Captain Kernow

I've not had very much modelling time lately, for various reasons, and what time I have had, has been devoted to weathering the Bachmann chassis for 82044. Tonight, I thought I would give it a good running-in on my circle of Lima track, which I keep specially for the purpose. Prior to the start of running in, the chassis did exhibit signs of jerkiness, especially in one direction, but, ever the optimist, I hoped that this would improve with some running. However, after 90 minutes of continuous running in both directions, it hasn't improved one jot and after a while and with a bit of experience, you can start to tell which locos will improve with running in, and which won't. Unfortunately, this chassis falls into the latter category. I even test ran a couple of examples in the shop when I bought it and chose the better of the two. I do try to buy R-T-R locos from a local shop, for precisely that reason, but any proprietor's patience is going to wear thin if I make him go through a dozen boxed locos until I find one I'm satisfied with. This particular chassis will lollop along reasonably happily at a scale 40 - 50 mph, but when it comes to slower speeds, especially starting away or slowing to a stop, the jerkiness returns with a vengence. As it happens, I have another Bachmann Standard 3 tank, and the chassis on that does run marginally better, but it's still far from perfect. I had intended that 82044 would be a relatively quick loco to do, prior to some other jobs I want to do on 'Engine Wood' and it's rolling stock in time for Railex at Aylesbury this coming May. So, what to do about it? I don't want to just pack it all up and 'walk away', because I really don't like leaving anything unfinished. I suppose I could dismantle the errant chassis and try to find the source of the tight spot or jerky running. Alternatively I could use the chassis from the other example (which is destined to have a P4 chassis at some stage, anyway), but would have to start with the weathering all over again, and I can't guarantee at the moment that this one won't bed in to my satisfaction either. On the other hand, I do have a Comet 76XXX chassis, plus a suitable motor and gearbox in stock, plus the right wheels, so I am now sorely tempted to build and modify that to fit the 82XXX. I almost can't face dismantling the Bachmann R-T-R chassis. I know others have done it, but I feel that I would be better off spending the time building the brass chassis for the loco instead. I'll have to have a think about it. I do wonder, though, why it is that so many of the Bachmann steam-outline R-T-R locos that I've bought in recent years are such indifferent runners, even after an attempt at running-in. I know we've had discussions like this on RMWeb before, yet it's just so frustrating when it happens again...

Lovely job there Tim. You haven't changed the bogie wheels, have you?...

Thanks for the tip, Graham, I'll look to get a set for my Wilton... (which CamRail did you visit, btw, I'm usually there and can't recall you visiting?....)

That's looking really good!

Excellent John - now where's that '60s band posing in the arches? Will a Wainwright 'C' eventually be seen plodding over the viaduct?

I think your collection of modified buildings as you've shown them, has much more character than the Medstead building, nice though that is. A canopy might make the difference to the Medstead building, though - it's the individuality that's going to make it stand out.

We should at least, I suppose, be grateful that Meldon Viaduct is still with us, when you consider other metal viaducts we've lost, such as Belah on the Stainmore line, or Crumlin, Walnut Tree etc....

Good effects with the soot on the boiler, Tim, in the latter days I suppose it's a wonder that they got cleaned at all. The soot is especially noticeable given the overall shade of the livery, which does seem to accord with colour photos in books that I own, too. I really like these locos, but I find it easier to justify a Class 17 over the Somerset and Dorset than one of these beauties, odd that...

Hi - I've just read this, with the Testors already drying in the railway room!! Well, I'll check the photos I have, but what I tried to do was have the lion facing the direction of travel - I thought that was the general rule... I thought my eyes were playing tricks on me with the photo in the HMRS book, so I put a '3' up for the power classification - still, the weathering will obscure that in all likelihood, and the Pressfix definition isn't what it might be.. I've now replaced the lamp brackets with WR ones and glued some of the detail in place. As regards running, she's not as bad as some Bachmann locos I've bought over the last few years. There's no binding when running with no load (I've tested her with wheels in the air and wires soldered to the motor leads). She will get a thorough running in on a circle of track before going into exhibition service. I don't tend to shunt with 2-6-2 locos, especially not passenger types, and especially not on BHR, due to the sharp curve onto the light railway. However, there is still the run-round movement of the 1805 Bristol TM to Engine Wood local to consider, and I plan to have 80244 sharing the duties at shows in future with 82041...

Nice-looking little loco, Chris. Interestingly, I also have one of those kits to build... The Wrenn chassis are very easy to re-wheel, by the way. 1/8" axle holes already, Romfords will drop straight in. How about enhancing it still further with some nice Alan Gibson replacement (Universal) coupling rods?

That's superb Martin (and even better in real life!).... One question - I've heard of thie Vallejo matt varnish, but last time I tried, I couldn't find any, where does a poor old sea dog pick a can or two of the stuff up, please?

What, and lead to a world shortage of alleged Cornish pasties as well??!!

As part of the on-going work to get some new/different stock ready for use on 'Engine Wood' at Railex in May, I've started work on 82044, which started life as 82029. There were only 2 or 3 black Standard Class 3 tank locos left on the Western, once Swindon had painted the rest of the Region's allocation green, and 82044 was one of them. Allocated to various sheds in the early 1960s such as Barrow Road/Taunton/Exmouth Jct/Horton Road, she was given a unique livery from 1963, in that the bunker was not lined and the numbers were shown on the cab side. 82044 appeared on the S&D now and then, so that's good enough excuse for me to have a black 'un on 'Engine Wood'. Work is in the early stages, I have replaced the Bachmann bogie wheels with Ultrascales and thinned the guard irons down a bit. Renumbering was done using Pressfix transfers (Modelmaster for the smokebox door). I also glued the pesky opening smokebox door up shut! Next tasks are to fit all the detailing, replace the lamp irons with W.R. ones and weather it. After finishing the renumbering, I realised that the '8' on the side photographed was upside down, so it has since been re-done. Sorry about the red reflection in the first photo! I'm hoping to use some Testors Dullcote to seal the transfers in, and (having never used their aerosol cans before), have selected an innocent Bachmann 12t box van for experimentation....

I shall watch your method of making the handrail clamps with interest, Robin! The downpipes look good - 1mm brass rod = 3" diameter down pipes (+ thickness of paint = fraction of an inch). And there's me agonising whether 0.8mm, 0.9mm or 1.0mm rod is best - 'JDI', I say!

Chris - try 247 Developments for some varied industrial loco nameplates (such as 'Plantagenet')...

I picked mine up from Dave Harding in the Exeter Model shop - he had over-ordered and sold it for a fair price - may be worth trying in case he has any left?

Thanks Phil - just noticed the thread pop up - a very useful image when it comes to weathering...

Folks, I've done a bit of checking with some of my work-related contacts, and it appears that Devon & Cornwall Railways were undertaking some surveys in the Holsworthy/Bude/Launceston areas recently, to see what level of support there would be amongst these communities for using the proposed Okehampton to Exeter passenger service, which is still a serious intention of D&CR. It seems that some individuals in the affected local authorites/areas have gotten the wrong end of the stick. D&CR are aware of the press reports and my contact has confirmed to me that there is absolutely no intention of attempting to reopen the railways mentioned earlier in this thread. It is all about promoting the proposed Okehampton to Exeter service. As regards comments about the closed section of line between Meldon Quarry and Tavistock/Bere Alston, I am not aware of any support or interest within NR or Devon CC for this. Also, don't forget that Meldon Viaduct was singled in the last few years of operation, due to concerns about the structure, and a 20 mph speed restriction imposed for the same reason. The ex-S.R. main line is certainly not considered a viable alternative to the main line via Newton Abbot. You may have seen press reports recently covering the visit by Lord Henley to Dawlish a few weeks ago, to investigate the possible implications of climate change on the main line along the Dawlish Sea Wall. This seems to have been a very positive visit, during which NR's committment to maintaining that route was reaffirmed. As regards Bere Alston to Tavistock, there is certainly serious interest and support from a number of local authorities for this scheme, and more importantly, the developer has not indicated any change of heart. However, the economic climate is probably not as favourable right now as it may have been 2 or 3 years ago, given that the railway is but one part of a larger residential development plan. There are also, as I understand it, a number of 'statutory processes' still to be gone through, and clearly the issue is sensitive to some parties in the Tavistock area, so I won't say any more at this stage.

I'm slightly confused - did folk conclude that the Bachmann model was dimensionally correct for the diagram portrayed, or not?