MikeOxon

As Mikkel wrote - lovely wagons and something I must start adding to my Broad Gauge collection.  In terms of 'modernity', it is alarming to think for how long small loose-coupled wagons were trundling around British Railways.

5 hours ago, Mikkel said:

Probably too comprehensive, we have a tendency in this digital age to document every little action in great detail. It can be useful during a build though, to show up problem areas and remember how you did something.

information is never wasted and you never know which little nugget will solve a problem for someone.  I write quite a lot of the details simply for myself - I frequently have to remind myself how to do things by reading my own posts.  On the other hand, I can also have a good laugh over my clumsy earlier attempts

Little things, like how to recognise a superheated engine, are always useful, too.

Mike

I also bought a Hornby 2721 very many years ago, because it seemed such a vast upgrade from the very crude Hornby pannier that I had before.  I eventually used the chassis from the old pannier under a Wills 1854 saddle tank kit and retired the 2721, along with other models from the time when i was dabbling in the 1930s (more or less). 

I now seem to have moved back into broad-gauge days, so I shall probably pass on my 2721 to my grandchildren but it's good to see how the model can be brought up to more 'modern' standards.

Mike

Interesting comment about thinning his paints.  I tend to use a roughly 50:50 mix of IPA and water because I find it flows much better, with the alcohol improving the 'wetting' of the surface.  I rarely use 'modelling' paints but tend to use artists pigments.  I like to apply a wash to the surfaces first and then add small amounts of pigment and build up the depth of colour slowly to achieve the effect that I want.

As others have said already - beautiful modelling.  I especially like the last photo of the stained paving stones in the yard and the two figures, looking a little sinister with that knobkerry over the shoulder!  I believe that the use of lime-wash was discontinued, because of its adverse effect on cows' feet. Jonathan should be careful not to splash too much on himself!

13 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The photo appears in J.H. Lewis et al., All About GWR Iron Minks (HMRS, 1980) .....

Many thanks for the info.  Once I knew what it was, I found a good photo and description at:

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/misc/misc_equip202.htm

The extra height was required to house a vertical steam boiler and this powered a small steam engine that drove an air compressor. The boiler's chimney could be removed when not required. Multiple connections for pneumatic tools were available from the pipework..

24 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

The Leamington scene is so very modellable. The bridge also features (or rather is being replaced, I think?) in another scene that would make an equally interesting diorama: 

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrls2086.htm

 

 

Any thoughts on the rather strange-looking covered van on the left of the photo?

Thank you, Annie - you have seen your copy in NZ before mine's arrived here!.  I've even got around to painting my model although there are still pipes and handrails to add.

57 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

 

.... I may have shown these two before, at Bristol Temple Meads. ....

 

The steel protection bars around the huts look surprisingly like modern crash barriers!

41 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

..............the fencing has a nice "filter" effect as per Reading's Vastern Rd yard.

 

 

I agree.  I like the line of huts with one marked 'GWR Foreman's Office'.  I have a similar hut in the yard at North Leigh, so may label it in the same way!

I wonder what the two guys by the gate are saying?  "Right, Bert, you watch that office, while I look if there's owt worth nicking from these wagons"

Really good modelling - the 'Greyhound' looks splendid and Archibald Plummer is one of the most convincing model figures that I have seen.  I really enjoy these Victorian scenes.

I've fought for ages trying to compose header pictures - how it's cropped varies with the screen used to view the site.

Nowadays, I prefer using a phone rather than a camera for model photos.

Mike

Beautifully executed and photographed - it is a splendid trigger for the imagination - I can hear those carts rumbling along the roadway! 

Thank you for the idea about magnetic fencing  usually, feature like this are a real pain when cleaning a layout. 

You make it look very simple but each of those trees is a work of art in its own right.  The whole demonstrates that "small is beautiful"

Mike

Thank you for commenting, @Annie.  I am very sceptical about the Twining drawing, which was produced around 1940.  I suspect he may have been influenced by the bogies on the Lehigh valley 4-2-4T. which was still extant at that time:

The valve gear, as shown in the re-built version of No.9, will not fit between a 7' leading bogie and the driving wheels.  It seems unlikely that they would have gone to the trouble of altering the arrangement during the rebuild, especially as it was re-built again, a little later, to match the layout of the 'Queen' class. 

This article referred to by @Miss Prismin the Imaginary Locomotives thread, is incorrect in stating that this engine used Joy's valve gear.  As the 'Engineer' article referred to above clearly states, it was Stephenson gear.  Joy did visit Swindon and saw this engine being built and there was a plan to use Joy's gear on the second, never built, version. 

The whole thing was an experiment by Dean to try and find a way of accommodating the valve gear when using larger cylinders.  Eventually, he adopted Stroudley's arrangement, with the valves located below the cylinders.  The real solution, of course, was to use outside cylinders, as Churchward realised.

Mike

2 hours ago, JimC said:

Drawing accuracy... Here's an example of how things can go wrong...

... and that's what I would call a 'recent' engine!  It's not just small-scale modellers that go astray.  There are some substantial differences between the Firefly replica at Didcot and photographs of the original Firefly.  I know compromises have to be made if a working engine is to meet modern standards but the firebox cladding on the replica is almost wholly cosmetic, with the true firebox hidden inside.  Yet the replica has a 'Haycock' style firebox where original photos show the 'Gothic' type, with arched sides.  Why?

2 hours ago, phil_sutters said:

I suspect that this is one of the photos of this class that you have - but just in case you haven't....

 

Nothing beats a good photo ... when you have one! 

Those of us attempting to model the earlier part of the 19th century very rarely have that opportunity!  In addition, many of the drawings we have were created long after the event, so are often extrapolations from limited information.  In such cases, it is necessary to find as many independent sources of information as one can and after that it's down to personal judgements.

4 hours ago, JCL said:

 ...I tend to start by boxing in the big shapes using measurements only and superimposing those on the Bird or Isinglass drawing. Once the bigger blocks are filled in, I start on the details using measurements, if I have them for those parts, and then photos to fine tune/fill in gaps. As you say, it can be more of an art than a science...

i suppose the difference is that I aim to create the main box and cylindrical shapes by extruding directly from drawings. 

It's not too difficult to make scaling adjustments in the computer, to compensate for errors in the drawings.  The major difficulties arise when the drawings are incorrect in the placement or dimensions of specific features. 

in the end it's a personal matter how far we wish to take things but no-one wants to make things incorrectly, if better information is out there somewhere.

On the subject of inaccurate drawings, I found that the drawings I have of Firefly do not include the mini-splashers over the carrying wheels, although they can be seen in photographs.  I only realised after I built my model and found that true scale wheels would not fit.  I've now re-designed the footplate to include these splashers:

2 hours ago, drduncan said:

I too have found anomalies when putting drawings into Fusion, .....

I agree with all the points you make, Duncan.   I always check horizontal and vertical dimensions separately and make any necessary adjustments.  The 'calibrate' function in 'Fusion 360' is very useful. 

I'm more concerned about actual drawing errors, where details are wrongly placed or wrongly sized, and so on.  There's a lot we shall never know about these old engines but I don't like to perpetrate errors, if I find them.

4 hours ago, Mikkel said:

It does look good, nothing particularly ugly about it.

 

I'm impressed that you managed to do the outside flanges on the wheels. Might they need some sanding etc to go through pointwork?

Thank you Mikkel - making the model has changed my mind about these engines and I now think they are rather handsome.

I'm still simply enjoying exploring what I can do with 3D modelling.  I haven't given any thought to actually running any of these models and they may well remain as 'display' items.  All the photos were taken without any significant cleaning up of the prints, apart from removing obvious loose strands and the like.  I think the wheels would need proper metal rims to make working models.

There’s lace making on the island of Burano if that helps 

Lots to enjoy in the Deutches Museum, Mikkel, including these:

6 hours ago, Mikkel said:

PS: I also searched for "coke raves", but that led to a whole different ball game! I expect Google will start serving me adverts for Ibiza now.

 

I would assume that PET will now be monitoring your emails, Mikkel

"That's one of the great things about modelling, every build is an entry point to railway history. " ... and that's my thinking, too

There's so much to learn about how things were done from a simple open wagon.  Even things like standardised nuts and bolts that we now take for granted took a while to evolve.

4 hours ago, Mikkel said:

 

I was about to say this reminds me of school, but in that case it's the best school ever 

 

The bunker looks to be well captured. I wonder why it is was designed with that elegant slope in the first place. Why not just make a square? To make access to the footplate easier for the crew, I suppose. Or to save materials. But it does raise the question, how much did aesthetics mean inn loco design at this time.

 

 

Your regretful sigh is almost audible 

 

Thank you for your comment.  I know my posts are somewhat didactic but if others find them of interest, I am pleased.  It's interesting for me to look back through these posts and follow my own learning curve!

The bunker shape is interesting, especially as the rest of the engine seems rather oddly proportioned.  Getting on and off the footplate must have been rather difficult, even with that curved side.  Steps are something else that I need to add.  I can see why the B&ER resorted to step ladders over the driving wheels.

Aesthetics certainly mattered to some people.  Brunel wrote to T.E.Harrison in 1838 "...Now your engine is capable of being very handsome, and it ought to be so" [Harrison was the designer of the engines 'Thunderer' and 'Hurricane']

You are correct that I do regret that what I find the exciting part of creating a new model is over.  Adding fittings etc. is a bit of a chore

Thank you very much for such kind remarks, @Annie  It's the design challenges that interest me, as I think you know..