844fan
-
Posts
348 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Posts posted by 844fan
-
-
Hey all got a small question I need a straight answer on so I can make a proper scale drawing based off a photo my good friend Sam (Sir_Douglas) found me and a few I've found myself and with the help of other members. Anyway I need to know Sleeper Spacing for two eras. One is Victorian circa 1866 the other is during the Big Four formation and up till BR LMS region.
With these in mind I should be able to gauge (Pardon me not intended) the wheel base of the engines and make a reasonable replica drawing.
-
Sorry I can't help with the 309 class, but I found 1 negative by JJ Cunningham in my collection of a 275, 16109 at Glasgow St Enoch shed. Hope its useful. It must have gone early as JJ Cunningham was prolific and I have about 600 of his negatives.
Duncan
Thanks Duncan that is a great find. Seems a few photos were snapped during the big 4 era and being from Glasgow they went to LMS I do hope that they got a proper repaint before scraping. Hmm now if I could just get some measurements on wheel Diameter and running board length I'd be in great shape to make a drawing of the class.
-
i can replace a broken end because of broken wire fixing points but only on certain types of motor like below, but thats all i can do
http://www.lusolarelectronics.com/images/SMS4.jpg
Fair enough my friend. I guess I'm just going to learn how to fix them myself. Heh I got a good teacher for the basics on electronics and mechanical stuff I just need to figure out the bushings, Brushes and that stuff elsewhere.
If I ever do get the hang of it I'll pass what I know on. -
it's no so elusive now is it!
Indeed my friend.
-
the gearbox is now out and taken apart, and next will be drawing the new gearbox
Do you by chance have any experience rebuilding the motors as well Sam? Even my father as capable a mechanic and electrocution as he is (And trust me he's the best in the county we live in) gives up on motors that stop. I'd just like to be able to rebuild them myself.
-
Credit to Micheal Davis on Facebook for these
Troublesome kitsons, The industrial no 99 from 2001
some of the pages have been accidentally duplicated by micheal but it doesnt matter
scans of an article Darlington coal yard Kitson
kitson - darlington coal yard (1).jpgkitson - darlington coal yard (2).jpgSam I have no idea how you do it but my friend you never cease to amaze. Great stuff for making a good little Kitson.
-
The conversion of the H1s to A8s wasn't so much a stability issue, AIUI, but simply to improve adhesion on the steeply inclined routes that the locomotives operated on.
Makes sense to me. A engine on a steep grade must have a lot of heft to them to overcome the drag.
Also sorry for the delay in replying guys. Been a busy few days house sitting alone. Also I recently got a gift in a game and it is one of those games you can't keep track of time with. You say I'll play for a mission and the next thing you know it's 10:00 at night. Got to break the habit heh but I'll reply to you all by the weekend promise.
-
Ok here is a question I had recently after my discovery of the Glasgow Class 14 Tanks and how similar it looked to a certain Blue E2 after his rebuild. But how common were Side Tank Extensions? I know the E2s had them (batch two anyway), Some of the aforementioned Class 14s and in fiction I know that two examples exist of Tank Engines with Side Tank Extensions.
I do als think I've seen a Pannier with added side tanks that give it a look of extended side tanks but it's the other way around here. I am honestly wondering how many engines out there had these installed to improve their running distance as I can only think of that as a reason to even do such a modification at all.
-
"Did I say Buffer beam?"
No, it was others who wrote 'buffer beam'; you did, indeed, write 'headstock'.
I should have started a new sentence for "it's not a 'buffer beam', on a wagon ...". My apologies, 884fan.
David
No trouble at all Dave I never meant to insinuate any offense my friend. Just wasn't sure if I had made the mistake or not. Glad we are on the same page my friend.
-
"Now that I think of it and this is still technically on topic what is the mount for the coupling hook (Often square or oval in shape) called?"
A 'drawplate', and, it's not a 'buffer beam', on a wagon it's a 'headstock' (and on a loco, a buffer plank), as I understand it.
David
Did I say Buffer beam? I swear I said Headstock as it was on Coaches and Trucks not engines. Though I know Mark one coaches had buffer beams I tend to call anything that looks like the LBSCR Twins from Sodor (Annie and Clarabell) frames Headstocks.
Draw plate you say hmm makes sense I've heard the term Drawbar for loco couplings and more often in regards to Buckeye/Knuckle couplers (I call em Couplers not couplings due to a old documentary called "Golden Age of Steam" if you have time Youtube has the full thing though broken up into 5 parts on archive and while it talks most of the US and not of the UK it does remind us that the UK is the birthplace of railways and engines so it's not bad and I recommend it highly.) due to their connection mounting.
You usually get the buffers out before the Peckett.
Hmm depends on the Peckett I mean some times the engine is hard to see between the buffers.
-
That class were known as the 14 class before a renumbering in 1919, after which they were the 275 class. The particular engine in the photo was built in 1914, with the extended side tanks and is shown with its LMS number after Grouping. Earlier batches, without the extended tanks, had been built in 1896 and 1903.
In my opinion, a class derived from the 14 class look much nicer. These were the 266 class - the 305 class after the 1919 renumbering. To enable them to handle tighter curves in yards and sidings, the back set of driving wheels were replaces by a bogie, resulting in an 0-4-4-T. Here's one of them, again with its LMS number - https://travelandmixpix.smugmug.com/Rail/Steam/Glasgow/i-3VJnNbw
Not a bad class evolution there indeed. I quit like many 04-2 tanks out there and I think that class would be perfect for a few branchline routes I have planned. If you'd like we can talk in PM more about them since this topic is about their progenitor and all.
Anyway I've searched Google from Stephenson and back but I can only find the photo of the class 14/275 tanks I posted above. I had the same trouble when I researched the Drummond Paddleboats (T14 and F13 which are both called Paddleboats even though I see only a vauge at best and I quite like Paddle steamer Tugboats.) till just a few weeks ago found a great side shot of the F13 and a friend had modeled a T14 and shared front and sides of it with me. (Of note these are all CG renders he shared as he is a animator who loves locos too. Also most of mine will be models in Trainz till I can get more room to build a proper layout.) Anyone know of any more? I really hate to ask but I'm turning up nothing also while book recommendations are good digital photos are much more appreciated at this time as I still haven't had much luck getting overseas books.
Even Abebooks was unable to get me two I ordered and they have a stellar delivery rate. Well I got my Shropshire and Montgomeryshire book so thats fine and they are amazing people to refund me for the others even if they still have a chance of getting to me. So I will try again but not for a while.
Hmm one last thing I just had a thought on how common was the concept of extended side tanks? It must of been decently widespread seeing two famous Tank Engines both had them. One blue one red and by that I mean the Rev. W Awdry's Thomas and Sammy the Shunter (Forgive me I cannot remember how to spell the ladies name who created Sammy and if I can I never misspell a author I respect's name and she is in my high regaurds). I plan on modeling Sammy as well in what I like to call RWS style by that I mean Sammy's model will be based off a Parker J1 and then given the mods to make him look like the character in the books realistically. Not Rivet counting here just making Sammy have a counterpart for everyone but I digress.
-
Sorry but you're wrong. The square (or sometimes round, oval or rectangular) part that bolts to the bufferbeam is the base of the stock and is part of it. The shank is usually round and, as I said earlier, slides inside the stock when compressed. The GWR (always had to be different) did, for a time, use square shanked buffers - but they were still shanks i.e usually a one piece forging with the head - the round or oval bit that rubs against its 'twin' on the next vehicle.
844, Traditionally couplings on wagons were "3 links" but all coaching stock and most vacuum braked wagons had "screw link" or just "screw" couplings for short. Most locos had screw couplings but some that were not vac. fitted just had 3-links. To complicate matters further "instanter" couplings started to replace 3-links so that the train could be 'tightened up" but without the trouble of having to 'go under' and tighten every screw coupling by hand. The 'instanter' link replaced the middle link of a 3- link coupling and was sort of heart - shaped.
Sorry if this sounds pedantic but I believe that it's just as important to 'preserve' the correct nomenclature as it is the physical heritage of our railways.
Ray.
Oh then I guess the stock in the old Model series of Thomas was GWR stock as if we look at this picture from Series one
That coach had a Square "Shank" but to the point the Shank is the actual part of the Buffer that is compressed into the stock when shunted or the sprung part of the Buffer as it were. Am I correct?
Also I had thought the chain couplings were only ever 3 links I just wanted to be sure and I've seen Instanters they look quite odd indeed. Some older Coaches were fitted with Chain couplings too but they were also hand braked if I'm not mistaken. A good example is the LBSC Stroudly 4 wheels. Though later on they received Air/Vacuum fittings.
-
If you think you've sorted the definition of components, have a go at this then! Snapped in northern Switzerland but could be of German origin:
Oh my. The only thing I can call clearly is Screw link Couplings. Everything else is Topsy turvy!
-
Hello hello what's all this then what's all *smack* Ow! *clears throat* Pardon me my John Cleese impression was on.
Anyway Hello everyone,
I got another interesting and out right look alike of a engine in my eye tonight. I was recently peruseing Mike Morrant's wonderful Collection of locomotive photos and I was looking through the Scottish region when I happened upon this little rather cheeky lookin tank with six small wheels, A short stumpy funnel, A Short Stumpy boiler and a short stumpy dome.
Proper Gallery link: https://mikemorant.smugmug.com/Trains-Railways-British-Isles/Scottish-and-BRSc/Scotland-GSWR/i-HZ9krLv
Will add better picture tomorrow darn mobile memory problems.
However this little engine is not the little blue hero of Sodor but a small tank engine from the G&SWR. A class 257 and a adorable little one at that. I know only one loco of this railway survives to this day and it is perched quite dizzily over a Jones Goods. But that engine I plan to look into at a later date as a possible Dockyard Tank to take over for my Lochgorm, Pugsy and Kitson tanks (not alone of course but it would be one of the newer stock to my harbor at some point) so that is rather a moot point.
No I want to know more about this Glasgowiegn cousin of Thomas and to find more easier to get photos of this class. It is a very interesting thought that a extended side tank with the flat running board and a splasher under said water tanks exsisted and that the Rev. W Awdry could of modeled this for his Thomas' Branch layout.
-
Are you sure about that? I've always understood that the "red" part is the buffer stock and the shank is the greasy (or rusty) cylindrical part attached to the head (round or oval) that slides partly inside the stock when compressed.
Ray.
I think the shank and stock are the same thing or if not the shank is the very back part that bolts to the bufferbeam, I've always heard people refer to a square shank or a round shank even though the buffer head is invariably round
Ok we are narrowing it down thats for sure. So the Shank is either the cylindrical sleeve that would hold the buffer springs in place or the part of said sleeve that is mounted to the headstock with bolts and rivets. Then the Cylindrical part I suppose can be called a sleeve or a shank and both be considered correct or we have two parts with separate names. Now that I thin kof it and this is still technically on topic what is the mount for the coupling hook (Often square or oval in shape) called?
I also want to be sure on this but a coupling made of three or four chain links named something special like the two loops with a screw fit between two flexing joints are called screw link couplings or are they simply as I've called them for years Chain link couplings?
-
It's a premise that works well in all walks of life!
Can save considerable embarassment at important occasions.
Don't bother to ask me how I know.........................
No worries mate. Mum is the word.
-
Ok this is bugging me now and I'd rather not start a new topic on it but since this is here I can sk with it. What are each part of a buffer and Dumb Buffer called? From reading this I'm thinking the part of the buffer holding the spring mechanism and the part we typically see painted red on many locos is called the "shank" Unless I've misread the replies on it.
Plus it's never too late to know your part nomenclature in this circle of transport am I right?
-
Dont forget a 60 ft section of standard gauge track ie sleepers and rails weighs around 10 tons.
Gordon A
Um I was thinking those really short ones they put on Conflats. Not the Longer ones.
-
If you want to be really... outlandish you could model the first crane engine, built as early as 1817, though I can scarcely find but a syperficial description of the machine, so it would have to be based on conjecture
Ah yes that would be interesting to try but with no photo I could hardly even try it. I mean the Alderny Breakwater loco I plan to model at least has a blurry photo to go off but this crane tank is a relic not well preserved in any media beyond the writen word. Also I'm not going for out landish per say just unique and different. I just see no reason a Crane Tank can't be of use to the permanent way just how much use is the question. I know sometimes sections of prebuilt track were used to replace very short sections and I think that could be a use for the Crane Tank no need to steam up a 30 ton crane for a job a 2 ton can do and is also of use for regular hauling so it will be in steam all the time.
At least that's my logic I know very flimsy but I just want character as well as reality if you take my meaning.
-
Very nice layout my good sir. I'm planning a coal mine or two for a set of Tranz routes (No room to model the proper way sadly) and this is quite inspiring.
-
The link shows Peckett 2081/1946 at Foxfield in the early 80s when she still had her 'bin lids' rivetted over her standard buffers. These were only on the front and to prevent buffer locking round the sharp curves at Nechells gas works when she was there.
Dang those are some big buffers.
-
I beleive I once saw an engine with double buffer shanks, its on the cover of fred harmans book about narrow gauge manning wardles
What about eight buffers...
Wait does the van it's coupled to also a quad buffer?
-
If I could make a case in favour of a crane tank
I've always found those secr funnel crane engines rather attractive, but if thats not what youre into, ok, the north london railway had a very attractive 0-4-4st crane engine, p.s. it would be interesting to see your model of gazelle
Well your in for a surprise witm my model as it doesn't yet exist and will not for a while. Well at least not as a physical model as until I am able to move into a larger home I haven't even the room for a HO/OO railway. Till then I am going to broaden my skills in 3D rendering and code my models to run in Trainz Simulator. I've been busy with research and creating the drawings I'm to make into 3D so I've yet to get started on the technical side but I am making excellent progress with the drawn plans in TT scale which I'll be enlarging for the modeling.
As soon as I can I'll show off Gazelle and all my other locomotives. 4 of which are what if situations being of 1860s-90s American Locomotives rebuilt to run in the loading gauge of all regions. No you will not be seeing a Big Boy or a early american Mallet with buffers all my engines are around the size of a Black 5 at their largest (Sierra No.3 is the basis of the largest one and I did a comparison of two existing models a Black 5 and said engine and she was just as tall and wide so safe if given some alterations.) I do my research unlike Hit Entertainment.
I follow a well known man's philosophy on railways as you can see in my signature below. But I'm also not a fool since I plan to make real models of these one day.
-
One possibility I could say for improvement on Leader is to do away with a coal burning firebox and instead use oil fireing setups. At least the problem of a poor fireman being roasted would be delt with. I could see a improved leader being a possibility if we took some of the more problematic systems away from the equation as well.
Honestly I cannot see it being impossible to correct issues of drive train, Fireing and the minor things. I always have enjoyed steam locomotives and certain Diesel locomotives as well from many facets of my life my father loves all motive power finding steam to be astounding engineering wise, He knows the technical side of diesels and the odd petrol driven engine thanks to his majoring in automotive study in his collage years so they aren't quite as majestic to him but he will never bad mouth them either. My Great Uncle (My fathers Uncle) Enjoyed railways as well as my grandfather on his side though he wasn't quite as much a rail enthusiast as we three are.
Rails are in my blood (both metaphorically and possibility literally since all human blood is iron based) and another person well persons I can thank for that love is the late Rev. W Awdry, His Son Christopher Awdry, Britt Alcroft (forgive my spelling of her last name if it is incorrect it is late and today was a long day for everyone in my house.) and the late and just as amazing David Mitton (Incidentally also a man I can thank for my lesser but still fascinating love of Tugs and old steamer ships) these four shaped railways into my life with a certain blue tank engine.
But more to the point and to bring it back to improving Leader in Awdry's supplemental books on his world of Sodor (And we all know this man knew a lot about real railways and were he a youth today would probably end up being banned from forums like this one for how passionate he was for realism) mentions the character Bo-Co a Metrovick type 2 as I'm sure you all know. Well Metrovicks were sad victims of teething troubles too but Awdry made it clear that at some point Crovan's Gate Works managed to fix his engine and electric faults.
Fiction yes but fiction written with a full on knowledge of what the problems were and how it could possibly be done. Now Leader is much like a Metrovick in this regard if given the chance old dangerous faults could of been fixed or removed. Maybe not a true success and indeed Leader was well too late to save steam but it could of been wonderful to see anyway what a fully realized and nonexperimental Leader could of become.
I guess it's just a silly dream and a possibility in a fictional story like Bo-Co's. But like the best of dreams we'll remember it long after it is gone and I for one won't stop dreaming of such a possibility.
Sleeper Spacing
in UK Prototype Questions
Posted
Hmmm that may be a tough one to get then as the line I'm in particular about is a industrial line "Grays Chalk Quarries Co. Ltd" I have no idea on the panel length though. Perhaps a photo can help? I've attached the one Sam linked before beyond that I'd say LMS region is the easier of the two to figure.