Jump to content
 

MikeOxon

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,369

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by MikeOxon

  1. MikeOxon
    Following my stock review , I realised that, although I have quite a good selection of early broad-gauge carriages, there are relatively few examples of early goods wagons.
     
    While thinking about the possibilities, I looked at the contemporary pen and wash sketch by J.C.Bourne, which shows three types of early broad-gauge wagons, including one with wheels outside the body sides and a tilt cover.
     

     
    For more information and drawings, I turned to the invaluable set of Data Sheets that were produced by the late Eddie Brown for the Broad Gauge Society (BGS).  Although these are extremely informative, they are written largely in note-form using typescript, which can be a little difficult to follow at times. With the help of these Data Sheets, however, I could identify those in the above sketch as two types of early ‘Box Wagon’ and an early ‘Horse Box’.
     
    Horse Box
     
    The Horse Box is one of the few early wagons that I have already modelled.  The original design of Horse Box was one of those Broad-Gauge oddities, in which the wheelbase of 6 feet was shorter than the track gauge!  It is one of the early vehicles illustrated in Whishaw’s ‘Railways of Great Britain and Ireland’, 1842.
     

    My 3D-model of an early GWR Horse Box, 1838
    (see my blog post for construction details)
     
    Box Wagons
     
    The history of the early GWR goods wagons is somewhat confusing, since thy are variously labelled as ‘Box Wagons’, ‘Luggage Wagons’, or ‘Utility Wagons’ depending on their mode of use at the times they were recorded. Eddy Brown teased out some their ‘life histories’ by comparing details such as Tare Weights from the various stock lists. It was a period when railway wagon design was developing rapidly from their farm-cart origins
     
    The first wagons ordered for the GWR were a batch of 29 ‘box wagons’ built in 1838/9. According to the BGS Data Sheet 401, five of these were described as ‘small box wagons’  There are no known drawings but one of these appears in J.C Bourne’s engraving of Pangbourne station.
     

    Extract from an engraving by J.C.Bourne
     
    This illustration is of particular interest because it shows that these were some of the very few vehicles that conformed to Brunel’s idea of placing narrow vehicle-bodies between the wheel-sets. These wagons show their farm-cart origins in the sloping sides, supported by struts known as ‘strouters’. The floor planks ran lengthwise, like a farm-cart, and there were drop-doors at both ends as well as in the sides.
     
    To create a 3D-model, I followed my usual method if tracing over the drawings in the BGS Data Sheet, which I imported as a ‘canvas’ into ‘Fusion 360’. I then extruded the panels and their details to form ‘solid bodies’. I used the ‘mirror’ option in ‘Fusion 360’ to create the opposite sides and ends, which avoided having to produce the planking details twice!
     
    After extruding the various parts from the side and end elevation drawings, as appropriate, I brought them together within the software, as shown below:
     

    Extruding a 3D-model from a ‘Canvas’ in ‘Fusion 360’
     
    Once the modelling is complete, ‘Fusion 360’ offer the capability to ‘render’ the 3D-model in appropriate colours and under controlled lighting conditions, to give an impression of how the eventual printed design will appear.
     
    The rendering option in 'Fusion 360' can be very effective and I have seen some superb examples, where other people have created complete scenes within 'Fusion 360'. So far, I have only touched the hem of the possibilities that have opened up, but it’s something I intend to pursue further.
     

    My 3D model of GWR Small Box Wagon, 1838
     
     
    ‘Standard’ Wagons
     
    The other 24 wagons in the initial order became known as ‘standard’ box wagons. BGS Data Sheet 402 states that the Traffic Committee's Stock Account for 6th.October, 1840, listed 22 wagons being allocated to London and 4 to Bristol as’ Box Wagons’, plus 3 known as ‘Luggage Wagons’, for use in Passenger trains.
     
    The ‘standard’ wagons were longer and also abandoned the Brunel concept of placing the body between the wheels, which resulted in greatly increased carrying capacity.  In fact, the internal volume was doubled in these wagons, from 6.31 Cu.yards (4.82 m3) in the small wagon, to 13.55 Cu.Yd (10.36 m3).
     
    In those early days, when ‘lower-class’ passengers were not encouraged, it is evident that, by September 1839, several of these wagons had been fitted with bench seating to carry ‘Goods train passengers’. After a serious accident at Sonning on 24th December 1841, it was recommended that the sides of the wagons should be raised, to reduce the likelihood of passengers being thrown out in the event of a collision!
     
    I created my model by using exactly the same procedure as for the small wagon; in this case extruding from Data Sheet 402. In fact, I was able to re-use some parts, such as buffer beams and cross members, for this larger wagon. Although the body sides were placed outside the wheels, they still sloped outwards towards the top and were supported by strouters.
     

    My models of the ‘small’ and ‘standard’ GWR Box Wagons
     
    Placing my models together shows vividly the increased volume in the larger design. Notice that the wheels protruded into the load space and were boxed-in in the prototypes.. In fact, this was a feature of GWR wagons that persisted for several years, until the Brunel dictum of ‘large wheels’ was finally abandoned. I suspect that those wheel-boxes were frequently cursed by the people loading the wagons.
     
    No doubt @Mikkel could create an amusing story about a package that got lost in the corner behind a wheel box 🙂
     
     
    A Model Trio
     
    As a final flourish, I decided to use my models to re-create the scene sketched by J.C. Bourne in the early 1840s. Note that there are some additions on the wagons he sketched. The small wagon has an over-all tarpaulin, supported by hoops, while the standard wagon has raised side-rails, which may have been for the carriage of animals.
     

    My three models arranged as in the J.C. Bourne illustration
     
    Mike
  2. MikeOxon

    On the Narrow Gauge

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    I have mentioned before in this blog that my layout includes an 009 narrow-gauge section. Most of this section does not need changing in order to fit in with my revised 19th-century timeframe but, a long time ago (1980), I built a 'Centre Models' kit of a Leek & Manifold 2-6-4T, of which the prototypes appeared in 1904. Whilst not quite fitting my new era, it is a handsome locomotive that I had never got to run well, so I decided to re-build the chassis. A body kit is still available from Meridian Models
     
    The original kit included a fret of nickel-silver valve gear, which was extremely fiddly to construct and get working. Alas, all my efforts were soon undone by the unsatisfactory white-metal chassis supplied in the kit. This soon warped and, in the process, destroyed the valve gear, which I could not face re-constructing at that time.
     

     
     
    More recently I saw a small 'Roco' engine being sold fairly cheaply, which had working outside gear. I had read that this chassis is not considered to be very reliable in heavy use but, nevertheless, I decided to see if I could use under the L&M body.
     

     
     
    My method is to take photos of the parts I wish to fit together over a sheet of graph paper, as a scale reference. I have the camera fixed on a tripod, so that all the photos are at the same scale. I then overlay the images in a photo-editor (I use 'Photoshop Elements') to check clearances and to see where any parts need to be modified. I find this method of creating a 'visual impression' of how the parts will fit suits me better than trying to make detailed drawings.
     

     
    It was clear that, with a little trimming of the underframe, the 'Roco' chassis could be fitted and give a reasonable impression of the original loco. I even found that there were suitable attachment points for the existing pony wheels and trailing truck. I adapted the motor mount, by fitting a flex grip from a British 13A plug across the side mounting points, and re-wired, omitting the DCC adapter board. (My layout is DC only)
     

     
     
    It all went together surprisingly easily and proved to run very smoothly at nice low speeds. Now, it must join the queue for re-painting, once I have got the hang of my new airbrush. It probably won't find a home on my current layout but I do enjoy watching the outside valve gear working, as in the following animation.
     

     
     
    Mike
  3. MikeOxon

    Brunel's Britzka - part 2

    By MikeOxon,


    General
    At the end of the previous post I had printed a set of parts, which needed to be assembled into the complete carriage. I must admit that it was a bit of a shock to see how tiny some of the parts can be in reality, when they had looked quite substantial on the computer screen!
     
    The springs were by far the smallest parts but I had chosen to print them separately so that they could lie flat on the printer bed. This orientation ensured that the hollow centres of the elliptic springs would print cleanly. I printed several, for experimental purposes, since they only take a minute each to print.
     
    Initially, I tried fixing them by using super-glue but the contact area was too small and there was no simple way to hold the mating parts in their correct orientations while the glue hardened. I therefore turned to another method that I have used before on several models: using a fine soldering-iron tip set to 200°C. I could comfortably hold the parts by hand since, unlike metal, the resin has low thermal conductivity. A quick slide across the joint with the iron tip and the small parts fused almost instantly, to create a remarkably strong joint.
     
    A better method might be to use one of the 3D printer pens that are now available, Such a pen could also be used to add differently coloured details. Possibly a future purchase!


    Fusing Small Parts with 200°C Soldering Iron
     
    I was very impressed by the fidelity with which my rather basic printer had created the complex 3D structures that make up the swivelling fore-carriage, as shown in my previous post.. In my very first post about 3D printing, I wrote “I wasn’t looking for anything particularly sophisticated but wanted to ‘dip a toe’ in the water and explore the possibilities for making various small parts and fittings for the ‘odd-ball’ locomotives and other vehicles that I enjoy creating.” It’s now clear that my choice has met this need very well!
     
    Two small parts that I didn’t show before are the two axles, which are simply tubes through which I could thread a 0.7 mm diameter wire, to form the wheel bearings. I added some flats near the ends of the axle tubes to make them easier to attach below the springs.
     


    3D Printed Axle Tube with Wire Hub Bearing
     
    I attached the front axle assembly to the fore-carriage in a similar way. The fore-carriage itself is pivoted on a metal pin extending down from the hub of the ‘fifth wheel’ on the fixed frame.
     
     


    Metal Perch Pin for the Swivelling Fore-Carriage
     
    The roof has a simple rectangular plan but I couldn’t decide about curvature. The distant view in Peck’s book: ‘The Great Western at Swindon Works’, assuming it really is this carriage, appears to show a white single arc roof, similar to that on a railway van. The side-on photo, however, on which I based my model shows a black roof, which may have a slight fore and aft curvature. After looking at many more carriage images, I decided to apply a shallow curve across the width, as shown below
     
    This completed the main assembly of the carriage – the wheels turn and the fore-carriage swivels.  I was also pleased that the vehicle sat level on its four wheels.
     
    Painting
     
    Brunel’s carriage apparently earned the sobriquet “Flying Hearse”, which presumably refers to its black colour.
     
    I felt that overall black would look rather dull on a model so I decided to paint the wheels red and add a few additional touches of colour to window frames and the box seat. The final appearance of my carriage is as shown below:

     
    My model in black with red wheels
     
    It will need a centre pole to attach the horses, a driver, and carriage lamps, to complete the model.  In 4 mm scale it is rather small and it’s difficult to see all the details once painted black.  I shall have to create a scene where it can stand out!   In the meantime, it's travelling on a carriage truck:
     
     

    My Model in Transit
     
    I think this view illustrates the great increase in size from road vehicles of the 19th century to a contemporary railway carriage. The accommodation in the Posting Carriage must have seemed extremely spacious to those early patrons!
     
    Mike
     
    POST SCRIPT: After placing my Britzka model on a carriage truck, I realised it was rather too wide.  I have now narrowed the body and shortened he rear axle so that the track is the same as the front axle. I think it is now closer to the dimensions of carriages of the period.  Assembly of the small parts was very fiddly and I must improve the design of future models to simplify the assembly task.
  4. MikeOxon

    Turning Back the Clock - 1

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    This blog aims to follow the conversion of my existing layout to an earlier time-frame. I hope that others will find it of interest and helpful, if they are also considering the Pre-Grouping era.
     
    By way of background: I built a small layout about 30 years ago for my then-young son. It was based on old Hornby-Dublo (2-rail) track and I added an 009 narrow-gauge section for additional interest. More recently, I had another look at this old layout and thought it would be suitable for running the small locomotives and vehicles that were characteristic of the late 19th-century. So, I began to think about what was necessary to "turn back the clock".
     
    I already had a few potentially suitable coaches, in the form of a rake of Ratio GWR 4-wheelers and a few locomotives that could be modified or used as they were. One of these was an old K's kit of the TVR 'S'-class Dock Tank, which I had never got to run smoothly. After stripping down the chassis and paying careful attention to the alignment of the wheels and coupling rods, I managed to transform it into a very sweet-running little engine. It seems that advancing age does bring advantages of care and patience when building models!
     

     
     
    The prototype of this locomotive was built by Hudswell Clark, around 1876, as one of their standard contractors' locomotives. I intend to use it for shunting on the exchange sidings with the 009 narrow gauge railway.
     
    I also had a Hornby 57XX pannier tank - an early rather crude model - onto which I fitted a Wills 1854 saddle tank body.
     

     
     
    Repainted with Indian red frames, this is a very purposeful-looking engine, with excellent hauling powers, in view of its substantial weight.
     
    Next, I had a K's 14XX autotank, originally intended to operate with an auto-traiIer. Like the Dock Tank it had never run well but it too responded to careful re-alignment of the chassis. I decided to try a simple conversion to a '517'-class, bearing in mind the variability of this class. I wanted one with inside bearings on the trailing wheels but keeping the Belpaire firebox of the original K's kit. Eventually, I found a photo of no.835, in Russell's 'Locomotives of the GWR', that seemed to fit the bill, so I based my model around that engine. The most difficult part of the conversion was cutting away the front toolboxes, which were cast integrally with the front splashers. After that, I cut away the cab and built a replacement out of plasticard, while retaining part of the original sides. I removed the (dummy) outside bearings and painted the wheels and underframe Indian red.
     

     
     
    I decided I would like to try to convert a Mainline Dean Goods into a 'Stella'-class 2-4-0, to head a train of the Ratio 4-wheelers. This proved fairly simple, provided one can accept the incorrect driving-wheel spacing (I'm not a hi-fi modeller .... yet!) I described the conversion in an article in the Railway Modeller, April 2013.
     

     
    That has provided me with a useful range of 19th-century locomotives, so I next have to consider all the other changes that are needed to revert to an earlier time-frame. I have thought of a few subjects, which I will tackle in future posts.
     
    1. Liveries - often much more elaborate than later styles. Even on the GWR, which had more continuity than other railways, there were many differences between pre- and post-Grouping styles. The shade of green on the engines changes, coach ends were brown, rather than black, different lining and crests on engines and tenders, and so on. (not to mention the crimson lake period, up to the Grouping.). Also, there is the issue of red wagons, discussed elsewhere in these forums.
     
    2. Road transport - all those buses and lorries have to go! Plenty of horses are needed and suitable carts at the station. Then the facilities to support them - farriers, stables, etc.
     
    3. Lighting - no electricity! Oil lamps or gas in the more sophisticated places. No yellow arms or lights for distant signals and, before 1895, no green lights either - white for 'all clear'.
     
    4. Details - differently-shaped milk churns, different dress-styles for passengers.
     

     
     
    There must be loads of details that I've not thought of yet - I can see a lifetime's work ahead!
     
    Mike
  5. MikeOxon

    A Bit about the Track

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    As I mentioned in my first entry in this blog, my layout started many years ago as a Hornby Dublo layout for my young son. The plan was taken directly from the Hornby Dublo Handbook of 2-Rail Track Formations (1st edition), as shown below, drawn using SCARM software
     

     
    Original Track Plan (as built in 1979)
     
    This track plan formed the basis for a small, simple layout, to which I added a narrow gauge section (009) at a higher level, for additional interest. The upper level hides the 'round and round' nature of the main line, while leaving the station, at the front, and goods yard visible, for scenic modelling. There was never anything very prototypical about the layout and I treated it mainly as a framework for developing scenery and 'vignettes' for photography.
     
    When I returned to this railway, a couple of years ago, I decided to use it for the Victorian designs, which I was interested in constructing. One major limitation in operating the track was the lack of a passing loop on the main circuit, so I decided one could be provided by replacing one of the points on the cross-over loop with a three-way point. Again, by using the SCARM software, I found that I could incorporate a Peco SL-E99 'electrofrog' point, without making major changes to the overall layout.
     

     
    Revised Layout Plan (including 009 section)
     
    I marked the positions for the new track on the baseboard, assisted by use of the Peco templates, as shown by the following photo of the 'work in progress'.
     

     
    Marked-up Baseboard and Templates
     
    The new point required two point motors and switches, to control the live-frog polarity. For these functions, I used SEEP motors, with integral switches. For ease of installation, I mounted the motors onto small rectangles of printed circuit board, together with block connectors. This meant that all the soldering could be done on the bench, with the connector blocks used subsequently, to hook up to the wiring under the baseboard.
     

     
    SEEP Point Motor Module
     
    Since I already had a 'hand-held' controller, I decided to adopt a similar principle for operation of the point switches. I mounted the six point switches needed on my layout in a small plastic box, from Maplin, and connected this to the layout via a multi-way lead, taken from a parallel-port printer cable.
     

     
    Remote Controller for Points
     
    The connections from the point motors were all brought to a common board, carrying three sockets to connect controllers for points, mainline, and narrow gauge, respectively. Again, I designed the board so that most of the wiring could be done on the bench, with just the final hook-ups having to be done under the baseboard. All the wiring is colour-coded and labelled to assist the final assembly.
     

     

     
    Two views of the Control Panel
     

    Points Wiring Plan
     
    Once all this was in place, I had the basis of a layout to display my Victorian stock
     

     
     
    Mike
  6. MikeOxon
    I find it interesting to observe how, having broken the ice, the waters of enthusiasm start to flow!  
     
    I’ve been experimenting with some of the tools in 'Fusion 360' and while it’s still very early days, I can now produce carriage sides with ‘tumble home’ curves and I can also add curved tops to the ends, for fitting to roofs.
     

     
     
    So far, this has just been an experiment, as I explore some of the possibilities for future designs.
     
    The 'Fusion 360' software can export your model for 3D printing, I decided to use the 'Cura' software, since I have already set this up for my printer.  This is the image, ready for slicing, as shown on the 'Cura' screen.  Note that the estimated cost for this model is 18 pence, showing that, once the printing hardware has been bought, the main investment is in time.
     

     
     
    It is very pleasing to realise that I can produce many of the model features in one go, using the computer software, rather than having to assemble lots of ‘bits’, when assembling a physical model, with all the hassle that using superglue or solvent inevitably brings!
     
    The replacement print-head on my E180 printer also seems to be performing better than the original, producing a smooth flow of filament, when building up the sides of the body.
     

     
     
    This is what emerges from the printer after about 2½ hours.  There's still some cleaning up to be done but the main shell looks quite good to me.  I'm taking it steadily, so there are no external beadings or framing, as yet.  I have included recesses for the droplights, however, and the ends are rounded!
     
    Mike
     
     
     
     
     
  7. MikeOxon
    I am grateful for the patience shown by my followers, while I have been wrestling to make progress on 3D modelling, against a background of many distractions!
     
    In my previous post on this subject, I described my progress in understanding how ‘slicer’ software turns a 3D computer model into a file suitable for 3D printing.  This enabled me to make a few test prints by downloading 3D models from the web.
     

     
    3D printed carriage from downloaded STL file on the web
     
    The experience has left me with some reservations concerning the 'Geeetech E180' printer that I bought.  It is a very neatly-designed machine, which fits well into the domestic environment, but the best results I have managed to obtain, so far, appear to lag behind some other low-priced printers.  More importantly, technical support is poor and I suffered a print-head failure after a very short period of use.  The print heads are a clever modular design that can easily be unclipped and replaced.
     

     
    Geeetech E180 print head assembly
     
    Unfortunately, spares seem to be unobtainable in UK and I had to place an order for a couple of print heads, directly from China.  These took about a month to arrive, which somewhat dampened my enthusiasm for exploring printing possibilities much further at that time.
     
    My original idea was to look into making components, which lay outside the capabilities of my 2D Silhouette cutter, for some of my loco and carriage designs. This initial plan was side-tracked, when I realised that a carriage, like the one I downloaded from the web, is little more than a box with holes in the sides for windows, so it looked like an easy candidate for learning basic 3D drawing techniques.
     
    To make it a bit more interesting, I went back to look at a carriage I had already constructed, using sides made with the Silhouette cutter.  As one of my readers (Winander) pointed out, the prototype appears to have had rounded ends, which I had not been able to make, so I decided to see whether I could use 3D printing, to convert it to a more refined overall shape.
     

     
    Model of early GWR carriage at North Leigh
     
    I was especially interested to try the Autodesk ‘Fusion 360’ software, since it appears to be a comprehensive solution, aimed at becoming an industry standard, like other Autodesk products.  Even more attractive is that the software is available free of charge, to hobbyists not seeking to make commercial projects.
     
    Quite early on, I came across a web video that described how to make an electrical junction box with 'Fusion 360' but then I couldn’t find it again, after a period spent on other things!  Such are the problems of short-term memory becoming less reliable with age.
     
    Instead, I started to look at some of the Autodesk training videos but, perhaps I started in the wrong place, as I didn’t find them very helpful in deciding where to begin – there seemed to be an endless array of tools and techniques, and I had no idea which of these might be useful to me in the early stages.  I came close to giving up on the whole idea, thinking the ‘learning curve’ was too steep for me but, then, I suddenly found that simple introductory video again and things started to feel possible, once more.  In fact, this video by Lars Christensen, on the web at  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5bc9c3S12g proved to be the turning point, which convinced me that I really could get going with the 'Fusion 360' software!  There are 3 episodes, which cover the basic principles involved in making a box-like structure, with curved corners and various penetrations through the walls
     

     
    3D tutorial example
     
    To cut a long story reasonably short, I learned from these videos that the starting point is to lay out a 2D plan on one of the three planes defined in the software.  In the case of my basic carriage, this was just a rectangle, representing the floor.  Even with the help of the videos, and after writing copious notes, it still took me a while to grasp the basic concepts behind the 'Fusion 360' user interface.  Because it is such versatile software, there are many different modes of operation and, for my task, the first selection to be made was to choose the ‘Model’ environment from the top-level menu.  I also set ‘mm’ as my dimensions parameter.  The following screen-shots show the steps I took, following the Christensen video:
     

     
    Steps in making a carriage body with 'Fusion 360'
     
    Even while selecting these images, I had to go back to check some of the steps, where I couldn’t remember exactly what to do.  The big difference in computer modelling, as opposed to ‘real’ modelling, is that no ‘bodging’ is allowed – you have to specify each step in strict accordance with the program requirements!
     
    After following these steps, I had a box of the same dimensions as the coach I hope to build.  A feature of the software is that I could paste a 2D DXF file, which I had already created for my 'Silhouette' model, onto the appropriate faces of my box.  With the image in place, I could then select the window openings and the droplight recesses, and use the 'PushPull' tools to open up the apertures in the sides of the box, as described before.  In this case, I used the inside face of the side as the depth reference point.
     
    Using parametric references means that the windows will still penetrate the width of the side, if I subsequently decide to change this width parameter.
     

     
    Importing a DXF file into 'Fusion 360'
     
    That’s as far as I’ve got, at the moment.  I hope that the techniques I’ve learned will ‘stick’ in my memory but I now have a written guide, to help me when needed!
    I’m especially pleased to have found that that I will be able to use my existing collection of carriage drawings when creating new 3D models on the same basic principles.
     

     
    Basic 3D carriage model
     
    Of course, there are lots more components to add : interior partitions, seats, external mouldings, and so on, but I have reasonable confidence that I know enough of the basics to be able to make these additions relatively easily.
     
    Mike
     
  8. MikeOxon

    More 19th Century Thoughts

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    Most of my entries in this blog, so far, have related to locomotives and rolling stock. For most of us , these are the key elements of a model railway and involve a lot of scratch or kit building, since very few pre-grouping (and especially pre-WW1) models are available as RTR.
     
    Now, I am starting to think about scenery aspects and have realised that there is something of a paradox when 'turning back the clock'. We tend to think of 'older' as meaning 'quainter' and more 'weathered' whereas, in fact, the opposite is true!
     
    A new railway line in the mid 19th century had more in common with a newly-laid stretch of motorway than our current mental image of an overgrown and characterful branch line. Embankments, cuttings, and the track itself would all have a 'new' look, with none of the tangled vegetation and overgrown fencing that we see today.
     
    I think that, in a model, some compromises have to be made if we are trying to create an appealing layout but I will take account of these thoughts as I turn back the clock.
     
    After this bit of philosophising, a few pictures. I recently visited the Oxford Bus Museum at Long Hanborough (recommended if your interests extend to other modes of transport).  One of the exhibits was a Governess Cart and I knew immediately that I wanted one for my layout.
     

     
     
    Dart Castings do a simple white metal kit (complete with pony), The few parts are nicely cast, with only a little flash that is easily removed (I use a finger-nail).
     

     
     
    Assembly looked simple enough but, although the instructions look good, they fail to describe exactly how the parts fit together and the illustration of the finished vehicle is not very clear. As a result, I assembled the upper sides the wrong way up, which was easy. I then realised that the upper rails were supposed to be raised above the side panels but fitting them this way up was by no means easy!  There is very little contact area and no alignment tabs, to assist in holding the parts together.  The final result, however, is an attractive little vehicle, perhaps for taking the children to the station for the train to school.
     

     
     
    Bear in mind that it is very small - the 'Mini' of the day - and needs a fair bit of dexterity to assemble. (No problem for the 2mm FS people, of course, but quite fiddly in 4mm terms
     
    Mike
  9. MikeOxon

    Broad and Narrow - 2

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    I visited the Swindon Railway Festival yesterday (15th Sep). It's always good to study prototype fittings, such as the sand boxes on the Dean Goods. In model form, these often show a 'draw' from the casting process, so it was useful to be reminded of the shape and details of the original.
     

     
    Dean Goods no.2516 - Sand Box
     
    There was also a sizeable model railway exhibition and I got talking on the Broad Gauge Society stand. I mentioned that I had recently photographed BG and NG models together, and had been struck by how the BG locomotive 'towered over' the other. The person on the stand was rather dismissive of this idea, saying that BG engines were actually quite small and could not have been taller because of loading-gauge restrictions. This prompted me to re-check the dimensions from various books and I made the following diagram, for study purposes, from small sections of two scale drawings. The BG single is from Alan Prior's 19th Century Railway Drawings and the Dean Single is from C.J.Freezer's Locomotives in Outline GWR (both drawn to 4mm/ft scale):
     

     
    Broad and Narrow - Head to Head
     
    The height from rail to chimney top of the BG engine is shown on the drawing as 14' 6", whereas the Dean measures 52mm on the drawing, or 13' at full-size. I feel that my 'towers over' description was pretty apt!
     
    The Swindon Steam museum also houses the North Star replica, which I photographed:
     

     
     
    From the drawing in Russells GW Engines, the original measured an even more impressive 15' 2" (rail level to top of chimney). Engines like these must have made a very strong impression during the first half of the 19th century! For comparison, a 'King' only manages a height of 13' 4 1/2".
     
    Mike
  10. MikeOxon

    Brunel's Britzka

    By MikeOxon,


    General
    It’s some time since I modelled horse drawn vehicles but recent discussion on @Mikkel's blog raised my interest in the subject again.  In Janet Russell’s book: ‘Great Western Horse Power’, there is a photograph of the Britzka carriage in which Brunel travelled while surveying the route of his planned Great Western Railway.
     

     
     
    This vehicle caught my imagination and the first question it raised was: “what on earth was a Britzka?”. The question led me to research many long-forgotten terms from a lost world of local craftsmanship. According to ‘The Carriage Foundation’ : “A britzschka has the same configuration as a barouche – but whereas a barouche has a canoe-shaped body, the body of a britzschka has a straight, or nearly straight, bottom line and the end panels are either concave or ogee shaped.  The earliest britzschkas were suspended on C springs, and under springs were added soon after they were introduced.”
     
    This technical description did not help much, as Brunel clearly had other ideas in most of his design details!   A more useful description, given in terms of its function, is currently on 'Wikipedia': “It was constructed as to give space for reclining at night when used on a journey. Its size made it suitable for use as a 19th-century equivalent to a motorhome, as it could be adapted with all manner of conveniences (beds, dressing tables etc.) for the traveller.”
     
    In other words, it served Brunel as a kind of ‘Dormobile’, which must have been very useful to him, since his chosen route for the railway ran through the sparsely populated Vale of the White Horse. I wonder if he ever regretted not following the route of the Great West Road to Bath, with its plentiful coaching inns!
     
    Unfortunately, Brunel’s carriage has not survived, although it can be seen in the background of a photograph of the Swindon carriage shop, 1872, shown in Alan Peck’s book: ‘The Great Western at Swindon Works’. It is thought to have been scrapped during the cull of ‘old relics’, including the original ‘North Star’ and ‘Lord of the Isles’, in 1906.
     
    Background
     
    Road carriages or ‘chariots’, as they were often called, were not popular in earlier years, when the few people who needed to travel preferred to do so on horseback, in view of the general state of the roads. The first carriage designs were similar to farm carts, with an unsprung undercarriage over which the body of the carriage was suspended by a combination of springs and leather straps. I found copious information on choosing and maintaining a carriage, including the costs of the various parts, in a 2-volume work: “A Treatise on Carriages” by Felton, published in 1798.  The explanation of the various parts introduced me to a whole new vocabulary of craftsmen’s terms! The bar linking the front and rear axles was called the ‘perch’. - possibly related to the unit of length, which I learned at school : rod, pole, or perch = 5½ yards, although these carriages are shorter than that.
     
    The fore-carriage, which provided the capability for the front axle to turn the carriage, introduced a great selection of terms – ‘splinter bar’ at the front, to which the harnesses of the horses are attached, ‘nunters’ are short strengthening pieces of timber, ‘futchells’ are timbers that link the ‘splinter bar’ at the front to the ‘sway bar’ behind the axle. Many of these parts can be identified in the photo of the fore-carriage of Brunel’s Britzka:
     
     

    Fore-Carriage of Brunel’s Britzka
     
    A major difference in Brunel's carriage is the absence of a ‘perch’ running the length of the carriage. In Brunel’s version, this longitudinal component terminates in a finial at the back of the fore-carriage, while the rear axle carries the carriage body by means of a pair of three-quarter elliptic springs. These modifications allowed the floor of Brunel’s carriage to be lowered between the axles.
     
    The introduction of turnpike roads and a general improvement in surface maintenance led to very rapid advances in carriage designs during the early part of the 19th century. A major change was the introduction of full-elliptic springs between the axles and the main parts of the fore-carriage. Structural improvements included increasing the use of iron, initially to reinforce wooden parts and later to replace them in many roles. These new methods of construction included the introduction of the ‘fifth wheel’ – a horizontal wheel, which provided a bearing surface to provide much better control of the steering of the front axle.
     
    A Britzka carriage built in 1829 by Adams & Co of London and now in the Shugborough Estate, owned by the National Trust, shows these improvements very clearly:
     
     

    Fore-carriage of the Shugborough Britzka (1829)
     
    There is a delightful video, extolling the virtues of the Britzka while deploring the depredations of the newfangled railways, on YouTube .
     
    My Model
     
    After a long period of research, it was time to consider a model. The complexity of the undergear cannot be represented fully in 4mm scale, so compromises had to be made but I feel it is important to know what is being simplified.
     
    I only had the side-on photograph to work from, so many of the dimensions and details are informed guesses, on my part.
     
    The Carriage Body
     
    I followed my usual method of extruding a 3D ‘body from a ‘canvas’, using ‘Fusion 360’ software. For a reference dimension, I set the diameter of a hind wheel at 4 feet – see footnote.
     
     

    Extruding my Model Carriage Body
     
    At first, I only extruded half the final width of the carriage. I then added the door and other detailing onto the side before creating a mirror image, to complete the width of the carriage, with the opposite side automatically detailed.
     
    I made the front boot as a separate extrusion to fit against the curved leading edge of the body. Similarly, I extruded the box seat for the coachman from the same ‘canvas’. I created each of these parts as a separate ‘body’, so that they could be printed individually in the optimum orientation.
     
    The Wheels,
     
    Once again, I extruded these directly from the ‘canvas’ but I only extruded one spoke and then used the ‘Circular Pattern’ command to create the correct number of spokes for each wheel, in a regular pattern around the hub.
     
     

    3D-Printed Wheels on Printer Bed
     
    The complete set of wheels took just 4 minutes to print. I also made a spare set of wheels, to replace the very skinny and weak set on my ‘Scale Link’ Horse Bus.
     
    Fore-Carriage
     
    I felt sure that this part was going to be difficult and spent some time planning my way forward.
     
    In order to prepare a plan-view drawing of the fore-carriage, I took a screen-shot of the 3D model of the carriage body and used this to prepare outline sketches in Photoshop. I designed the fore-carriage in two parts – the lower swivelling carriage, carrying springs and wheels, while the upper fixed part is attached to the carriage body. A central pin allows the lower part to rotate about a vertical axis.
     
     

    Sketch Plan of Fore-Carriage
     
    I imported the above sketch as a ‘canvas’ into ‘Fusion 360’ and used my usual extrusion method to create the upper and lower fore-carriage parts as two separate ‘bodies’, ready to place in the correct alignment with the Carriage body.


    My 3D Model Fore-Carriage
     
    For a 4mm scale model, I decided not to attempt to replicate all the complex curves in the prototype but used simple rectangular transoms and other parts. I made an exception for the ‘horn bar’, since the curvature is the reason for its name.
     
    Springs and Axles
     
    I created these as a series of separate components, extruded with reference to the original ‘canvas’ shown above and then manoeuvred into their correct places within the ‘Fusion 360’ model.
     
    The 3D-printed axle trees are a pair of hollow tubes to hold each pair of wheels at the correct distance apart. The wheel bearings will be provided by 1 mm diameter metal rods, passing through the wheel hubs,
     
    The front springs are full-elliptic and were drawn using the ‘3-point arc’ tool, then extruded. They fit between the front axle and the main transom.
     
    The hind springs are three-quarter elliptic, with one end attached to the side of the carriage and the other to a block carried on a bracket attached to the rear of the carriage. A bar links the brackets on the two sides. These parts were drawn with reference to the original ‘canvas’ and then extruded.
     
    Fore-carriage brackets
     
    On the prototype, the fore carriage was attached to the underside of the front boot by means of an array of iron tubes. I considered using metal wires for my model but then, after making a few modifications, decided to create these supports as an integral part of the 3D-printed fore-carriage.
     
    I extruded a support bar across the width of the underside of the front boot and then made two curved bars between the horn bar and this new bar. I extruded another straight bar from the ‘perch’ at the back of the fore-carriage up to the same support bar.
     
    For the diagonal struts, I used the ‘Sweep’ tool in 'Fusion 360' to extrude from a circular pattern, drawn on the top of the horn bar, then following a diagonal path to the support bar below the boot.  For drawing the path, I enabled the ‘3D Sketch’ capability of ‘Fusion 360’ (in the Sketch Palette), which can be rather confusing when viewed on a flat computer screen. I found it best to draw the path approximately first and then make small ‘Move’ adjustments to the end points, while viewing from a couple of orthogonal directions.
     
     

    My 3D Model of the Front Frame with Struts
     
    General Assembly
     
    As I have mentioned several times, I have kept many of the parts as separate ‘bodies’ so that they can be printed individually, in the optimum orientation for each component. To ensure that all the parts will fit closely, I have moved them together within 'Fusion 360'. The result of this ‘general assembly’ is shown below:
     
     

    General Assembly of my Model in Fusion 360
     
    3D-Printing
     
    The real work when making a 3D-printed model lies in the research, followed by the design of the model within the chosen Computer Aided Design software. In my own case, I have been reading about horse-drawn carriage design since the beginning of this year. Apart from the ‘Treatise on Carriages’ mentioned above, I also learned a lot from a ‘A History of Coaches’ by G.A.Thrupp, 1877, and ‘The Development of Center-Pivoted Fore-Carriages’ bv Dr. Gordon S. Cantle in The Carriage Journal: Vol 26 No 1, Summer 1988.  See also 'Carriages and Coaches' by Ralph Straus, 1912.
     
    Since I only had a single photograph of Brunel’s Britzka, I spent a considerable amount of time deciding what details were appropriate for a carriage that was presumably built around 1830. 
     
    I then had to break my overall design down into parts that could be printed on my 'Geeetech' E180 FDM printer, with minimal need for additional support structures.
    After going through this lengthy period of research and design, the actual printing was simply a matter of loading the files onto a memory card, inserting the card into the printer, and pressing the start button!
     
    For the record, the print times (estimated by the ‘Cura’ slicing software) were:
     
    Carriage Body: 29 minutes Front Boot: 8 minutes Box Seat: 7 minutes Fore-carriage: (2 parts, printed together): 5 minutes Wheels: (4, printed together): 4 minutes Springs: (5 parts, printed together): 5 minutes  
    Once all the parts had been printed, I took the ‘group photo’ shown below:


    My Britzka Model Components, as printed.
     
    I am especially pleased with the appearance of the fore-carriage, which I had anticipated might have proved too delicate to print in 4 mm scale:


    My 3D-Printed Fore-carriage (2 parts)
     
    I shall pause for breath here. There’s a fair amount of fettling and fitting together of the various parts, then the painting and the addition of details such as carriage lamps. I plan to cover these in a future post
     
    Footnote: since my initial estimate, I have realised that the photo shows the carriage straddling some broad gauge track. Scaling from this track yields a hind wheel diameter of 4' 2" - close to my original estimate.
     
    Mike
  11. MikeOxon

    A Distraction - Tilt Wagon

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    In my previous post, I made the self-fulfilling prophesy that I would be distracted by the forum thread on GWR standard gauge 'tilt' wagons, started by drduncan. Initially there was some discussion as to whether the photo shown was, in fact, of a Broad Gauge wagon but the dimensions (especially the height) seemed sufficiently different to indicate that the vehicle under discussion was indeed Standard Gauge.
     
    Something 'clicked' for me and I decided that I had to add one to my stock, so I began to prepare simple drawings by scaling the photograph, using the assumption that the wheelbase was 9' 9", as in the BG versions. The result, produced in Autosketch by tracing over the photograph, looked like this:
     

     
    Because the original was of metal construction, I wanted to do the same with my model but I also decided to try a new way of marking out my 10 thou (0.25 mm) brass sheet, making use of my Silhouette Portrait cutter. Previously, my method has been to cut out sections of drawings on paper and stick these to brass sheet, using a glue pen. I then simply cut out the parts by following the printed lines with jewellers' snips.
     
    This time, I decided to use a diamond scriber in the pen holder of the Silhouette cutter, to mark out the outlines of the components directly onto brass sheet. As well as the outlines, this method also enabled me to scribe details, such as planking and guidelines for attaching surface details.
     

     
     
    In addition, I realised that if I drew the outline of my rectangular brass sheet on a sheet of paper and also added the Silhouette registration marks, then I could scribe both sides of the brass sheet, in registration. To do this, I lightly taped the brass to the paper, aligned with my outline drawing, and then scribed the detail. I then turned the brass over and scribed the other side with the appropriate designs - remembering to flip the Silhouette image to correspond with the way I turned the sheet over.
     

     
     
     

    Scribing Brass Sheet with a Silhouette Cutter
     
    After cutting out the individual components, I assembled the basic shape of the Tilt Wagon, as shown below. I have a set of socket spanners in a wide range of diameters which provide useful 'jigs' for setting the curvature of the end bonnets. I used super-glue to fix the bonnets inside the folded wagon sides and then inserted the curved ends into the bonnets. I prefer using super-glue to solder where there are lots of different small parts to be fitted together, as it avoids earlier joints melting while new ones are being made. Inevitably, some glue extrudes from the sides of the joints and I use a small stainless steel chisel, intended for wax carving, to remove this excess while it is still at a 'cheesy' consistency.
     
    A prominent feature of the prototype is the extensive use of rivets! I decided to 'cheat' and use the rivet strips that are currently available from 'Mainly Trains'. I realise that this means the rivet heads are on a raised 'plinth' but I find that the near-perfect alignment is preferable, at normal viewing distances, to my attempts at embossing even lines! Additional details are the angle-iron stiffeners along the tops of the sides and on the side doors (1mm brass angle), and the wooden cross-bar at the top of the doors (plasticard). I still have to add the rails above the sides and between the tops of the end bonnets.
     

     
     
    There remains the little matter of a chassis! I find that the GWR W-irons from MJT are still listed as "temporarily out of stock", as they have been all year! In addition, I see that 'Mainly Trains' have a notice on their website that "After 35 Years of trading we are beginning the process of winding down." It looks rather ominous for the future supply of many very useful detailing components!
     
    Perhaps I shall have to turn to completely scratch-building the chassis as well....
     
    In the meantime, my 'work in progress' looks like this, making an interesting comparison with a round-ended 3-planker from David Geen.
     

     
     
    Continue to next part
     
    Mike
  12. MikeOxon

    A Year in Retrospect

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    My first post in the Forums was in July 2013 while I started this blog a little later, in August. I've not been doing much modelling recently, since other activities take up most of my time during the Summer months, but I do spend time thinking "where next?" and also taking stock of the past year.
     
    A year ago, i had just started trying to re-create some late-19th century "atmosphere", while knowing rather little about how things were actually done. Thanks to the patience and help of many members of the forums, I have learned quite a lot - or, at least, enough to realise how much I do not know!
     
    When I started this blog, I had just completed a simple conversion of a Mainline 'Dean Goods' into a fair representation of a 'Stella'-class 2-4-0. I was delighted to find that it really was possible for me to have something 'different', without needing great engineering skills! This tender-driven locomotive made me think what else could be pushed around my layout by suitable tenders.
     
    The Mainline Dean Goods has a simple chassis for the engine that consists, essentially, of a square-section plastic bar, with slots to take the axles of the driving wheels.
     

     
     
    This 'inspired' me (if that's the right word) to make a similar chassis from a length of square-section styrene tube, with slots cut for the axles. It proved an extremely simple way of making a 2-2-2 chassis, where there are no coupling rods to add complications!
     

     
     
    Once I had this 'rolling plinth', I could put anything I wanted on top - and so, my 'Queen' (or 'Sir Alexander') scratch-built locomotive was born! The next hurdle to be overcome was in realising the complex liveries used in the 19th century. Here, the availability of ink-jet printable transfer film came to my rescue and I was able to make my own lettering and lining, as I have described previously in this blog.
     

     
     
    There was still the problem of rolling stock,with complex outside frames and often on 6-wheel chassis that seemed to have no chance of negotiating the small-radius curves on my layout. Help from other forum members solved the chassis problem and the splendid thread about the Silhouette cutter solved the bodywork problem. The possibilities suddenly seemed endless!.
     
    So, I quickly 'threw together' a couple of 6-wheel coaches and created a 'special train' without too much difficulty.
     

     
     
    Technology has come to my rescue in a number of ways and I have enjoyed discovering novel ways of achieving the results I wanted. Some of these methods may not stand the test of time and I'm going to have to re-visit them. In my impatience to see quick results, I neglected some important steps, such as varnishing over some of my printed sides, so that they have acquired some quite heavy unintentional weathering as a result. Also, the fit of some of the parts that I cut out for my initial experiments is not as good as it should be. I have since read several forum posts about how styrene distorts when glued and stretches when cut, so I'll have to have another go, taking such matters into account.
     
    I feel that having explored all sorts of 'odds and ends', I'd like to 'settle down' and try to build a typical short train from the late 19th-century. Photographs have undone many of my pre-conceptions. It would appear that clerestory roofs were not as ubiquitous on the GWR as I had thought, since most of the photos I have seen of secondary services have plain arc roofs. The sort of train I have in mind can be seen here:
     

     
     
    So,some plans for the future but I'll probably get distracted by all sorts of other things , such as the Tilt Wagons, currently being discussed in a thread at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/86563-gwr-standard-gauge-tilt-wagons/
     
    Mike
  13. MikeOxon

    'Cheats' Lining & Lettering

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    I have mentioned before that the attractions of the pre-grouping period include the elaborate and colourful liveries. These also, however, present a challenge to the modeller in achieving these effects on a small scale.
     
    Many years ago, while recuperating from a bout of pneumonia, I built a rake of Ratio 4-wheelers. Looking at these now, I am somewhat amazed to see the patience with which I tackled their painting! 30 years later, natural 'weathering' has given them a 'used' appearance, and I quite like the appearance of the dust on windows and footboards!
     

     
    The Ratio sides have good relief detail, which I exploited when applying the lining. A steady hand and fine brush were all that was needed to apply black to the raised moulding lines. These coaches, however, also had a thin gold line within the edges of the panels and realising this feature was much more difficult! Eventually, I found a technique that, I think, worked rather well.
     
    After completing the main painting, using enamels, I made up a dilute water-based gold paint. (at the time, I used Rowney Poster Paint). I found that surface tension caused the water to accumulate in the recessed edges of the panels, and so deposit a fine line of gold particles in these areas. After drying, it was simply a matter of removing any stray particles with q-tips and a fine dry brush. This method laid down just enough gold to provide the necessary highlight, without being too prominent. I find some model lining is far too dominant, which does not create the right 'impression' of the prototype.
     

     
    Nowadays, there are many tools and materials that were not available 30 years ago. Most significant of these is the Personal Computer, which allows detailed artwork to be prepared, using programs such as Photoshop. I have used my computer to prepare lining and lettering that can then be printed onto specialist materials, such as the various decal papers distributed by Crafty Computer Paper - http://www.craftycomputerpaper.co.uk/category/Decals
     
    I have been pleasantly surprised by the resolution that can be achieved by printing on these papers with an ordinary ink-jet colour printer. I use an HP Deskjet with the print quality set to 'maximum dpi'. As well as printing individual items, I also sometimes print whole panels, such as a wheel arch, complete with edge lining and emblems. These are then applied in the same way as other water-slide transfers. When viewed under a microscope, I find the detail is amazing. The maker's-plate is only about 4mm across and yet most of the lettering can be read.
     

     
    Similarly, the GWR garter crest on the splasher shows plenty of detail
     

     
    I remain, of course, seriously impressed by the skills of those who create these effects with bow pens and rigger or liner brushes, but my 'cheats' do enable good results to be achieved by those of us with lesser skills 🙂
     

     
     
    Mike
  14. MikeOxon

    Broad and Narrow

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    One aspect of modelling, which interests me, is the ability to compare the proportions of locomotives that are rarely photographed together.
     
    Many years ago, I built a K's Milestones kit of the GWR Broad Gauge 'Rover' class locomotive, so I decided to photograph this model alongside my Tri-ang Dean single, to illustrate the profound differences between these types:
     

     
     
    The Broad Gauge locomotive takes advantage of the width between the wheels to use a much larger diameter boiler and very wide firebox but, at the same time, the overall length is much shorter. When Dean designed his locomotives, it was still considered important to maintain a low centre of gravity, so he had to fit a boiler of sufficient steaming capacity between the large driving wheels; hence, the much smaller diameter but increased length.
     

     
     
    It was not until much later, when boiler pitch was allowed to increase, that the girth could once again reach Broad Gauge proportions.
     
    One day, perhaps, I shall build some mixed-gauge track, so that I can see these locomotives performing together!
     
    Mike
  15. MikeOxon

    After a Pause - 3 plank Wagon

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    I've now built my second GWR 3-planker from a David Geen kit. This time, I made a floor from 10 thou brass sheet, which acted as a template to keep the body panels square. It certainly solved the problem of trying to align several lumps of white metal in my far-from-steady hands!
     
    My method, when working with brass sheet, is to print a scale drawing of the part onto paper and then stick the paper to the brass using a glue-stick. For the wagon floor, I simply used a guillotine to cut out the rectangular shape but this method comes into its own for complex shapes, such as curved frames, when one simply has to follow the lines on the paper template with appropriate cutting tools. Afterwards, the paper is easily removed by soaking in hot water.
     

     
     
    Now, I could assemble the sides and ends, using the floor as set-square and template. The sides have steps at the top of the solebars, on the inside, which provide secure mountings. At the ends, I provided a folded tab, which similarly provided a secure fixing. It was now very simple to align one side and one end - unlike when these parts were 'floating' freely.
     

     
     
    The additional sides were then added and fixed to the floor-plate. In fact, the castings all fitted very well and simply needed the floor as a jig to assist their assembly. This time, I ignored the advice in the instruction sheet and waited to attach the axle guards until after the main structure was complete. This showed up an asymmetry in the castings since, when the guards were centred over the bump stops on one side, those on the opposite side were noticeably displaced, when the axles were lined up correctly. I fitted the guards on one side first and then trued up the axles before gluing those on the opposite side.
     

     
     
    The detail on the castings is very good indeed and once I had found a way of truing up the assembly, I think this makes a very attractive early wagon.
     

     
     
    I am very grateful for all the suggestions that were made on my previous posts and would like to ask one more question. Am I correct to assume that the V-hanger should be removed from the side opposite the brake gear? I guess that there was no shaft across the wagon but that the one-side brake was supported by a single V-hanger and the vertical rod inside the brake rods.
     
    Now for another pause. I read, on another thread, about air brushes and, as a result, have bought an AS186 kit to have a go! It may take some time for me to get the hang of it and, definitely, some time before I have anything fit to post!
     
    Mike
  16. MikeOxon

    my next kit - 3 plank Wagon

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    Photographs can be very cruel! Looking at the photo of the handbrake ratchet in my previous entry, all I see is the huge tab, which I have not filed smoothly. It's invisible in practice but not on the photo! It's a real test, to subject modelling to this type of scrutiny.
     
    My favourite weapons for removing those pips, as well as flash on white metal, are emery nail boards from the pharmacy. They're cheap and disposable, and don't get ruined by white metal, so saving my precious needle files.
     
    It was very pleasant to read the favourable comments on my N6 horsebox. Yes, it was a bit challenging at times but the sort of challenge that results in a real sense of achievement and of having learned something. Since building that kit, I have been thinking about other additions to my vehicle fleet, to replace several RCH wagons with something more characterful. I saw some three-plankers with rounded ends on Mikkel's blog. I rather liked the look of these and thought that, after the N6, they should be pretty simple ..... shouldn't they?
     
    Well, most entries on this site seem to show how wonderfully people have overcome difficulties and produced beautiful models but that is not the case here. I've been making rather a mess of things but hope that it will all prove to be part of a learning curve.
     
    The David Geen kit for the GWR three-planker contains some very nicely moulded and detailed (on both sides) castings for the sides and ends of the wagon, plus a few other small castings and a piece of planked plasticard, which I assume is intended as the floor (though not cut to size).
     

     
    Kit components
     
    The kit includes plenty of information about the prototypes but very little by way of building instructions, apart from a recommendation to use low-melt solder or epoxy but, preferably, not superglue. I soon found that there are no location pips or raised edges, to assist with location of the parts, either horizontally or vertically, The ends of the sides are simply mitred at about 45 degrees. Also, because of the curved tops to the ends, and the V-hangers below the solebars, I couldn't set up the parts upon a flat surface! I could not think of an easy way to jig it up for soldering, or to hold it firmly while epoxy hardened, so I decided to try superglue (against recommendations).
     
    Actually, I quite like superglue and find it effective, with the proviso that parts must be close-fitting and free of surface contamination (including any residual mould-release agent.) These parts weren't like that and there was a distinct taper at the ends (which I think I can see on Mikkel's model also). So, a bit of gentle work with the nail boards provided bright, matching surfaces that seemed to fit together pretty well.
     
    I decided to hand-hold one side and one end at right-angles (by eye) and then tack them together with superglue, then count to fifty as it hardened. Good! Next the other pair and now to put the two bits together, to make the rectangular plan of the wagon. I held the pieces in a pair of ratchet clamps but then realised that the side pressure from the clamps forced the mitred joints to push the ends apart! As the photo below shows, the thing looked far out of square and, in trying to sort this out, my tacked joints failed ... 'bother' ( actually, I used a word with different letters after the 'b') Oh well, clean up and try again with the delicate balancing act.
     

     
    Use of ratchet clamps
     
    By now, I had decided to use this wagon as an experiment, to discover better ways of building the next one. I cut the plasticard to size for the floor, fitted the rather horrible mis-shapen buffers, which didn't fit the holes in the buffer beams, and carried on with the rest of the assembly. When I slotted some wheels into their bearings, it was clear that things were very out of true - the axles were far from perpendicular to the axis of the wagon.
     

     
    Mis-aligned axles
     
    Right, I've now paused for reflection. I find that problems like this find some recess in the back of my mind and churn away there. A potential solution then pops out at an inopportune moment - for example, at 3am, when I am trying to sleep. In this case, the idea was to cut out a rectangle of brass sheet, to form a rigid floor / chassis, with fold-down tabs to support the ends. I could mount the sides onto this chassis and run a fillet of epoxy under the floor, to make everything secure. Then I could prepare the sides to receive the two ends, making sure that everything was square against my brass template.
     
    I'll stop at this cliff-hanger, in case better ideas pop out in the next day or two, but I think (hope) I'm on the way to a successful model. I must find some nice buffers, too!
  17. MikeOxon

    Trial of the Reds

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    In a previous post: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1405/entry-12531-milk-churns-and-siphons/
    I mentioned that I had tried painting a GWR wagon with Farrow & Ball 'Rectory Red' paint.
     
    To re-cap, this colour is described by the manufacturer as Vermilion mixed with Lead Oxide, to make it cheaper. It seems to me that could be a plausible formula for the red used during the 19th century on GWR wagons.
     
    Because it is difficult to compare colours accurately between different photographs, I have taken a shot of two wagons together. .The one on the left is painted in 'Rectory Red' and the other is sprayed with red car primer.
     

     
    comparison of wagon reds
     
    I think that the brighter red, on the left, matches the 'light red' description, which some writers used to describe GWR wagons, rather well. Because of the red lead content, this paint would darken with age, which was, allegedly, the fate of early GWR wagons
     
    Edit: I analysed the wagon colours in Photoshop, which shows that the oxide primer is more yellow (i.e.less blue content) than Rectory Red.
     

     
    Mike
  18. MikeOxon

    Another new 'Old Engine' - 1

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    Since reading Part Three of the RCTS "Locomotives of the Great Western Railway" series, I have become fascinated by the first standard-gauge locomotives to run on the GWR. I shared some of my findings in a forum thread - now updated at https://www.rmweb.co.uk/blogs/entry/26175-early-gwr-absorbed-engines/
     
    My interest has gradually become focused on GWR No.184, which was built by E.B.Wilson and Company for the Oxford, Worcester, & Wolverhampton Railway in 1853. It was photographed several times, showing how it acquired a more modern appearance through at least two re-builds at Wolverhampton works. This engine appealed to me, because it continued in service throughout the rest of the 19th century, ending its life working local trains in the Oxford area, where my current layout is set.
     

     
    There are several problems to be overcome before I can consider building a model of this engine and I intend, in this blog, to document my approaches to solving these. This post is, therefore, the first of what I expect to become a series. I have a "suck it and see" approach to modelling and, at the moment, cannot guarantee that a model will ever see the light of day but I hope that my methods will be of some interest to others. So, to begin at the beginning......
     
    Before starting on a model, I need some reasonable outline drawings to work from. It may be that the originals of No.184 exist somewhere but I am going to work from the information that I have to hand. Part 3 of the RCTS series I referred to above has a line drawing of the original (1853) form of the engine (Fig.C62). It also provides me with the key dimensions of the wheelbase and boiler. While there are photographs of both the 1871 (Fig.C61) and 1893 (Fig.C63) re-builds, there are no drawings of these later versions in these books. There is, however, a drawing of a very similar E.B.Wilson engine, No.192, as re-built in 1874, with later modifications (Fig,C86), so I decided to see if I could adapt this drawing, to provide a fair outline of No.184, as it appeared towards the end of the 19th century.
     
    My usual method, which I have described in earlier posts, is to make photocopies of the drawings and then to overlay them in the computer, to show the similarities and differences. The outside frames were not changed during the rebuilds, so my task was to 'graft' the new boiler and cab from the drawing of No.192 onto the frames and wheels of No.184. In making the overlay shown below, I had to reverse one of the images, since the drawing was of the opposite side of the engine.
     

     
    The overlay shows that the two designs have very similar overall dimensions, so I did not find it difficult to synthesise a single drawing of No.184 from the two overlaid drawings: Both engines had the same overall wheelbase of 15' 6", equally divided in the case of No.192 (when re-built) but 7'6" + 8' 0" for No.184. I was also able to check many details against the various photographs of No.184.
     

     
    Combined with the following information from the RCTS description of the re-built '182 class' :
     
    Boiler Group 35 (Type R3) Code TJ with raised casing:
    Barrel 10' 0" long X 4' 2" diameter
    Casing (firebox) 5' 1" long
     
    Wheels 3' 8" leading, 5' 8" coupled
     
    I believe that there is now sufficient information here, for me to prepare some 4mm model drawings of the engine.
     
    Next job will be to design a matching tender, which is rather more difficult, since there is much less information available, regarding wheelbase and other dimensions, for these early vehicles. That will be the subject of my next post.
     
    Mike
  19. MikeOxon

    Early GWR 'Absorbed' Engines

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    I wrote a Forum post about some of these ‘absorbed’ engines back in 2014 but it has now been archived and has lost its illustrations, so I thought it was worth restoring these in this blog post, which is partly based on my original text.
     
    Some time ago, I acquired a bound set of the RCTS "Locomotives of the Great Western Railway", mainly to learn more about the various pre-grouping designs by William Dean.  I had tended to skip over the volumes on 'Absorbed Engines' but later found myself browsing Volume 3 and realising what a strange and wonderful collection of engines made up the first standard-gauge locomotives to run on the GWR. These booklets are now available again on a print-to-order basis or in digital form.
     
    Of course, the early GWR was a Broad Gauge railway and it was only in 1854, during the drive Northwards, that it came to own any standard-gauge locomotives at all.  The first batches of these were acquired from the Shrewsbury & Chester and Shrewsbury & Birmingham Railways.  What an extraordinary mix of types these were, quite unlike anything we usually associate with the later GWR.  
     

    Shrewsbury & Chester Rly. as GWR No.14

    Some were Bury-type locomotives, with bar frames, others were 'long-boiler' types, with a gothic firebox hung behind all the wheels, and there was even an 0-4-0 with an intermediate drive shaft (built by the Vulcan Foundry).  At that time, there was a brief vogue for intermediate drive shafts, since these decoupled the valve gear from both vertical movements of the springs and lateral thrusts from the flanges on the driving wheels.
     

    Shrewsbury & Chester Rly. - GWR No.34
     
    This 0-4-0 was one of two that became GWR Nos. 34 and 35.  They were delivered in 1853 and both were withdrawn in December 1865. 
     
    Another former Shrewsbury & Chester engine that later gained notoriety was the long-boiler 2-4-0 GWR no.5, built by Longridge & Co., which was involved in a fatal accident at Rednal on 7th June 1865.
     

    Shrewsbury & Chester Rly. - GWR No.5
     
    A little later than this first group were the former West Midland Railway engines, which were added to the GWR fleet in 1863. This amalgamation brought in some of the old stock from the Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway (frequently referred to as the 'Old Worse & Worse').  The only known illustrations of most of these early locomotives are drawings by E.L.Ahrons, a great chronicler of early locomotive history.  One of his drawings shows an ex-OW&W engine that would, perhaps, have seemed more at home in the Wild West than the West Midlands:
     

    OW&W Rly – as GWR 223
     
    There were two of these engines, one carrying the name 'Ben Jonson', and they worked branches in the Chipping Norton area until 1877, the other becoming known colloquially as "Mrs Jonson".  Note the outside steam pipes to the cylinders and the (somewhat squashed) safety valve cover.

    Another West Midland engine, which is better known because its photo appears in 'Great Western Way', had the unusual feature of outside Stephenson valve gear.  It became GWR No.219, from a class of six, originally built by the Vulcan Foundry for the Shrewsbury & Hereford Railway in 1853/54. 
     

    Shrewsbury & Hereford Rly. - as GWR 219
     
    I found that there are extensive records of all the locomotives built by the Vulcan foundry on the web. These records includes lists of locomotives deliveries by years, in which the S&H engines appear as below:



    There is also a drawing of one of these engines in ‘The Engineer’, showing both the locomotive and its tender, which gives a better sense of its proportions than the oblique photograph.
     

    Shrewsbury & Hereford Railway – as GWR No.215

    According to Ahrons, one of these engines could still be seen "lying in a heap of scrap behind Swindon Works in 1886".  

    Some of these early engines survived well into the 20th century, usually after having been re-built several times.  The last engine from the OW&W. 0-6-0 No.58, seems to have been around until 1921, by which time, after several re-buildings, it had acquired a conventional GWR appearance as GWR No.47.
     

    OW&W Rly. Re-built as GWR No.47
     
    After my initial look at thee ‘absorbed’ engines, I came across an article entitled "Some Early Great Western Recollections" by C.M.Doncaster in the April 1942 "Railways" magazine.

    The author photographed engines in the late 19th century at Reading Station, as a member of his school's photographic society, and recalls that he casually snapped No.184, never dreaming that this engine dated back to 1853, when it was supplied to the OW&W by E.B.Wilson and Co.  He wrote that, in 1895, it was not unusual to see these engines drawing trains of ten 6-wheel coaches   He even made a simple water colour of such a train, since, most unfortunately, he wrote that his photograph was not fit to reproduce.

    This article led me to explore these engines in more detail.  Six were supplied to the OW&W in 1853; they were 2-4-0 engines, somewhat similar to the 'Jenny Lind' 2-2-2 design produced by the same company.  As it happens, No.184 was not camera-shy and appears in two photographs in the RCTS survey of GWR Locomotives (Part Three): one as re-built at Wolverhampton Works in 1877 and another, after a further re-build in 1893. This particular engine was finally withdrawn in late 1899 and the whole class had gone by 1904.
     

    OW&W Rly. - rebuilt as GWR No.184

    I have looked into some of the background to both this locomotive and the Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway, in general. so share this information, in case it is of interest to other modellers.

    The OW&W was initially planned as a mixed-gauge line, with Brunel as chief engineer.  Apparently, Brunel grossly under-estimated the costs and the money ran out in June 1849.  After a lot of wrangling, the line was eventually completed as standard-gauge only.

    David Joy (best known as the designer of the 'Jenny Lind' and of his radial valve gear) was appointed locomotive superintendent in 1852 and his diary (see https://steamindex.com/library/joydiary.htm ) gives some idea of the precarious state of the railway at that time.  He writes that when he arrived, the line was due to open in a fortnight's time, on May 1st, and he had to scour the country to get some locomotives for working the railway.   He scraped together a miscellaneous collection for the opening day, including a four-coupled " Jenny" (known as engine 'A') from the Railway Foundry in Leeds, with the cheque (£1,250) in his pocket to pay for it!  Remarkably, this ‘second hand’ engine survived into GWR ownership as No.206 and was finally withdrawn in 1876.
     

    David Joy’s engine ‘A’ – later GWR No.206
     
    Fortunately, after a few months working with these second-hand machines, relief came with the arrival of the first new locomotives, built by Hawthorns in 1852, and six more by the Railway Foundry (then recently re-named E.B.Wilson & Co.) arrived in 1853, starting with No.21.  It was these latter engines that later became the GWR '182-class' and they were clearly David Joy's favourites.  He wrote "This 21 class would always answer to any little nursing, and would go"  For example he: "received an order for an engine, two first-class carriages, and a van, and a driver who dare run........ We were at Yarnton or Wolvercot Junction on the morning, and all ready to take our passengers from the Great Western Railway special. I was, of course, on the engine — No. 21."  A report was sent from one of the stations that the "special train had passed at 60 miles an hour." , This report, in due course, came before Joy, who remarks " I countersigned it, ' Yes, all right.' ".  There are plenty of other fascinating insights into the running of these early engines in the diaries, including several accidents, which Joy described as 'spills'.


    OW&W Rly. No.21 (From David Joy’s diary)

    In 1860, the OW&W amalgamated with the Newport, Abergavenny and Hereford Railway and the Worcester and Hereford Railway, to become the West Midland Railway, which, in turn, was amalgamated into the GWR in 1863
     

    OW&W No.21 (later GWR 182)

    All this colourful history convinced me that one of these engines would be an excellent subject for a model.  I found that No.23, re-built as GWR No. 184,  survived until October 1899, still working trains in the Oxford area.
    The construction of my model is described in a series of posts, starting with   https://www.rmweb.co.uk/blogs/entry/14895-another-new-old-engine-1/


    My model of GWR No.184 with motorised tender (in Wolverhampton livery)

    List of OW&W Locomotives

    nos. 1 - 20     12 Passenger 2-4-0 and 8 Goods 0-6-0,  built by Hawthorn in 1852/3
            became GWR 171 – 181 (Pass - with some exceptions) and 239, 241 – 243/5/7 (Goods)

    nos. 21 - 26    6 Passenger 2-4-0 built by E B Wilson in 1853
            became GWR 182 – 187

    nos.  27 - 30/ 34    5 Goods 0-6-0 built by E B Wilson 1854/5
            became GWR 248 – 252

    no. 31        Engine 'A'  2-4-0, built by E B Wilson in 1849, bought second-hand 1852
            converted to 2-2-2 in 1855,
            became GWR 206

    nos. 32, 33    'Ballast' engines 0-6-0, built by E B Wilson 1854/5
            became GWR 278 & 279

    nos  35, 36    small 0-4-2ST, built E B Wilson 1853
            became GWR 221 & 222

    nos  37 - 39    3 Goods 0-6-0, designed Peacock,  bought from MS&LR 1854
            one (38) sold, others became GWR 237 & 238

    nos. 40, 41    2 Passenger 2-4-0,built by E B Wilson 1855
            became GWR 188 & 189

    nos. 42, 51    2 Passenger 2-2-2, built by E B Wilson 1856 (large 'Jenny Lind' type)
            became GWR 207 & 208 (51 named 'Will Shakspere' sic)

    nos. 43 - 46    4 Goods 0-6-0,built by E B Wilson 1856
            became GWR 264 – 267 (264 rebuilt as no.49)

    nos. 47 - 50    4 Goods 0-6-0T, built by E B Wilson 1856
            became GWR 231 – 234

    nos. 52, 53    2 Passenger 2-2-2T, built by R Stephenson 1859
            became GWR 223 & 224 (52 named 'Ben Jonson')

    nos. 54, 55    2 Goods 0-6-0,built by Kirtley, bought from MR 1860
            became GWR 280 & 281

    nos. 56 - 59    4 Goods 0-6-0, two built by Kitson and two by R Stephenson 1860
    became GWR 294 – 297 (294 rebuilt as no.47)

    Examples of each of these types are illustrated in RCTS 'The Locomotives of the GWR - Part Three'

     
  20. MikeOxon

    Oil Lamps for North Leigh

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    When I started this blog, a year ago, I wrote that my aim was to follow the conversion of my existing layout to an earlier time-frame. In practice, I seem to have spent most of my time designing and constructing new stock, while I have done relatively little to the basic framework of the layout itself. So, for this post, I decided to make a start on some 'backdating' of the layout scenery. Fortunately, static features of the landscape tend to change much more slowly than vehicles: I often notice how old railway photographs show 'antique' locomotives and carriages in front of buildings that are still in place, with little major change. Nevertheless, a lot of details have changed, partly arising from the use of electricity as a major source of power, heating, and lighting.
     
    Some time ago, I bought a set of oil lamps from DCC Concepts, so I decided that the time had come to install these along my station platform. These are attractively finished and well-made lamps, which are supplied in sets of three, packaged together with a controller on a small circuit-board. The lamp heads contain filament bulbs, rather than LEDs, since the manufacturer claims that incandescent lamps provide a more authentic 'glow'. I feel that the price is rather high at around £40 for the three lamps, especially since, although the controller is said to be capable of powering up to 6 lamps, additional lamps are not sold separately. (It's worth shopping around, as they can be found for about £30 a set)
     
    Each lamp is provided with two optional extension bases. For platform use, these extensions are not required but they would be needed for yard lamps, placed at ground level. The instructions call for a 2.75 mm drill, to make a single mounting hole for holding the cylindrical base of the lamp securely. The nearest size I had was 2.5 mm, so I used this, thinking that I could open out the hole a little, if necessary, for a firm fit. In fact, my lamps were just a little sloppy in the holes I drilled, so I am glad that I used nothing larger! The very fine wires from the bulbs protrude a few centimetres below my baseboard, so I soldered the ends to short length of stranded, insulated wires, connected to screw terminal connectors below the baseboard. There is sufficient slack in the fine wires to allow the lamp posts to be removed from their sockets and laid flat, during layout cleaning operations.
     

     
     
    In response to a question from Mikkel, I have previously explained that my layout represents North Leigh station on the Witney Branch, which is shown on the following map:
     

     
    1849 Map of the Witney area
    reproduced from http://www.fairfordbranch.co.uk/ , with permission from Martin Loader
     
    The map shows the line diverging from the Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway near Stonesfield and then heading southwards, towards Witney. At that time, there were numerous proposals for branch lines to Witney and this particular route encountered hilly terrain in the North Leigh area.
     
    North Leigh itself mainly handled local traffic to Oxford, including agricultural produce from the surrounding Cotswold farms, timber from local estates, and stone from the quarries along the ridge above Holly Court Farm. To assist with the transport of stone, it had been proposed to build a branch to the quarries but the hilly terrain proved too difficult for a standard gauge railway (even more so, broad gauge!). A group of local entrepreneurs then built a narrow gauge (2' 3" gauge) line to serve the quarries, with a loop to collect timber from a local saw-mill.
     
    The route prospered such that, soon after the original line was built, it was realised that the trailing junction towards Oxford was inconvenient, when bringing wool supplies from the Cotswolds via the Worcester line. A triangle was therefore added, to meet the Cotswold main line near Wilcote, where Sir John and Lady Wilcote held the Manor.
     
    My layout represents the junction just outside North Leigh station, where the line from Witney emerges from one of several short tunnels along this hilly route, with the route towards Worcester diverging through a narrow cutting, while the original Oxford line enters the station, where there is also a passing loop. Two sidings serve the local creamery and a cattle dock, and also provide an interchange to the narrow gauge system, serving the quarries and saw mill.
     

     
    North Leigh station, looking towards Witney
     
    I've not yet completed the connections to the platform lamps and realise that I have opened a whole new area for development, since the three platform lights will inevitably lead to yard lighting, building lighting, carriage lighting, etc., etc .....
     
    Of course, Sir John's younger daughter, Blanche, is not at all impressed by oil lamps. Her mind is full of the gas lamps of London, turning night into day. She recalls looking from the windows of the train, after the family's last visit to London, and seeing the blaze of lights following the Great West Road, all the way to the military exercise ground at Hounslow Heath. "Oh, why must we be stuck out here in the country - will we ever see such a spectacle in Wilcote?"
     
    Mike
  21. MikeOxon

    GWR N6 Horse Box - 2

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    In my very first post in this Blog , I referred to the need for plenty of horses and the facilities to support them. As part of "Turning Back the Clock", I decided that an essential railway vehicle would be a Horse Box, so I chose to build the Wizard Models/51L etched brass kit of the GWR diagram N6 box.
     
    Inspired by @magmouse description of his 7mm scale model, I decided to restore my own early post about my 4mm scale model.
     
    Although at that time (2013), I had not started writing detailed descriptions of my ‘builds’, I found that I had made a collection of photos, stage by stage throughout the build. So I am now able to add extra illustrations, which date back to 2012. I hope that my 10-year old ‘build’ may continue to be of interest to current modellers.
     
    I felt that construction of the ‘Wizard models’ N6 kit was achievable for a beginner in etched-brass construction, since the prototypes, dating from 1890, were of a particularly simple, straight-sided construction, albeit with quite a lot of panelling on the sides and ends. The panelling is, of course, taken care of by the etching process but I liked the fact that this model did not need any 'tumble home' to be formed, so everything looked pretty straightforward.
     
    Chassis Construction 
    I decided to start with the chassis , carefully following the instructions to bend the buffer beams, vee-hangers and axleguard-brackets down. This was followed by adding the solebars, which fit through slots in the floor and were soldered in place.
     

    Initial chassis construction
     
    I then moved on to adding the brake blocks to the axleguard etches – the instructions advise to do this before bending the W-irons. The axle guard is then fitted at ‘the grooms end’ with the linkage hanger pointing to the end of the vehicle. I puzzled for some time over which was the ‘groom’s end’. I eventually realised that the fold-out steps on the solebars are the key to this, though not mentioned in the instructions. The ‘linkage hanger’ is the fold-up part that looks rather like a sub machine-gun on the etch!
     

    Adding brake blocks to chassis etch
     
    After folding up the W-irons and adding bearings to the etch, I carried out a test fit of the Mansell wheels, to check for free running
     

    Complete axleguard assembly
     
    The second axleguard is assembled in the same way but is designed to pivot on a shaft between raised tabs on the chassis etch.
     
    I struggled for some time to understand how to bend the handbrake lever stirrup and then realised (too late) that it is necessary to fit this before fitting the pivoted axleguard assembly. Otherwise, it is impossible to solder the tab on the inside of the chassis, without removing the axleguard assembly again!

     

    Folded handbrake ratchet etch
     
    Next, I realised how little I knew about brake gear, so had to give myself a crash course on 'safety loops' and the like. The N6 underframe superseded the earlier outside rigged brake gear, by using the later standard pattern, with triangular tie-bars between the brake blocks on opposite sides of the vehicle. The basic method of operation of the clasp-type brake is shown below
     

    Clasp brake operation
     
    The triangular links between the brake blocks on each side were fitted next. There are several diagrams in the instructions to show how the various parts should be fitted together. Then the various ‘safety loops’ were bent and added to the axleguards as described in the instructions. These parts were fitted on the prototypes to catch any loose parts of the brake linkage that might otherwise drop and cause an accident. 
     
    Next, I added the vacuum brake operating cylinder (white metal casting), followed by the linkage to the clasp brake assemblies, as shown below. To describe this as a fiddly process would be an understatement and I found it easier to attach several small parts by using drops of superglue rather than soldering, which tends to loosen adjacent parts.
     

    Brake linkage and safety loops added to chassis

    I summarised the steps in the construction of the chassis in the illustration below:
     

    Stages in construction of the N6 chassis

     
    Body Construction
     
    Once the chassis was complete, I built the body as a separate item. This proved relatively straightforward, with just two etches that are each folded to form one side and end, then soldered together.
     

    Inner body shell folded and soldered
     
    The detailed overlays carrying all the planking details and framing then fitted easily over the tabs raised from the inner body shell (one tab ringed in above image). These tabs also serve to represent the hinges on the doors.
     

    Etched overlay added to inner body
     
    I had some difficulty in persuading the roof to sit flush to the ends, near the centreline of the body, so I soldered a pair of small right-angle brackets inside the body, to hold the centre of the roof in place – easy to do, if you assemble the body and chassis separately.
     
    Finally, I added the various white metal fittings and found that the spring and axle box assemblies tended to foul the rocking compensation of one axle. A fair bit of filing down was needed to keep everything working! Eventually, however, I had an attractive model, to play its part in generating the 'feel' of the of the earlier period that I am trying to represent.

    As in the case of the chassis, above, I made a collection of images to show the stages in the construction of the body and the final assembly of my complete model:

     

    Stages in construction of N6 Body
     
    At the time of writing (2023), I must confess that this model is still missing lettering and various handrails.
     

    My model of N6 horse box after painting
     
    Later on, I built several other vehicles, such as a carriage truck, so that this model could be included in a complete train , to carry the Wilcote family together with their carriage and its horse to London for ‘the season’
     
    Mike
  22. MikeOxon
    NB There is a newer version of this post at :
     
    In my OP in this Blog, I referred to the need for plenty of horses and the facilities to support them. As part of "Turning Back the Clock", I decided that an essential railway vehicle would be the Horse Box, so I chose to build the Wizard Models/51L etched brass kit of the GWR diagram N6 box.
     
    I felt that the N6 was a suitable design for a beginner in etched-brass construction, as the prototypes, dating from 1890, were of a particularly simple, straight-sided construction, albeit with quite a lot of panelling on the sides and ends. The panelling is, of course, taken care of by the etching process but this model did not need any 'tumble home' to be formed, so everything looked pretty straightforward.
     
    I decided to start with the chassis and puzzled for some time over which was the ‘groom’s end’, when looking at the chassis parts. I eventually realised that the fold-out steps on the solebars are the key to this, though not mentioned in the instructions. Next, I realised how little I knew about brake gear, so had to give myself a crash course on 'safety loops' and the like.
     

    safety loops in place!
     
    I struggled for some time to understand how to bend the handbrake lever stirrup and realised (too late) that it is necessary to fit this before fitting the pivoted axleguard assembly, as it is then impossible to solder the tab on the inside of the chassis, without removing the axleguard assembly again!
     

     
     
    Once the chassis was complete, I built the body as a separate item. this proved straightforward and the detailed overlays fitted easily over the inner body shell.
     

     
     
     

     
    I had some difficulty in persuading the roof to sit flush to the ends, near the centreline of the body, so I soldered a pair of small right-angle brackets inside the body, to hold the centre of the roof in place – easy to do with the body and chassis assembled separately.
     
    I added the various white metal fittings and found that the spring and axle box assemblies tended to foul the rocking compensation of one axle. A fair bit of filing down was needed to keep everything working! Eventually, however, I had an attractive model to play its part in generating the 'feel' of the of the earlier period I am trying to represent.
     

    still awaiting lettering and grab rails
     

    That's one more small step on the road back to the 19th century.
     
    Mike
  23. MikeOxon

    Sir John's 'Special'

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    I've finally worked out a simpler method for constructing a clerestory roof, so now I have all the vehicles needed to take Sir John's family up to London for the season.
     
    On my first U29 composite, described in recent posts, I folded the roof from a single sheet of 5 thou brass sheet but found it difficult to make the reverse folds correctly. For the family saloon, which I now believe to be Diagram G13, I have therefore made the roof in three parts - two separate sides and the raised centre section. This method of construction meant that only a simple right-angle fold was needed on each piece, and it was also easy to cut out slots for the windows, along the sides of the clerestory.
     

     
     
    Apart from that, I constructed the saloon in much the same way as I had built the U29 composite.. On the composite, there are four laminations to each side - the outer three of card and the inner of styrene, so that it could be 'welded' to the styrene ends. The tumble-home of the lower side is formed by an up-turned section of the brass chassis plate. When building the saloon, I dispensed with the innermost of the card layers, but now think this was a mistake, since the thinner side is less rigid and tends to bow slightly, especially around the large saloon window. A nice thing about making the pre-printed sides with the Silhouette cutter is that is very easy to make replacements but, for the moment, I shall live with those I have.
     
    There are still loads of details to add - oil lamp tops, foot-boards, buffers, couplings, etc., but I am very pleased with the '19th-century' look of these coaches, with their panelled sides and 'up and down' window line. I fear that the 80:20 rule may apply - the remaining 20% of the work needing 80% of the total effort.
     

    Left: U29 tri-composite Right: G13 1st-class saloon
     
    I now have all the vehicles needed for Sir John's special train. The components are:
     
    'Sir Alexander' class 2-2-2 locomotive, no.1124, sister to that illustrated at Witney on the webpage http://www.fairfordbranch.co.uk/History.htm Nos. 1124 and 1128 were the last of this class to be scrapped from Oxford shed just before WW1. My model is scratch-built from brass sheet, with a very simple 'rolling' chassis, and is powered by the tender, which has a Hornby 5-pole motor inside a white metal body from Scale Link (see my earlier post at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1405/entry-12756-tender-drive-a-convenient-short-cut/ )
     
    V5 Pasenger Brake Van, built using Shirescenes sides on a cut-down Ratio 4-wheel brake third. (described at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1405/entry-13204-v5-full-brake/ )
     
    G13 1st class saloon, scratch built on a brass Cleminson chassis, with Silhouette printed card sides and roof as described above. The prototype was apparently one of two, re-built from broad-gauge sleeping cars in 1891.
     
    U29 tri-composite built by the same method as the G13 saloon. This vehicle carries the servants and other household staff in Sir John's party. I expect the greatest fun was enjoyed in the 3rd class section, where the young maids would be making their first trip to London.
     
    Early (1866) Paddington-built carriage truck carrying the 'Victoria' carriage for use by Lady Wilcote and her daughters, Amy and Blanche. The truck is scratch-built on a wooden frame and the carriage is built from a Scale Link kit.
     
    N6 Horse Box to carry the carriage horse, with the groom in his own compartment, built from Wizard Models/51L etched brass kit (described at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1405/entry-12276-turning-back-the-clock-2/ )
     
    Although there is still a lot of detailing to complete, the following picture gives an impression of the ensemble, standing in North Leigh station:
     

     
    I know that 'special' trains were a regular feature of 19th-century railway operations but know very little about their actual 'make up'. If any one can provide information on an appropriate configuration for such trains, then I shall be very grateful and will modify my 'consist' accordingly.
     
    Mike
     
     
  24. MikeOxon

    'Special'- unique photo

    By MikeOxon,


    general
    As I mentioned in the previous post, I have been trying to track down a photo of the prototype of Sir John's special train.
     
    Today, I have found one but unfortunately, the morning of April 1st 1892 was notable for the famous London 'pea-soup' fog.
     
    Despite the photographer's best efforts he has been unable to capture much detail of the train. He has, however, used sepia toning very effectively to enhance the subject 🙂
     

    Train in London Smog - 1st April '92
  25. MikeOxon

    A Missing Link?

    By MikeOxon,


    General
    In my last few posts, I’ve been delving into the almost lost world of the early days of the GWR broad gauge. I notice that my previous post aroused little comment so, perhaps, I have moved rather too far from what most people think of as ‘railway modelling’ - but I do like using models as a way of improving our understanding of these early engines.  I do appreciate the various 'likes' that many of you have given me.
     
    Before I move back into more familiar territory, there is one more piece of history to record, regarding an engine that may not have existed at all – at least not in the form in which it was described.
     
    Francis Whishaw on the GWR
     
    One of the earliest books to survey the British railway scene was Francis Whishaw’s “The Railways of Great Britain and Ireland” of which the 2nd edition, with additional plates, was published 1842.
     
    He wrote “THE Great Western Railway is by far the most gigantic work of the kind, not only in Great Britain, not only in Europe, but, we venture to say, in the whole world. Mr. Brunel, not satisfied with the beaten track pursued by those who had gone before him, determined on carrying out this important work on entirely new principles; and, notwithstanding the numerous adversaries he has had to contend with from every quarter, has thus far been eminently successful in his favourite project, and will, no doubt, ere another summer shall have passed away, pronounce this mighty work to be completed throughout.”
     
    I should add, though, that Whishaw did go on to criticise the great increase in the costs incurred, over the original Parliamentary estimate … something with which we are all too familiar!
     
    Concerning locomotives, Whishaw left us with a puzzle, when he wrote :“we have ... classified these machines according to their magnitude, and the gauge of way to which they severally belong. Thus the six-wheel engines for the seven-feet gauge, as those on the Great Western Railway, belong to class A ; ...An engine belonging to class A is shewn in elevation in Plate 1, the frontispiece. and sections and details of an engine belonging to this class are exhibited in Plates 7, 8, and 9.”
     
    Whereas Plate 1 shows a locomotive of the ‘Firefly’ class, the engine shown in Plates 7, 8, and 9 does not correspond to any engine known to have worked on the GWR!:
     

    Whishaw Plate 7
     

    Whishaw Plate 8
     
    Whishaw does not specifically state that this is a GWR engine, although that assumption has been made by many later writers and is reasonable, considering that no other British railway used a 7 foot gauge..  The image has also sometimes been referred to as being a member of the ‘Firefly’ class, which it superficially resembles, at first glance.
     
    I have also noticed that there are many similarities between these drawings and the example of Stephenson’s ‘Patentee’ engine, illustrated in Tredgold’s ‘The Steam Engine, Vol II’, Plate LXXXXIX (99), published 1838. To demonstrate this, I overlaid the two drawings to the same scale, as shown below:
     

    Comparison between Whishaw’s Plate 7 and Stephenson’s ‘Patentee’
     
    Creating a 3D Model
     
    I decided to create a 3D model based on Whishaw Plates 7 and 8, shown above. As usual, I imported the two images as ‘canvases’ into ‘Fusion 360’. I used the various sketching tools in this software to create drawings, which I could then extrude to create the main components of the engine. I also copied details of the frames and axle guides from the drawing of the ‘Patentee’ engine in Tredgold’s book..
     

    Examples of Components extruded from Whishaw plates
     
    Once I had extruded all the necessary components, including use of the ‘revolve tool’ for the chimney, safety valve, and manhole cover, I assembled them together, within the Fusion 360 software, and created a ‘rendered’ 3D image:
     

    My 3D model created from Plates in Whishaw.
     
    Comparing Models
     
    When viewing the images of the Whishaw engine in isolation, it is not difficult to conclude that this image has similarities with the GWR ‘Firefly’ class. That idea is quickly disposed of, however, when I bring together the above model with the model of ‘Argus’, a member of the Firefly-class that I created in 2021.. Note that both these models were created to the scales indicated on the original drawings.
     

    My 3D models of the Whishaw engine and Firefly-class ‘Argus’ brought together
     
    Once the two models are placed together, the profound differences between their overall dimensions is immediately apparent! Notice too, the much lighter frames and smaller driving wheels of Whishaw’s engine.
     
    Similar Engines
     
    There was a Stephenson 2-2-2 of the ‘Patentee’ type, named ‘Harvey Combe’, which was built n 1835 and was used by Messrs. Cubitt, the contractors, during construction of the London and Birmingham Railway near Berkhampstead. The scene was captured by the artist J.C.Bourne, as shown above in my header image:
     
    According to an article in ‘The Engineer’ by J.G.H. Warren, dated 24th Sep.,1926, Nicholas Wood, in a “Report to the Directors of the Great Western Railway,” December 10th, 1838, gave results of experiments on the ‘Harvey Combe’ of the London and Birmingham Railway, to compare with contemporary experiments with the North Star of the Great Western Railway.
     
    I have not read Wood’s report in full but it suggests the possibility, at least, that similar engines might have been used by contractors engaged in construction of the GWR. It does seem to me that an engine similar to that shown in Whishaw would have been far more suitable for that task than the large-wheeled engines specified by Brunel, as the initial engines for the GWR.
     
    Perhaps, then, the engine shown in Whishaw’s book represents a ‘missing link’ between the engines built by Stephenson for the London and Birmingham railway and an engine or engines used during the construction of the broad gauge GWR?
     
    Mike
×
×
  • Create New...