Simond

Chris I think that's a bit bold! Where standardisation saved money, GJC and his team were absolute masters at it - wheels, cylinders, horns, axle boxes, springs, pony trucks, brakes, injectors, ejectors, chimneys, firebox and boiler formers, and many other bits. When you consider the cost of patterns & masters, tools such as the die plates, machining jigs, and then the risk and uncertainty that they avoided by using and developing standardised components that could be mixed and matched into different locos (and probably a similar system for coaches, wagons, and a lot of other things too) I remain convinced that Churchward was a finer Engineer than most if not all his contemporaries, and Brunel too! (Waiting for the hail of abuse ) I suspect where it was a case of saving time & money, many shed foremen, were masters of making do, and de-standardisation too! And without them, our model making would be so much less fun!!! Best Simon

'Tis indeed a strange beast. Confusing as the crosshead (enormous - must have weighed several cwt) appears to be at or near back dead centre whereas the cranks are just behind top dead centre. I wonder how that works! S

Jeff Thanks for that - mine is only 56mm wide which might explain the issue. Due to the location of the pick-ups on mine I can't directly measure the offset from the frames on mine, but I'm guessing that your 18mm figure puts the pump just outside the edge of the footplate - does that sound about right? My frames are 27mm inside, half of this would be 13.5, add 18 = 31.5, and the footplate is 60mm wide so about 1.5 wider than the footplate. I'm sure mine would fit in this case. Chris Please pardon the interruption! Best Simon

Jeff Thanks for your kind comments - I'd be very proud to have built one as nice as yours! Please could you do me a favour and measure the overall width of your motion brackets? The CRT kit needed "quite a bit of help" including a new home-made motion bracket, and I fear that I may have not made it sufficiently wide to suit the vac pump. If you could also tell me how far it is from the outside of your vac pump to the inside of the frame on that side I can probably figure a way to sort mine out. Thanks in anticipation Simon

Chris Back in Kent - please find some photos of my CRT model below: You'll see from the not very good photo that the clearance is microscopic between the rods and the back of the crosshead - hence the recessed con rod and very short bush on the leading axle. It appears that your kit has far more space in this area - assuming the cylinders are the same outside dimensions, I guess the difference must be in the slide bars. I still have not fitted my vacuum pump, as it appears almost impossible! I'm waiting for you to fit yours, and I'll copy you!!! Best Simon

Chris are there a couple of bits of tube in the kit that telescope outside the piston rod and fit in the bigger hole in the back of the cylinders? if not, do you have a suitable bit of K&S to do the same - this will provide the basis of a "gland" on the piston rod, and support it so it doesn't droop like the last turkey in the butcher's on Christmas eve... regarding rivetting - Leicestershire is not handy to Kent, otherwise you could borrow my press... More usefully, there are a number of "drop presses" shown in old Gazettes which are cheap, effective and reliable. if you can't find the articles or a sketch, the idea is a cylindrical weight with a hole in it (about the size of a "c" cell battery), sliding on a bit of threaded rod (eg M4 or M5 which you can get from Wickes / B&Q etc). you sharpen the end of the rod (ideally on a lathe but a big file will do nicely) and you run a pair of nuts onto the sharpened end, and lock them together. Another pair of nuts at the other end sets the "stroke". You simply place the pointy bit in the right place, and drop the weight from the top - this is consistent. You'll have to experiment with setting the length of drop (say about 100-150mm) and choice of a suitable backing material (hardboard, mdf, lead, plasticard) to suit the material you are punching. good luck! Simon

Is your wife really called "Asbestos"?

Useful link in DCC forum to Arduino / DCC / points http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/70389-arduino-accessory-decoder-experiments/ Best Simon

Hi Thanks for this Please see the Arduino thread I kicked off a few months back - it's linked in my signature below. I'll link from that thread back to here as there are lots of common themes. Best Simon

David Thanks for this - I suspect that the other 3 "likes" in response to your original question were intended as votes for "please show us", as was mine! I can certainly see the advantage of the long, low rate springs, and of the plungers being tucked up inside the frames - much less vulnerable than scratchers. You've got me thinking... Kind regards Simon

Pete Whose kit is the Mogul - please forgive me if this info was obvious and I missed it Ta Simon

Chris Just seen your photo with the 12BA nuts sunk in the backs of the wheels. I guess the "two bushes on the same pin" will still work for the con rods. Simon

Ah, yes, been there. If you use 10 BA bolts glued in the wheels, and tap the Slaters bushes to suit (including the extra pair you have) you can secure the con rods with the extra pair. This will set the con rods outboard by about 0.5mm, the thickness of the flange. You can then shorten the bolts to the ends of the bushes. You'll need to shorten the bushes to stop the rods flapping about. You'll also need washers behind the bushes to stop the rods catching on the wheel boss - one or two 10BA washers should suffice, but beware the washers with a slightly oversize hole as the bush may go into it causing inexplicable and unexpected tight spots. The area where I suspect you will find issues is behind the cross heads, where clearances will be mighty tight. Shout up if this isn't clear! Simon

Not the worm then...

Bearings? Worm? Simon

Jeff 10BA crankpins are a good idea, I've done this on most of my locos, which have Slater's bushes tapped to suit. I file a pair of flats on the flanges and made a spanner to tighten them. DLOS (and others) of this parish and the GOG websites did a rather more technical / professional job of drilling a pair of holes in the flanges, and making a peg spanner to suit. I turned up longer bushes for driving axles. Slater's wheels tap easily for 10BA, epoxy secures the screw to the wheel. Best Simon

Chris AFAIK right hand crank leads, thus if the LH cranks are at top dead centre, the RH cranks must be at front dead centre. I trust there will be howls and screams if I got it wrong . Not least from me as quite a few locos will need attention! (But I don't care how many rivets he counts, he can't see both sides of the loco at once!!!) Turning to your socket / blanking plug query - depends what chip you might use. This would be easy if someone (HINT ) were to issue a 13xx sound project, but none yet available. My guess is that if one were to be produced, it might well be on Zimo, and I guess that an 8-pin, or 21-pin would be possible. For simplicity, I would recommend an 8-pin if you go that way, and a harness with an 8-pin socket, and an 8-pin blanking plug, are available. I did have a look on the websites of the usual suspects but didn't find the necessary bits, but I'm sure a phone call to any of the DCC suppliers will get you what you need. Personally, I have not used sockets on most of my locos, there are 4 key wires, red (right rail) black (left rail) orange ( one side of motor) & grey (other side of motor) and frankly, I'd just solder the decoder in. Messing around with lights and smoke generators, and sound will of course add further connections - again, these can be soldered, or you can buy micro-connectors to do these. Most decoders run very happily on DC as well as DCC, so whilst it costs, if you just fit a chip as you build it, you will be prepared for use on DCC if & when you set up the layout to use it. You can also incorporate "stay-alive" capacitors which will prevent stalls due to poor pickup, and you can arrange that the decoder acceleration & deceleration are applied when on DC as well. Everyone will have their favourite decoders but for what it's worth, I have ~ 10 Zimo non-sound decoders and two ESU v4 with sound. Happy with both. I have some old (>10 yrs)Lenz decoders, which are less good, no experience of more modern ones. HTH Simon

I concur with both Chris & Mark. My button pressing is confined to loco selection, and, on the sound equipped locos, tooting, cylinder drains, and the odd safety valve... So far, I have two locos so equipped, both v4 ESUs from Howes, and I love the automatic variation in chuff from wide open regulator to drifting steam. Haven't yet tried to fit steam generators. One day... Regarding throttles, Multimaus works well, Lenz LH90/200 also, and if you can stand the buttons, the LH100 is excellent. I am much in favour of separation of driver and signalman, so my points & signals are controlled by a simple lever frame - I have no accessory decoders (but may consider automation of a fiddle yard at some point). I am an engineer, and coincidentally work with batteries, I think there is potential for on-board rechargeables, but until r/c can do what DCC can do (and at comparable prices) I'm sticking with DCC. (There is an excellent & informative thread on the subject at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64616-battery-poweredradio-controlled-locos/page-13). If anyone does choose to play with lithium batteries, please RTBM and follow the instructions therein - do not provoke them, and they won't bite. Yes, sorry, off topic too.... Please continue the build. I'm following with interest as a 1361 is on my shopping list (as would be a DCC chip with appropriate sounds HINT HINT!) Best Simon

Chris I don't want to pee on your bonfire here, but have you got any play between the equalised axles and the frames? it looks from the photos that the frame cut-outs have not been cut out, which is ok if you have opened up the holes in the frames, but otherwise, it will be rigid - which is ok, of course, assuming that's what you are trying to do. Shout up if I can help. Simon

Fully agree with Chaz. It is fundamental to match the axle positions to the coupling rods when assembling the hornblocks. Further, you do need to have jointed rods if you have any kind of suspension. I think that on the 1366's the four-coupled pair on the coupling rods are rear and centre, (ie the joint is ahead of the driver crankpin) and the rear axle is fixed in this kit. This means you can fix the centre horns with reference to the fixed axle and test that it all fits /spins freely before jointing the rods, and doing the front axle hornblocks. It might make it easier to manipulate on your assembly jig. I also agree with Chris, there is something very satisfying about the soldering process, always assuming the parts fit and stay in place, the flux works as intended and you don't drip molten solder into your shoe. There are days I wish I had been blessed with at least two more hands, but in general, it does give a mild glow of, well, not pride, but something similar, as the solder freezes "bright". BR Simon

Might be a daft suggestion, but given that the central square is made in four quarters, and the other rails likewise, what would happen if you built the central bit to 18.x gauge, and gauged the rest from that. Seems to me that you would end up with unfeasibly large flangeways at the four crossing points, and the thing would be ~ 6" over scale diameter ( but could, presumably be filed down?). Whether the flangeways would look acceptable or not is obviously a question that I can't answer, but I don't think running would be a major concern. HTH Simon

Steve There is a photo of my t/t in Jeff's thread http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/76732-stepper-motor-turntable-drive/page-4 at post 96. The photo is not brilliant, but you can see that the gravel sort-of "fades out" near the ring rail. The photos I referred to when painting and subsequently weathering the bridge & pit show some kind of concrete plinth, or at least a different "texture" where the ring rail is installed. There is also some kind of conical dip towards the centre, which I, and the Metalsmith kit, did not allow for. This photo shows what I mean. http://www.gres.org.uk/page50.html, whereas, it is not so obvious in this one - http://www.lovedartmouth.com/groups/profile/12/pictures/503/2 Will post a better one of mine when I can - I guess you have some good shots of the original Ranelagh bridge pit, so you can work out how to do it - at least you won't make the mistake I did! Best Simon

Me too It's a damn shame when something of historic value gets weighed in for what it can raise in cash... I too hope the perpetrators get their just desserts. I built a model of 1366 from the CRT kit (see GWR.org), and AFAIK, when built, she was not fitted with a bell - see the pic at http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/m_in_060_1366.htm Can anyone advise when / if one was fitted? Ta Simon

Steve Will do but I'm up in Birkenhead & Pwllheli for the next week or so - hopefully beginning August I'll get a chance before heading off to Scotland for work. Holidays - Will do some research for Porth Dinllaen, and hope to get a ride behind a two-foot Garrett... Will get back when I can Simon

Steve Looking back at mine, I think the one thing that would have made mine much better would have been to make a circular plinth to put the rail on. Just to lift it up. When I surfaced the central well, I used some small ballast, maybe fine 4mm scale, but it ended up a little higher than the base of the chairs, and it isn't right. I'm not going to change it, but I'm sure that I could have done better if I had somehow made the chairs a bit higher. Hope it helps - I can do a photo or two back end of next week if it would help Simon