Jeepy

55 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Hmm - that seems to be self-contradictory!

 

A flangeless bearing is a flanged bearing without the flange - that is self-evident.

 

So - with a flanged bearing fitted with the flange proud of the inside face of the axleguard, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be proud of the axleguard face by the thickness of the flange - agreed?

 

But - with an unflanged bearing fitted flush, the widest diameter of the bearing cone will be flush with the axleguard face - also agreed?

 

So - unless the vino is seriously compromising my reasoning - the length between pinpoints in each case differs by twice the thickness of the bearing flange!

 

This assumes - of course - that the depth of the bearing cones is the same in each case.

 

I have long ago concluded that the only wise course of action is the four-handed, dry assembly struggle - with all the associated bad language!!

 

CJI.

Hello, 

Yes, I can understand what you are saying I think!..... Without examining the bearing in close up, perhaps with a magnifier of some sort, I guess that would be a good assumption that the cone starts decreasing in diameter immediately from the top surface of the shoulder, and if a bearing's cone without a shoulder starts decreasing immediately too that does stand to reason that it would shorten the distance between the Two bearings...... Out of interest I may actually examine it, you've got me thinking now! 

I've just finished painting the various parts on the sprues and I'm waiting for my order of dummy coupling hooks from Wizard, (I intend to use DG couplings) then I will commence assembly but I have certainly taken note of Chas's and your suggestion of attempting a dry assembly first with the shouldered bearings installed, I'm enjoying the learning curve although it does seem to be quite a long one! Thank you for your input, 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

Hello, 

I have recieved a swift and comprehensive reply to my email, apparently when the instructions were written by the previous owner long ago there were fewer choices so it's an ambiguity that needs looking at so I'm told but if you're using 'top hat' bearings the shoulder should sit on top and the type without shoulders should go in flush, great service from a nice chap called Graham 👍. 

Thank you all for your replies, very helpful and appreciated...... I should've contacted Cambrian in the first place! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

1 hour ago, Chas Levin said:

Hi Jim, I should have said, copious use of rubber bands, hair clips, blutak and similar things can supplement the hands... 😄

I have sent an email to Cambrian, will let you know what they suggest...... 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

I'm not sure why you were quoted again in this post Chas..... My incompetence I guess! 😆. 

1 minute ago, Chas Levin said:

Hi Jim, I should have said, copious use of rubber bands, hair clips, blutak and similar things can supplement the hands... 😄

Yes, I think that may well be the case! 😆, thank you! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

8 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello, I've found - with the wagons I've built so far - that there are a few factors that affect possible splaying, including the bearings of course (and whether they're flush) but also including the axle length and of course the back-to-back measurements for the axle-boxes, because in both of these dimensions, a fraction of a mm can make a crucial difference. The only way I've found is - as a couple of others have suggested - to do a dry run, using all three or four of your hands to hold the wheelsets in place between the sides (!).

I did try on early builds fixing one solebar+axlebox in place vertically, only to find that a tiny amount of splay was unavoidable (but invisible from normal viewing angles) and having fixed one side truly vertically, the other would have to accommodate all the splay, which is when I swapped to doing a full dry run to check.

On occasion, dealing with a kit where the sides were quite close but the wheels I wanted to use were on a slightly longer axle, I've also resorted to removing the wheels and using them on a slightly shorter axle.

Hope this helps...

Thank you, a dry run with all Four of my hands it will be then! Thank you for your comments on your experiences, 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

34 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Might it be worth addressing the question directly to Cambrian - I believe that they have a contact form / email address?

 

CJI.

Ah yes! It might well be, thank you, I shall do so to confirm either way, Cambrian themselves recommend the Alan Gibson wheelsets for the kits so they should know! Good suggestion..... By the way I shall be ordering the waterslide transfers from your good self in due course, not until March though I believe, it'll probably take me at least that long to build them anyway he! He! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

Hello, 

I'm starting to build a few Cambrian Models 4mm wagon kits, (First time for me!) I have purchased a few packs of Alan Gibson 8 spoke wheelsets with bearings, in the Cambrian instructions they say to fit the bearings 'flush', does this mean 'sinking' the shoulder into the back of the plastic chassis part or installing the bearing so the shoulder is on top but the main part of the bearing is in the hole please? 

I'm asking because when I eventually attempt to fit the wheelsets will they 'spread the chassis parts out of true if the bearings are installed with the shoulders protruding? I hope this makes sense! 

Many thanks, 

Jim. 

Bachmann C class and Hornby H class tank, although there is one H class on pre order not been released yet that I'm waiting for so maybe they don't count as they are technically still in production? Thanks, 

Regards, 

Jim. 

Merry Christmas everyone! 

Thank you all for a very enjoyable part of the forum, and a very inspirational one too! Keep up the marvellous work. 

Best wishes for a happy, healthy and productive new Year, 

Regards, 

Jim. 

23 minutes ago, bbishop said:

and they ran beautifully.  Once a month I caught one from London Bridge to East Croydon.  Okay it took 5 mins to get up to speed and 5 mins to decant at EC, but they just glided along the track.  Bill

Yes, they were usually very smooth riders, they had air bags and yaw dampers on the bogies, it must have been quite a drastic track issue to make one bang and jolt like that. 

During 'Slippery season' we had to carefully notch-up with the controller handle to try and avoid any slipping when pulling away, although the gearing was high, or low they were quite powerful motors and consequently it took even longer to get up to speed! 

Cheers, 

Jim. 

6 minutes ago, TrevorP1 said:

 

I've never commuted but did use the Bournemouth line now and again. One day we were coming off Battledown Flyover and there was an enormous bang and a jolt. Goodness knows what it was but for a moment it was quite alarming. I was used to the roughness of parts of the line but this was exceptional. It was a 'Wessex Electric' or what ever they were called, the ones that came after the REPs.

Class 442.......we used to call them 'Plastic pigs', they were the only 100 mph stock we had at the time, they used the old REP traction motors and were very high, or is it low geared? Took ages to get them going from a standing start but they did fly eventually! 

Cheers, 

Jim. 

Another recommendation for a mini heat gun here! 

I've had it some time now, the Mrs gave it to me when she cleared out her crafting cupboard, it's got a folding metal stand attached to it so you can put it down straight after use and not worry about it making contact with anything while it cools down, 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

Thank YOU Andy! 👍, 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

4 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

There was an amazing O gauge layout today at Wigan - Newchapel Junction.

 

Interlocking, permissive working within the station, several signal boxes, junctions and stations plus amazing arrays of functioning semaphore signals, calling on devices etc.  It was a joy to behold, built by people whose day job had involved signalling / operation or engineering.

 

I chatted with the operators, watched the way it worked and was thrilled by the activity and the way they all worked together to operate it, it was real team work and communication between them all and the trains simply never stopped - usually three on the go at any time.

 

Did it matter that by their own admission there was a lack of Southern Engines for the Southern rakes or that the trains entered the station at a higher speed than they should - not a bit, if anything the pace of operation added to their skill in controlling so much activity, especially the main station signaller/operator who was also legging it around the front to couple and uncouple three links to allow the shunter to take over.

One of my all time favourite layouts! I've seen it in action 3 times over the last few years 👍. 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

I've got One tube in my 10' x 12' shed 😳....... Plus a lamp on my desk! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

34 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

With pleasure.........

 

 

Passing Bytham School in February 2016 on the occasion of her first revenue run on the main line (delayed because of imbeciles swarming over the tracks at Huntingdon). 

 

I suppose I should also include this wonderful loco.....

 

 

Why do I always try and get my cabside numbers parallel with the footplate? 

 

 

Do these qualify as 'locomotives'? There certainly won't be passengers in the leading and trailing vehicles.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

The boiler 'skin' looks surprisingly smooth on Flying Scotsman! 

Lovely pictures! 

Regards, 

Jim. 

Hello Tony, 

Our thoughts are with you, Mo and the rest of your family at what must be a difficult time, 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

Great work Laurie, what an imagination!!........ I especially love the converted galleon, smashing! 

Regards, 

Jim. 

3 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Jim,

 

yes, the rectangles do go across the underside of the roof from flange to flange. They are only very slighter wider than the gap to get a gentle arch so don't exert a lot of side pressure when fitted but enough to help keep them locked in place. I put them about 25% of the coach length in from the ends (subject to partitions locations, etc) to spread their pull down along the roof. The screws don't need to be very tight to hold them in place and get a close fit as shown in the attached.

 

Jol.

 

 

 

 

Thank you Jol, 

That makes sense, making them slightly longer so they bend with the arc of the roof, and then i expect it's just a case of 'gently does it' when tightening the bolts....... Great stuff! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

50 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

I have used extruded aluminium roofs on a number of LNWR carriages and retained them by fitting a couple of brass rectangles between the roof flanges. Brass nuts are soldered in place over central holes in the rectangles and long brass screws pass up through the coach floor to retain the roof.

 

The rectangles are made very slightly too wide so are sprung into place, forming a very slight arch and then epoxied in place. 

Hello Jol, 

Could i ask please? Do the rectangles you describe go across the underside of the roof from flange to flange and if so do they flex when you tighten the bolt up through the floor or are they of sufficient thickness to be quite stiff? Or maybe fixed in the middle too? Thank you, 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

7 hours ago, Iain.d said:

Hi Al,

 

Good point – kind of well spotted! I have taken some photos to try and better illustrate my method.

 

First off, I drill a 1mm hole through the aluminium roof and then use a taper broach to open it out so the bolt passes through with the minimum of slop (a 1½mm bit is too big), then I partly drill a hole with a 2mm bit from the top of the roof, as deeply as I can, but not passing through the roof – just feeling the tip of the bit on the underside of the roof tells me it is generally deep enough.

 

I only have cheesehead bolts so I reduce the diameter of the bolt head to fractionally <2mm and then lower the profile of the bolt head with a file so when in the hole, the head sits below the level of the roof. A tiny amount of glue (epoxy) is smeared under the head of the bolt and I then secure the bolt using a washer and bolt on the underside of the roof.

 

 

The cross beam that I solder between the sides of the carriage is cut to within smidgen of the right width and a hole drilled through the centre. A bit of filing ensues to fit the cross beam squarely between the sides, keeping the bolt perpendicular to the roof and hole over the centre of the roof line. I put a spacer (3 layers of cheap masking tape) between the flange on the aluminium roof and the top of the cross beam – this ensures the roof is tight at the cantrail – and then solder the cross beam in place.

 

 

A confirmatory check that all sits as it should. Once done I smear a bit more epoxy around the nut and bolt on the roof’s underside.

 

 

On the top of the roof, I try and hide the bolt hole with roof furniture. I was able to do that at the kitchen end of this vehicle. At the seating end I filled the small recess with filler and smoothed it flat.

 

 

And at a more normal viewing distance, it'll be lost under the paint.

 

 

Sorry for the long explanation – and if you’ve had to suck lots of eggs…mind you it is Easter…

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

Thank you Iain, very well explained..... Keep up the lovely work! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

On 07/04/2022 at 07:53, Tony Wright said:

Our pleasure Jim.

 

It's so nice to have friends visiting LB again, and Jilly plays 'front of house greeter' every time. 

 

Shortlands Junction would make a most-interesting model project, especially for those who like to run locos from all the London Regions (even WR?) and the BR Standards, plus so many diesel/electric classes. What was in those few pictures in the book? A Jinty and an 8F from the LMR, A J50 from the ER, two Ws and a Q1 from the SR, and a NB Type 1, EE Type 1 and a Class 71? All on the same stretch of track! Not the largest types, of course, but wonderful variety on the transfer freights. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Yes, seems incredible really, quite interesting! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Regarding split gears on (particularly) Hornby locos, such cases are brought regularly to me at shows (prior to lockdown and, now, afterwards); at least two locos per show on average. Is this acceptable? All I do is recommend Peter's Spares, or get in touch with Hornby. 

 

When David West popped over last week, running his detailed/weathered Hornby A2/2, after a circuit of LB on (admittedly) a heavy train, the most alarming grinding noises were heard, the loco just stopped dead and its motor whirred away to no traction effect! Another split gear! 

 

All the more-recent posts confirm to me (if ever further confirmation were needed) that my decision to build my own chassis, whether they be scratch-built or kit-built or whether they be underneath RTR bodies, scratch-built bodies, 3D-printed bodies or kit-built bodies is the right one. Split gears? What are those? 

 

Today, Jim Good from Waterlooville came over for the day, and we ran just about all of LB's trains. Every loco we ran, I'd built and there were no split gears. The running was excellent, apart from (as always!) my operating incompetence in not setting the correct roads. There was a problem on a slip in shunting the pick-up. Since I find shunting of no interest at all, the slip has probably not been changed for months. No matter, a few throws, making sure that there was no detritus between the switch rail and the stock rail and a bead of oil, and all was cured.

 

Thanks Jim, for your hospitality at lunchtime, your diligent driving, excellent conversation and most-generous contribution to CRUK.

 

I hope you had a good journey back. 

Thank you Tony, and Mo for your hospitality too, lovely to meet you both, and Jilly! 

I had a smashing time, what an inspiration today has been for me! 

You've certainly given me some food for thought about my EM project too regarding Shortlands Junction. 

The journey back was trouble free, what a lovely part of the world you live in! 

Best wishes, 

Jim. 

5 hours ago, Iain.d said:

One of the other modelling projects underway is this Comet Coaches Stove R. The build is not too far off being done.  A few people who read this thread have made mention of building these and mine is little different to others that have been shown on the forum.

 

The underside of these vehicle is/was quite busy, I get the feeling the drawing shown with the Comet kit is more guess work than accurate, that said mine has a reasonable level of guesswork too. The W irons/axle assemblies look more complex than they are, I’m not sure I’ve got the brake pull/push mechanism right and there are vacuum cylinder, dynamo and electrical boxes to be added – these will be done closer to the painting stage.

 

 

This vehicle will form part of a parcels train (8.25pm Templecombe – Derby (Perishables) service) and will sit between two non gangwayed NPCCS vans and so I soldered up the cast gangways that came with the kit rather than make my own. I will try and fabricate something that looks like a door on the vehicle end, not that it will be visible through the gangway aperture.

 

 

And with the main bits placed together. I used the shell ventilators supplied in the kit. I did this blindly without any checking of appropriateness. I assume some did/may have had shell vents but I have yet to see a picture of a vehicle so fitted. Most seem to have torpedo vents and the one shown on the Wizard website has the later LMS type of vent. An easy fix though when I can find out more. I’ve yet to add a chimney. Many of these vehicles had beading added to the sides later in their lives, to cover the joins in the sheetwork; I’m undecided yet whether I’ll represent this on this one. It’s going to be finished in BR Crimson (circa early to mid 50s) so may not be required.

 

 

I had hoped to have this, and the BR Restaurant Car I posted yesterday, ready to paint by the end of March but there is still some way to go on both of them. With RMWeb being unavailable I was also able to do lots of things, not just modelling, but other hobbies and interests too.  I don’t think I do enough modelling to warrant a thread of my own and I’m not even sure if what I post here is of particular interest or I'm just filling space and time. I’m not sure if others like seeing models in the process of being made or prefer completed ones. For me anyway the offline time allowed a little food for thought on what I do and why I do it.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

Good morning Iain, 

Lovely work! I for one am certainly interested in seeing models in the process of building as i have yet to embark on two Roxey kits i have that will represent a 2-car pull-push set of the type used on the Allhallows-on-sea branch line in the early to mid 1950's on the South Eastern. 

I am a complete novice as far as building etched brass kits go but i have had a little dabble with purely whitemetal 1/76 bus kits with some success in the past and i am enjoying the learning process of working with brass by experimenting here and there with scrap bits! Keep up the fantastic work everyone, I'm watching avidly and picking up tips on the way! 

Kind regards, 

Jim. 

10 hours ago, john new said:

With the recent concentration on wagons I am thinking of adding a timber plank load to enhance an r-t-r 13 wooden bodied open. I believe the Oxford one to be a general wagon not a minerals wagon. I have looked at p26 of the loading guide at http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/Booklet_BR20426_Issue.pdf so can see how to rope it.

 

What I can’t find anywhere on line is a guide to what a standard length of timber would be likely to be when going from sawmill to builders depot. Were there standard widths, thicknesses and lengths? 

Hello John, 

I don't know if this helps but may give a rough idea! When I've purchased timber from my local timber merchants for building decking for the garden etc the longest whole lengths of any size of timber they could supply seemed to be 5.3 Metres, wether that was for the framework or the deck boards. 

I always tried to have the least amount of joins possible! 

That's going by today's standards of course and I'm guessing in the period you're modelling it would have been Feet and Inches, i expect it also depends on the type of tree it was 'hewn' from at the saw mill and the longest straight lengths they could get from the trunk, just some thoughts that's all! 

Best wishes, 

Jim.