one for rear. Currently only the centre axle drive is supplied, but that may change again once I have obtained a Dapol Pannier and made any changes needed. Both types were designed to keep the motor and drive out of view in the cab. That is not the same as out of the cab altogether, and from the CAD it looks touch and go as to whether either version would be suitable as-is for an open cab loco. However, you could still use the frames, coupling rods etc and mount the gearing and motor to your own design. Chris

Yes there is a thread about that (forgotten where). But my advice is to wait for the new Dapol Pannier (due out next week if Dapol are to be believed). It will I hope be a better loco, and if enhancement is still needed, will be a whole lot easier to work with it's plastic body. Once I get my hands on one I will be reviewing what if anything needs doing to the etched chassis to use it with the Dapol body (both centre and rear axle drive versions). Chris

Quartering is one of those things where it can go together no problem one day, but the next time you try you get all sorts of niggles. I assume you know you have the coupling rods on upside down? Chris

Sadly the N Brass ones look like the earlier Churchward taper buffers. Kings and Halls also had taper buffers as built. You could half-inch a set off a Peco 2251, but that would be a very expensive way to do the job! Chris

Loco maroon I expect it will be. Which is sad for me as I am planning a model of Princes Risborough in summer 1962 for which I want a shiny new Western in coach maroon. Possibilities for a limited edition perhaps? Chris

Tony, Julia is indeed correct. This issue arise with every 2FS loco which has splashers. The combination of scale gauge track but overscale width wheels means that the spasher dimensions have to be made both wider overall to fit the wheels in, and also wider individually to cover the flange. Depending on the wheel size used compared to prototype, you might even have to make the splasher larger to accomodate the overscale flange depth. On many locos this is more noticeable than it will be on a Pannier, and is often one of the trickier jobs involved when building a loco etch that has been 'shot down' from 4mm scale. It's just the nature of the beast when modelling in 2FS. If you really want scale width splashers, you are looking at modelling in P4 or S7 instead. Chris

All I can say is that the senior 2mm modellers who use this technique do not seem to have any problems. If indeed you are quartering the wheels such that "when the run, that's OK" you might see more issues. But really you should be quartering the wheels such that they are all at 90', not just close enough to run. Lathe solution is rather clever but to be honest even if you own a lathe the Association quartering jig is quicker to set up. And certainly cheaper if you don't. Chris

The chassis are designed with the M0.4 figures with slack so are 6.53mm in this case. So 20:30 100DP should work fine, but as pointed out you do have to know where to buy them. I'm going to be using the M0.3 gears for the design of the next batch of chassis as it gives more available options and in most cases a slightly higher gear reduction. I think this should be the spacing for 19T to 31T. The way it works is that for gears of the same pitch, having the same total number of teeth on the two gears should give the same total spacing. So 19:31 and 20:30 should be the same spacing. Chris

Common sense says that introducing a bit of slop on 100DP spur gears could be more problematic than 64DP/M0.4. I would have thought either springing only the centre axle or all six would be stable combinations. Never spring the outside ones without the centre one, that would create the dreaded rocking action. You could try adding the springs just as pickups, without enlarging the holes. Although it has now been done for so many years, it is questionable as to using bearings as pickups, which is what the split frame design does, is totally wise, given that oil might get in there. Which combination of 100DP gears did you use? None of the available combinations seem to match the mesh centres used for the M0.4 gears, so I think you took a bit of a risk there? Chris

The recommended size for axle holes when using 'SImpson springs' is 1.6mm. These are nothing more than pieces of very thin phosper-bronze wire which bear onto the axles in the gap between the inside of the frames and the muffs and act as springs/pickups - in reality mostly the latter. Your chassis already has extra holes etched into it to locate the ends of these. You can buy such wire at Eileens emporium of use N gauge coupler springs straightened out. The coarseness of the gears used in the design mean it's OK to have a little bit of play even on the driven axle in this case. But I would not totally rule out the possibility of other issues. Running on wires attached to the motor, double check that it really rotates smoothly without any tight spots in the rotation. Causes for this could be quartering issues or irregularity in the gear teeth. It's possible these might not stop the loco when running on such a test, but will when it has the extra effort of moving its own weight along the track. Chris

You obviously need a bigger vice. I have no problem pushing them in that way. Turning them to quarter is another matter. For those that don't know how to get them out again, you use a soldering iron and melt the muff off! Chris

The problem with broaches are that they soon end up cutting on a large section of the muff all at once. Plus the hole will be slightly tapered - at least in theory not good for wobble. With my drills I end up with a parallel hole and the reaming out is much easier. Chris