Captain Kernow

Going back to the issue of the tops of the chairs fouling certain flange profiles, I remember looking forward to fettling and weathering two Bachmann locos that I had acquired about 20 years or so ago, for use on 'Engine Wood'. One was a BR Standard Class 5 and the other an ex-LMS 'Crab'. OK, the 'Crab' might have been a bit of a stretch for the S&D in the early 1960s, but Rule 1 has always applied on my railways. I was very disappointed, however, to find that the driving wheels on both locos bounced along the tops of the C&L chairs. Replacement wheels seemed to be the only answer, so I rang Alan Gibson (when he still owned the company with his name) and asked for a drop-in set for both locos. He asked whether this was for EM or P4 and was somewhat surprised when I said, 'no, it's for OO'. I proceeded to explain the problem, so he supplied the necessary wheels, with OO axles. In the event, other (modelling) priorities took precedence and the locos concerned never had their wheels changed and were eventually sold on and the Gibson wheels too. I also remember first running my Bachmann WD 2-8-0 on 'Engine Wood'. The driving wheels were fine (a difference profile to the Standard 5 and Crab) but the bogie and tender wheels also bounced along the chairs. In this case, a simple substitution with Markits equivalents sorted the problem out.

No problem - here it is - You're probably better off going straight to the last page if you want to post a query, the thread is currently well over 3,000 pages long!

Mention of driving wheels is perhaps somewhat apposite, as Romford wheels have been one of my main focuses over the last couple of days. Having done some 'fettling' on the first of the two Peter Lawson panniers, my attention has now turned to the second one, but before I do any work on the body, there was a matter that needed attention regarding the chassis and specifically the driving wheels. Both locos are well built and run very well. Whereas the first pannier had Alan Gibson wheels, the second one I am now working on has the older type of Romford 18mm drivers, the ones with the deeper flanges as compared with what is now available from Markits. The problem is that the older, deeper flanges on the Romford wheels fouls the inside of the chairs on my C&L track. It's not a new problem and one that I have got round in the past by asking a friend with a lathe to turn the flanges down for me and this worked well. Unfortunately my friend is no longer in a position to help me and in any case, all of my new builds have used the newer 'RP25' profile wheels from Markits, once they became available. I also wonder if the problem with the insides of the chairs is restricted to the older pattern of C&L track from around 25 - 30 years ago, my stocks of which have still not been exhausted! I don't recall the problem with SMP track and I have no experience of other types of bullhead flexitrack in OO. Anyway, my plan of action was to remove each driving wheel in turn from the pannier and reprofile the wheels using a file and an electric drill (it sounds a bit dangerous but I have done it before and it's straightforward enough). I was also going to remove the rods and unscrew each crankpin and (probably) fit newer Markits ones, where I could cut my usual fine slot across the top of the crankpin washer, once it was soldered in place and dressed smooth with a file. This is done with each crankpin held in the vice (with card either side of the thread to protect it) and is probably better described with photos, so I'll do a new blog entry when I've finished the work on the pannier. Unfortunately Peter Lawson had not only epoxied each wheel nut in place, but also each crankpin! I know there was a discussion on this a few pages back and I understand the reasons for doing so, but none of my locos go far or fast enough on my small layouts to risk crankpins coming adrift in that way. In the end, I managed to remove each of the wheels in turn and successfully reprofiles them as described above, using a current Markits wheel of the same diameter as comparison. Unfortunately, two of the six crankpins resisted my efforts to remove them and both broke off, leaving the base of the crankpin securely in place. Not currently having the ability to drill the centre of the brass thread out, to take some brass rod of the same diameter as the crankpin bearing, I had to reluctantly put all six Romford wheels to one side. As luck would have it, I had a complete set of current Markits GW 18mm drivers to hand (marketed by Markits as suitable for a 57XX pannier), so the pannier was rewheeled with these newer wheels (I couldn't mix and match, as the crank throw is different...). After a bit of adjustment and fitting new pick ups on one side (the original chassis had half insulated and half uninsulated wheels), the loco is now running as well as it ever did, which is very gratifying. Just as I was testing it on the layout this afternoon, I found that the back-up controller, a Gaugemaster panel-mounted DC unit, seemed to have failed, so the rest of the sessions was spent testing it and ensuring that it was the controller that had failed and not the wiring on the layout. Having satisfied myself that the problem is the controller, I have now contacted Gaugemaster to arrange one of their 'life time warranty' repairs. It's been a busy day!

Thanks for the timely reminder, I was thinking of ordering some Markits wheels earlier... Is there anything wrong with the Scalelink equivalent? I was aware that Scalelink was doing wheels but I've no experience of them. Thanks.

I've posted a blog entry covering the first of the two whitemetal panniers that I bought from Tony Wright, originally built by Peter Lawson. I've added a few extra details only, not wanting to detract from the original character of the loco.

Impressed with my one van and two opens, one of which converted to P4 pretty easily this evening.

Here is a photo of the point under construction: The 'extension' pieces beyond the Y were simply to help with rail alignment and have since been removed. Here it is in the process of being tested by running various locos over it. Cosmetic chairs have since been added:

Hello Tony - just to say that I have done a bit of work on the first of Peter Lawson's panniers and have shown this in a blog entry here - Very happy with the loco and many thanks again.

Some folk may be aware that I recently bought two whitemetal kit panniers from @Tony Wright, which he was selling on behalf of the builder and previous owner, Peter Lawson. I understand that the ex-GW locos listed on Tony's thread are only a small selection from a much larger collection, most of which (if not all?) I gather are to be sold, due to the unfortunate ill health of the owner. Anyway, the two panniers arrived here at Kernow Towers a few weeks ago and were posed on the layout: I understand that the right-hand loco was built from a K's kit, albeit with more a more modern etched chassis, a decent (open frame Anchorage) motor and Gibson wheels. The left-hand pannier was built from a NuCast kit (which was probably derived from the original K's moulds, I think) and also has an etched and compensated chassis, Romford wheels and another Anchorage motor. Both locos were numbered as examples of panniers that were allocated to South Wales sheds at the time that Bethesda is set in, so I decided to renumber them. The K's one was to become 9629, allocated to Oswestry for a while (Pannier Papers) and the NuCast one will become 9741, allocated for a short time to Shrewsbury (Pannier Papers). I have also decided to add a small amount of extra detail, such as lamp irons, sand pipes and injector overflow pipes, which were not originally featured on either loco. Both locos were also single manned at the time they arrived here, both with a fireman, clearly awaiting the driver to turn up from the mess room, so a driver from the ModelU agency has also taken up duty on the footplate. Both locos are extremely well built and run well. Peter Lawson certainly knows how to build a loco kit properly. It is my intention, however, not to alter Peter's work any more that I need to and importantly, to retain the original character of the locos. So far, I have worked on the K's one, which has now become 9269. I am extremely pleased with the result and the loco is now officially listed on the roster for Bethesda Sidings. I've also uploaded a short piece of footage of 9629 working in Bethesda yard today: These locos are probably around 50 years old and whilst it is true to say that they don't have quite the level of detail that their more modern RTR counterparts have, I do think they still stand up very well. What they certainly have is a definite presence (they are heavy when compared to a Bachmann one, especially one of my Bachmann bodied panniers with an etched chassis) and loads of character.

I have recently completed an OO chaired bullhead Y point, using copper clad sleepers. I downloaded and printed off the Peco short Y point template from their website and used that as a basis for the experiment. I used modified Exactoscale plastic chairs, which I epoxied either side of the rail. Now got to decide which project to use it on.

Very difficult to tell just from photos, I'm afraid, given that I have no experience of recent DJH kits, but would it not be possible to wire up the motor and gearbox on the bench (with the motor body sitting in a lump of blue tack - I always test motor-gearbox combinations like this), with an axle and a single wheel attached and see how it performs under power?

Is it a hopper discharge facility for depositing sheep droppings for local power stations into waiting lorries beneath?

I think that's the only option (pinning), other than replacement of the crank with a new one. Provided only one side of the loco is pinned, any future adjustments to the quartering that might be necessary due to whatever causes, can still be made. When I've done pinning (Gibson wheels to steel axles), I've chosen a new HSS drill, put it in a pin vice and rotated slowly but steadily, until I've drilled to the required depth.

I would have thought that pinning should work. How about pinning right through the axle and into the opposite side of the crank for a 'belt and braces' job?

So, unless someone is proposing to reintroduce arsenic flavoured crisps or lead sandwiches into the catering mix, I suspect that most crusts will be eaten...

Pasty folklore indicates that you have correctly surmised the reason for the crust!

No ill effects on either!

'Please don't turn the volume up'...

At the RMWeb dos, there's not usually much evidence left to inform the Pasty Consumption Investigators...

I have recently re-numbered a pannier, so the old plates for '8750' class pannier No. 9678 are 'free to a good home'.

Meanwhile, in the real world of South Brent, the Packhorse has had a make-over, on the outside at least:

As someone who only has space for small layouts, I don't model actual prototypes, but use prototype influence on my imaginary scenes. As such, the track plan is wholly dependent on the amount of space I can devote to any given layout project. Once I've arrived at a track plan that I'm happy with, I'll then invent a back story to suit (bearing in mind that the most effective 'lies' are those with a hint of truth about them...)

Lovely scene above! I really wish, sometimes, that I had the space for a large roundy-roundy, but it never happened and never will now. Instead, much shorter layouts, built for shunting are what I build. I will admit to liking shunting, with a well-mannered loco and wagons with impeccable manners. Steel end links and magnetic shunting poles have transformed this activity, by the way. Having said that, it's still lovely watching continuous run layouts at shows etc.

Sounds very interesting, Wayne, a P4 A6. Is that only available from Scalefour Stores (I am a member)? In the meantime, awaiting the delivery of my first Finetrax kit - an OO A5, which I will build to see how I get on with it and for comparison with my existing method of using copper clad for point construction. Eventually the A5 will be used in another (very) small cameo set up.