Captain Kernow

10 hours ago, melmoth said:

Personal opinion obviously, but frankly unlikely

I agree, but from what I can recall, YouTube just give the name of the piece, not the artist playing it...

4 minutes ago, AJCT said:

Ah... thanks, anyway !

 

Alasdair

The problem is, I am only just about computer literate enough to add the sound track in the first place. I've just gone back to my YouTube channel home page, but I can't work out where I can find out the name of the piece!...

Sorry about that!

4 minutes ago, AJCT said:

Nice background music there, Captain - adds a touch of class to your shunting cameo.  What is it - Ludovico Einaudi?

To be honest, I don't think it's Einaudi, it's something that YouTube offered for free as background music and it seemed pleasant and about the same length as my clip...

I meant to add a short video I took of 9741 shunting, so here it is:

Some more info on the recent work I've been doing on the two whitemetal panniers is shown here in my Workbench thread - 

Here is one set of side rods, with the new crankpins in place:

And then mounted back on the wheels:

It was at this point, that I realised my huge mistake...

First of all, on the original chassis, the wheels on one side were non-insulated and I had mixed and matched all four of the original wheels and thus introduced a permanent short circuit.

Also, with the two new Markits wheels, I quickly realised that the crank throw of the old and new wheels varied. The old wheels were 'generic', whereas the new ones were specifically marketed as being suitable for 57XX panniers. So even once I had sorted out the short circuit, the chassis jammed up solid after only a quarter turn of the wheels...

Until I found a way to remove the broken-off old crankpins from the remaining two Romford wheels, I had no choice but to install all the new Markits wheels and put the old ones to one side.

This took a little time, as all six of the new wheels were insulated, so new pick ups had to be provided for that side of the chassis.

Eventually it was all done and the chassis was tested and found to still be running smoothly:

A spell on the rolling road followed:

It was then time to paint the new wheels.

The original balance weights were removed from the old driving wheels, cleaned up and epoxied to the new wheels.

The wheels were then mounted in two bits of card, as per the photos, each according to which side they came from and their respective positions in the chassis. This was so that I would put each wheel back in exactly the same position it had occupied when I tested the chassis.

The wheels were then sprayed, first of all with Halfords red oxide primer, then with a matt black. Once the black had dried thoroughly, each wheel was individually brush weathered with a mix of Humbrol and Railmatch enamels and allowed to dry again.

Then it was a case of removing each wheel in turn, re-mounting it on a spare axle and putting it in the electric drill. The drill was started up and cotton buds, slightly dampened with cellulose thinners were used to remove all dried paint deposits from the wheel treads. If I'm careful when I do this, I usually end up with a nice, crisp delineation between the painted front of the wheels and the actual treads.

Here are the repainted wheels mounted back on the chassis:

The chassis had been brush-weathered in the meantime.

After that, I used a mix of enamel paints and weathering powders to provide some basic weathering for the loco body.

Replacement numberplates were added (the location of the old ones had been cleaned up, smoothed off and repainted black to match the livery). The cab side plates are from 247 Developments and the smokebox door plate is a piece of 05 thou black plasticard, with a Pacific Models paper number affixed to it. Here is the finished loco on the layout:

The work on 9741 (new number) started once 9629 (new number) was finished.

First of all, I had to remove each driving wheel and turn the flanges down on the electric drill, using a file and some wet & dry paper (plus proper eye protection).

Before I could do that, I removed the side rods. Thinking that I would be replacing all the Romford crankpins with new ones, I snipped each soldered washer off, to remove the rods. Then each wheel was removed from it's axle. This was easier said than done, as the builder had glued each wheel to the axle end, prior to adding the Romford crankpin nut. The rationale behind this is easy to understand, as these locos in all likelihood did a fair amount of mileage on the builder's layout. I've had a crankpin nut work loose on the rolling road, so it is a fair precaution, if you don't think you will ever need to take the chassis apart again.

However, firm and sustained effort with a Romford axle nut screwdriver was able to loosen each individual axle nut in turn.

Using the file in this way proved to be surprisingly effective and it did not take long to remove sufficient metal to achieve the profile I was after.

The following photo shows a newly turned-down wheel on the left, an untouched wheel in the centre and by way of comparison, a new modern Markits wheel of the same diameter on the right:

Here is one complete re-profiled wheelset made up for photographic purposes:

The old crankpins had also been glued into the wheels as well. Four of them yielded to firm effort with a pair of pliers and came loose (they were the old pattern, so the Romford screwdriver could not be used).

Unfortunately, the remaining two broke off close to the surface of the wheel and rendered the wheel unusable (for the moment, at least).

As such, I decided to 'mix and match', using the four wheels I had salvaged and reprofiled, together with two of the new Markits wheels.

Once the reprofiled or replacement wheels had been reattached to their axles, I set about sorting out the crankpins on the side rods. I have my own peculiar way of doing this, so that I end up with a thin slot across the face of the crankpin nut, which (I find) helps enormously in screwing the side rods on to and off the wheels. The following series of photos best illustrate what I mean. The thin card is to protect the screw thread on the crankpin:

The 'screw slot' is cut using a fine piercing saw blade:

More in next post.

Another picture of 9629 (new number - the K's one) on the layout:

2 hours ago, hayfield said:

Very nicely weathered, I think these kits are one of the same with K's kits being absorbed into the NuCast range. The 57xx from K's could be ordered with the earlier (flat) cab and round windows, I think I have a couple stashed away

You are correct, John. Since writing the above post, I checked in my copy of the History of loco kits book, which also states that in 1995, Nu Cast introduced a new etched chassis for the 57XX/8750 and I think that this is what my 9741 has.

13 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=plant+based+eggs#ip=1

 

Found these although I must say they don't quite look the part to me.

Thanks for looking, but I think I agree!

CTMK and I tried some vegan cheese a while ago, never again!!

The last few weeks have been spent working on the two OO whitemetal panniers, that I bought from @Tony Wright, (which he was selling on behalf of the builder and owner, Peter Lawson, with some of the monies going to Cancer Research UK).

Here are the two panniers, as received from Tony. One was built from a K's kit (9678 on the right), with 9681 on the left being a Nu Cast kit (but as far as I can ascertain, the Nu Cast castings seem very similar to the older K's ones and I believe that Nu Cast may have acquired the K's range).

Both locos were built very well and also ran nicely. Neither of them has the original mechanism, chassis or wheels. 9678 has a rigid chassis, possibly a Perseverance kit or similar, a large open-frame Anchorage motor directly driving a final drive gear on the axle. It has Alan Gibson wheels and has been weathered.

9681 also seems to have the same chassis and motor combination, although the motor is attached to a simple gearbox, but has the same direct drive relationship to the final drive gear as the other loco. The chassis is, however, compensated with single beam compensation. It also has the older type of Romford driving wheels, with the larger flanges and is in a more 'ex-works' condition.

Having test-run them on 'Bethesda Sidings' (which is where they will mostly be employed), I established that certain tasks needed to be done, before they could be put 'in service'.

The back-to-backs on the Gibson wheels on 9678 varied between 14.5mm and 15mm and the wider b2b did not like the small portion of OO-SF on 'Bethesda Sidings' (just like certain recent RTR releases), yet another reason to regret building that crossover to those standards. As such, the back-to-backs would have to be narrowed to 14.5mm.

The older Romford flanges on the wheels of 9681 did not like the older pattern C&L flexi-track that I used on Bethesda Sidings. I still have some stocks of this track, dating back some 30 years and used some of those stocks when I built the layout. In the past, I had a friend who simply turned the older flanges down on his lathe. More recently, the finer RP25 profile of more recent Markits wheels ensures that this is no longer a problem.

So, I'd have to somehow deal with the flanges on 9681, if I wanted to use it on Bethesda Sidings. My lathe is not set up at the moment, so I undertook an experimental turning down of another older Romford wheel, using an electric drill, a file and wet & dry paper and appropriate PPE. This worked, so that would mean that all the wheels on 9681 would have to be removed in turn, turned down and replaced in their former position on the chassis.

Although both locos were finished to a very good standard, there were also a few additional details that I decided I would add, such as lamp irons, sandpipes and the injector pipes under the cab steps.

Both locos were numbered as locos based in South Wales sheds during my time frame, so re-numbering was called for. This would also enable me to re-locate the smokebox door numbers to the correct position, level with the top door hinge.

As such, 9678 would become 9629 (Croes Newydd) and 9681 would become 9741 (Shrewsbury).

The work on the K's/Gibson 9629 is outlined in a blog post here - 

I'll outline the work on Nu Cast/Romford 9741 in the next post.

Just now, St Enodoc said:

Yes, I think it's called an egg or something like that.

Indeed, I just wish some very thin and wiry hens could lay some non-fat ones...!

1 hour ago, gwrrob said:

 

An eggscellent idea . Seen before, Mogul class 5391 does the honours.

 

What's the first wagon in the train, please Robin (the one with the forbidden fruit in it!)?...

1 hour ago, gwrrob said:

 

An eggscellent idea . Seen before, Mogul class 5391 does the honours.

 

Is there a low-fat, non-milk, low-salt alternative (basically an egg without chocolate), please?

14 hours ago, DLT said:

Wasn't he related to Arthur "Two Sheds" Jackson?

No.

Don't forget Peter Leyland, who goes by the name of Gravy Train on this forum.

This tragic accident has echoes of the Severn Bridge disaster in 1960, albeit differences in detail and scale.

A brief update on the two P4 panniers, which actually dates from a few months ago now:

First of all, here is 7788, which is John F's loco @Re6/6:

Here again is John's 7788, alongside my 7741:

7788 was subsequently sent off to @Tom F to be properly weathered as per the prototype 7788 in the early 1960s, when it appeared in photos totally begrimed but with the 'GWR' still obviously legible on the tank sides.

I will weather 7741 myself, when the weather improves enough to use the shed.

Since the work on the above panniers, I've been busy doing work for our Scalefour area group 'D.R.A.G.', building some points for our new test track, doing some work for 'Balcombe Viaduct' and more recently, working on the two OO panniers I bought from Tony Wright, which will feature in due course.

It's amazing the difference a simple coat of paint makes!

Steve, will there be the connecting bus service from/to Bristol Parkway that has sometimes run in previous years, please?

56 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

I was thinking was what CK and CTMK doing in Essex for a model railway exhibition

If we ever do venture so far out of our Authorised Zone of Activity, I'll be sure to make sure we present ourselves at a convenient Essex Police Station for arrest and deportation purposes...