Captain Kernow

What about cleaning airbrushes?

Are these cotton swabs small enough to do the area underneath the handrails, please, Mick?

Interesting.

I use it to dampen dry, tamped ballast, prior to droppering Klear onto it!

I am impressed that just using IPA has done that, Mick!

I suppose that one could use one of those very small, pointed cotton buds, Mick? (like wot I discovered when our mutual friend Andrew gave me some last year!).

I agree with the use of brushes, though, different tools for different effects.

Hi Mick, can you just clarify at what stage you give the wheel treads and backs of flanges a good clean, to remove all paint residue, please?

Well, I'm getting on with some jobs on the chassis, such as preparing the main frames and spacers for soldering and making up the hornblocks, but further progress will now depend on the receipt of a parcel from High Level. I had another useful chat with the ever-helpful Chris Gibbon this afternoon and he's rushing further gearbox components to me, so that I will have a variety of configurations to try later this week.

I've realised that I may well be able to revert to my original plan of driving the leading axle, fixed, using a High Level DriveStretcher attached to the end of an 'articulated' LoadHauler Compact+ or Roadrunner+ gearbox, which should allow me to have the gearbox clear of the second axle and occupying the available space inside that horrible mazak block. This in turn would allow me to fit single beam compensation on the rear driven and pony truck axles, as per the kit's original design.

Doing this in OO has proven a bit of a headache, as there isn't enough room (in some of the possible configurations) to fit the gearbox between two internal rocking compensation beams, had I opted for twin-beam compensation on either the front two or rear two axles.

If the above cunning plan doesn't work, then twin-beam compensation at this stage will almost certainly require one of the High Level SlimLiner gearboxes, originally designed for 3mm scale modellers, but with a much narrower width between the frames, one of those would allow twin compensation beams either side of the gearbox.

I could, of course, fit purely sprung hornblocks, but they are a little outside my comfort zone and I'd rather work with designs that I am already familiar with, even if the application of same needs to be a bit more inventive.

Why even bother with compensation or springing in OO? Well, I do try to do this with locos of this size, as it does improve electrical pick up and overall running, even in OO.

Thanks for the tip about the motor shafts. I'm going to have to try the damp wadding approach, as the shaft is definitely going to have to be shortened and I don't have any diamond needle files here (but will also be investigating getting some).

I've been running the motor in gently on the bench this afternoon, just on its own, which is something I always do, prior to attaching it to the gearbox (which will also get a running in, when built, with the motor attached).

While that's been going on, I've been fettling the first of the two etched Perseverance side frames, to get it to fit the body. I've also had to fettle the body a little, at the front end. Photos to follow.

I had some issues with the 1015 in my Dean Goods, Tim, which seem to have been due to a sub-otpimal combination of motor and gearbox, with the gear ratio  (38:1) not high enough to get the best effect from the motor. From that experience, I would guess that a 60:1 or 90:1 gearbox will be fine. If you're interested there was some good discussion by folk more knowledgeable than me:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/90035-mashima-1015-motor-low-torque-problem/

 

In the end I found that I could get a 1024 into the Dean without any difficulty, making me wonder why a 1015 was recommended in the first place. I have however heard that others managed to get 1015s working well in the Deans.

Thanks for that link, Al.

It looks like some folk have had problems when they cut the shaft of a motor with a cutting disc, something I've often done in the past, with no apparent problems.

However, with the limited space within the mazak block on this loco, I may have no choice but to cut part of the unused shaft of the 1015 off.

Hopefully the 90:1 gearbox will fit OK, too!

I wonder whether the small 10x15 Mashima, which is often used in N to re-motor UM tender drives, will have enough oomph to power the loco even coupled to a 60-1 roadrunner +.

I had a fairly long chat with Chris Gibbon this morning and have discussed motors with him on previous occasions as well. I'm hopeful that the 1015 will be up to it. It's certainly at least twice as big as the horrid little coreless motor provided by Hattons/DJM.

I'm weighing up whether to install the 60:1 RoadRunner+ that I ordered this morning or the 90:1 LoadHauler Compact +, which I ordered at the same time. The one that doesn't get used will be used for another project.

The loco will only ever have to crawl into Bethesda Sidings, shunt about a bit and then depart again. It won't have to work the 'Chalford Flyer'. Chris estimated that if the motor was run at top whack with a 90:1 gearbox, it would equate to a top speed of just over 33 mph. The maximum permitted speed into Bethesda Sidings is only about 20 mph max, so I should be OK.

However, the LoadHauler Compact+ is quite a wide gearbox, at 11mm and the OO frame spacers work out at 11.5mm, although the drive extender is narrower. It may be that this is sufficient reason to use the narrower RoadRunner+ instead, which is about 8.5mm wide.

My pleasure, Ray, and the best of luck!

You saw my Thomas at the S4 test track!?

 

Where were you?

Or has Captain Kernow uploaded a video or??

I was only taking stills, rather than videos and I do have one semi-acceptable shot of 'Thomas', which means that it's slightly less blurred than the other one, but I don't know if I can upload photos on someone else's blog?

That's why I use the admittedly overscale Smiths hooks on most of my stuff. It's far easier to get the link on it under exhibition conditions than a scale hook, such as Masokits, of which I also have a few.

Might you be tempted to open the plastic Hornby hook up a bit, Mick, as it's otherwise going to be a bit difficult to hang the wagon hook on them?

I'd suggest a bit tatty, seen better days, paint a bit worn in places but still loved by it's crew and their oily rag, please!

OK, thanks, I think I get it now, but what happens if some of the strands under tension in the dip become unglued?

It looks great, Andrew and the fencing method sounds ingenious, although I'm afraid that despite the photos, I didn't quite understand exactly what the large piece of plasticard with all the holes does.

Sympathy and moral support from another who doesn't wish to go down the DCC road!

Thanks Mick.

Some brilliant images on your Flickr site, by the way. Presumably some of those are commissions?

Hi Mick,

This series of blog entries has been extremely instructive and interesting.

I wonder if it might help folks if perhaps you would be prepared to list all the materials (paints, powders etc.) used on this weathering project, as that would certainly help anyone looking to do a bit of shopping for their own projects?

Thanks.

That's a very impressive and imposing structure taking shape there.

CTMK has used Mod Podge for fabric-based projects in the past, so I had heard of it, but my preference would always to use some kind of PVA for ballasting, whether applied neat with a paintbrush between the sleepers or in diluted form (with some dilute washing up liquid) on top of already-laid dry ballast.

Happy to comment, if you wouldn't mind posting a photo or two for us to see, please?

Thanks.

Sounds excellent!

Will this locomotive be running on a layout of yours, when it's finished, Mick?