EHertsGER

Thank you, Mike! 1.2mm brass angle it is, then.

Coming back to this topic a few years on, I am about to order some angle from Eileen’s but would like to know the cross-section dimension, please. I note on the above 3 1/2” is mentioned. Thank you, Marcus

I would be grateful for any guidance our collected expertise might be able to offer in identifying what appears to be a LNER 'standard' lineside structure built in wood in the same manner as the adjacent signal box. I am particularly interested in its purpose (signaling/plate-laying equipment? It seems rather grand for a simple platelayer's hut, and there's one just up the line in short walking distance anyway) and, more importantly to me as a modeler, the availability of drawings. At first glance it is often mistaken for the concrete huts the LNER scattered about, but I know it was wooden as I am familiar with it as it was and know it burned down some time c1973. The building to which I refer can just about be seen in the accompanying photographs as the ridge roofed structure set to the left and slightly to the rear of the signal box at Widford on the Buntingford Branch. Any help would be welcomed. Modellers of the LNER may find a model of it appearing shortly, if one does not already exist. Best, Marcus

Clive Yes, that too. I have even got to the point of contemplating cutting and shutting brass sides... Marcus

It’s been a while since my last update. The explanation is simple; distractions elsewhere in life. However, my return has turned out to be anything but straightforward. Firstly I have pressed on with the droplights on the remaining sides ‘in the flat’ and then gone back to finish the first side of the diag 105. Hinges are MJT/Frogmore as below, door handles and vents from the kit, grab handles from MJT. This stage seems to be just being patient and plugging away to the point of complete sets of finished sides. It was when I went back to the earlier attempt at the brake coach (diag 102) that things started getting complicated. Looking it over after six months away from it left me feeling I had hurried it - and it showed. Later work on the other sides (103/4/5) revealed a better solution to the hinges issue (the hinge brace - see earlier posts) clashing with the droplight led me to using the door hinge etch marketed by MJT (a Frogmore Confederacy product). The results can be seen above. Worse was to follow as I tried fitting the roof. It is an MJT extrusion and fits perfectly. A little settling and it will be snug. My issue was with the way I had built the body; it seems the waist was wider than the bodywork: So, the logical thing to do would be to tear it down and build it up again properly. A pain, but it couldn’t stay that way. It was then that I noted some damage to the etches and began to contemplate simply replacing the sides. Bill Bedford must do replacement sides, right? This is a standard diagram, so may even be available as a single set. At that point real confusion set in; certainly the diag 66 is available as a set of sides, but hold on a minute. It’s not quite a diag 102, but, it seems, neither is the one I have... The existing brake vehicle has five toplights between the van doors, whereas the diag 66 only has four: From the photos of the prototype, there are only three - and it has a ducket at the end. Even looking at a diag 119, that is nowhere near either, so what is it? I’ve asked Bill, so we wait and see. In the mean time I have re-done the undergubbins with, in summary, the MJT 61’6” turnbuckles cut down and the MJT vacuum/tank set. The Battery boxes are now Wizard etched boxes cut in half to make the single boxes of this vehicle (see photos, above): Overall things are going well; this was never going to be an easy kit - even if it qualified as a ‘kit’ in the first place. So, I suppose one might say we are making progress. While I await Bill’s reply I have three more coaches to build - and the articulation units to work out... Best to all, Marcus

Does anyone know of a source of the cab-side number plates for these locomotives, Please?

Does anyone still offer the remagnetizing service? I have a very reluctant Romford Bulldog that could do with attention to the magnet (runs OK otherwise if I use a magnet from an X04 motor on it, but they really don’t fit (haven’t tried the armature in the X04 though) best, Marcus

I can vouch for George’s tools; more adventurous modellers are recommended to buy his rivet press and rolling tools also.

As far as my distant, dodgy memory goes, we got as far as Rugby before she was swapped out for a 40 that took us as far as Llandudno Jct, where we alighted. Rumours that the Four Seasons wrote a song about it are untrue, but it was December, 1963.

I cannot recall if Jim's material was card or plasticard (not to be confused with Teddy Francis, who did use plasticard extensively). Similarly, 40 years ago seems too recent, if you can imagine such a thing. My memory takes me to the late 60s/early 70s (and so may rightly be considered inaccurate) and the MRC. The feature that distinguished Jim from Teddy was the minute detail that I imagined to be impossible - but there it was! This is not to denigrate Teddy's beautiful work, but Jim's seemed 'beyond reach' whereas Teddy seemed to give us a fighting chance of reproducing it. I do recall the mention of such mysterious substances as Cerrobend (I still use it, though after 40+ years I have actually got to my third 1/4lb block, it lasts that long!) and Shellac, so, in the latter case, there may have been card involved somewhere (roofs?). Alas, a quick ferret through my magazines (a lot!) failed to turn up any of his articles. A pity, I was hoping to find some and read once again - they are very good!

‘Good grief!’ twice over - once in astonishment that such a work is available and secondly that is the work of Jim Whittaker, whose work used to intimidate me as a young modeller. Thank you!

On the subject of underframes, is there any source reference covering the ‘arrangements’ down there; battery boxes, vacuum cylinders, reservoirs, pipework.a

Ha! The elusive numbering missing from my effort. Out with the decals!

Once again, Mike comes to the rescue with his etched set of door hinges - installed easily with a small hole to secure. Certainly bits of plasticard will do it for a Kirk body, but Mike’s hinges come ready made. Have at it, chaps!

I have a spare set of Schools deflectors you can have gratis if you still need them

For those contemplating cutting washers from tube, I find mounting the tube in a pin vice with the washer thickness plus blade thickness protruding and cutting them off flush to the face of the pin vice works well - for me, anyway. I use a fine, taut fretsaw.

Paul I am going along with Clive for two reasons - for now, unless I find out more. I agree that the GER vehicles were 8’6” as opposed to the GNR 8’0” (don’t start me on 8’6” inner and 8’0” outer combinations) and (as I said, for now) this will lay the bogie issue aside while I get on with actually building the things. Fortunately they come off easily (unlike undergubbins) and I will never waste them - there is always a vehicle that can use whatever I am not going to fit as the ‘final answer’. Onwards... best, Marcus

I am assuming, Richard, that having conjured up such an idea you are prepared to volunteer for the task using the photo in Harris’s book on p139, then...

Here we go, once again... Photographic evidence, particularly with the camera-shy Hertford Quads, is woefully hard to find. The enjoyable part of that is spending a quiet hour or so poring over Harris/Campling and Banks/Google. Very relaxing! I have only seen one photograph - of set #159 - in Harris’ book (p139). Alas close inspection has revealed that the brake vehicle, built to diagram 102 was fitted with only two battery boxes, not the four supplied (but replaced by me) in the kit. I think it would have been an easy mistake to make as diag. 102 is only one compartment different to diag. 119 and the ones I found have four boxes. Oh, well, off they come and will be replaced with the etched single boxes from the kit.

Now, I do like this approach. The whole idea of turning the bolt upside-down makes for a much easier solution. The MJT solution is a good one, and I may just resort to that if my tinkering fails, but as one who absolutely must have it looking like the real thing, I reserve my space in the workshop of fruitless pursuits. I take the point about curves - but in my case there aren’t any worth worrying about.

Well, here we go again. Photographic evidence now tells me there were four turnbuckle braces under the quads, and they appear to be even, so that needed to be addressed. Yes, I suppose I have been making mistakes, but the dearth of specific instructions (what? You wanted an Airfix kit?) left me adrift and searching for clues. So, taking a deep breath, the undergubbins had to come off completely as a fresh start seemed a better approach than bastardising what was already ‘wrong’. Another set of MJT bits bites the dust. In doing so I fitted the four braces, this time spliced in the middle and reinforced with some fine p/b wire for rigidity (copper? Nope). Attach them while the brace is in the flat and turn it using pliers at both ends - avoiding stressing the joint - to put the wire on the inside where it can’t be seen. I was also able to relocate the vacuum cylinders to make room for the reservoir tanks that did not fit in the original configuration as marked on the original floor etch. Similarly, the articulation assembly was removed pending further thought, as above. Photos to follow. So, what seems to be a series of blunders is actually me making the mistakes for you, so keep the comments on the positive side, please! best, Marcus

Indeed - I have a couple to play with, but looking at the actual prototype (see attached) I am beginning to form the idea of a more robust screw over the head of which a 'cup' fits in much the same way as the prototype. There will be some tinkering on the bench to see if this is a viable solution in the hope that the end result looks exactly like what it is supposed to be. Stay tuned... Best, Marcus

So, here is the object of my attention so far: My apologies for it being grubby still. Points to note are the 00.15” partitions. In the passenger coaches the divider is very slim, so anything thicker would make glazing complicated. The underneath has been built out using the MJT 61’ 6” turnbuckle kit (see the above notes). There are one or two things to sort out. The articulation coupling does not seem as strong as it could be, so some thought needed there. I don't mind trying the 'kit' solutions first as they should have been thought out by somebody already. In this case, the theory was fine but the execution - to my clumsy hands at least - impractical. A new solution is in the works, somewhere. Having removed the centre queen posts, they need to go back, but as the turnbuckle needs to clear the vacuum mechanism, they will be a little longer. There is enough metal in the MJT post mounts to drill out and fit new posts a little longer than the outer ones. The turnbuckles - according to the isinglass Quint diagrams, anyway) ran parallel but lower as a result. That takes care of the other two 61' 6" rods, making sure to mate the two halves in the middle this time! The reservoir tanks have yet to be fitted - they would have been in the way if, as it turns out, I was to re-fit the turnbuckles. The rest is just bits and pieces; remaining ventilators and hinges that came loose during the teardown, door handles and grab handles (nice selection in the kit). With that all cleaned up the roof can be fitted. The plan is that the interior will be fitted out with basic seats and some people. Windows will be microscope glass slide covers (the only windows that are actually glass!). Once the interior is done the roof will be secured with white PVA - secure but easy to break open. The finish has to be teak and for that I will follow Mice Trice's method (it has been tried and is very easy! No, really. And fun. Go on, get an old Kirk body and have a go. You'll be surprised. I was. Very.) Only three more to do after this. More anon. Best, Marcus

On from Richard’s comments, above, my plan is to laminate all the ends and replace all the floors; the heft of the thicker material was just so much easier to work. Inspection of Harris' book (p138) shows Quad set # 159 quite well, revealing four turnbuckles, so that needs to be sorted out. Bogies, I believe were 8' 6" heavy duty at the points of articulation and 8’ 0” at the outer ends.

I'm certainly not averse to Richard 'highjacking' this post as I believe in the 'two heads better than one' philosophy insofar as we both seem to be venturing into relatively new territory. Indeed I welcome and look forward to interjections! As far as my own progress goes (see photos below, once they actually appear, if you happen to be ahead of me): Initial progress was made by assembling the passenger compartments to the brake vehicle to effect the curvature of the sides, fit the 'hinge brace' as I described above, ventilators, droplights and so on, though omitting door handles and grab handles for now. Fed up with the tedium of that I went straight to building out the body. This is where the lessons began. (Above) The first attempt sitting on borrowed bogies and showing rather anemic queenposts. It did not take long to note that the etching process, in providing some relief to the underside of the floor and the beading of the ends left the material somewhat thin for the purposes of structural rigidity. Alas this only manifested itself as the build went on, particularly where the passenger and brake compartments met at the 'inset', but I kept going, hoping a final shape would yield the rigidity I prefer in my coaches. Alas, no. The basics are that the etched floorpan has markings for folds that provide the register for the sides of the body when separate from the underframe. The aim is, I feel, that the body and underframe are separable, being secured at each end. The etched floorpan, when subjected to the heat of soldering on the queenposts, tends to bow along its length, producing a 'humped' cross-section. Odd, but there we are - or at least, here I am. You may be able do better, but the thinness still bothered me. First thoughts went to the MJT 51' floorpans and some minor hacking about, which would be a way to go for those yet to revel in the deligjts of their fretsaw skills. Not for me, with a box full of sheet metal looking for a purpose and a natural inclination to economy. Remember, too, this is a brake vehicle, for which MJT does not supply a floorpan. (Above) a new floorpan, partition and laminated ends So, it had to come apart and strength built in. The original floor could have been 'backed' by a laminate, but I felt a new one easier to manage. The marks on the original for the underframe attachments can be transferred to the new floor. The 'rebuild' involved cutting a new floor from 0.018" n/s and laminates to 'back' the ends in 0.015" n/s. Even then the longitudinal rigidity was lacking, so, for the passenger compartments, partitions of 0.015" n/s gave us the shape needed. At this point the purpose - and tedium - of the 'hinge brace' came into question. If I was to provide rigidity to the sides and length with partitions that are necessary anyway (especially the full passenger diagrams), the more basic solution of MJT hinges might be easier than mucking about with the hinge slots described previously. I added more partitions to the brake compartment and found myself with a more solid body. The horizontal brace along the top of the sides was retained and installed to give us the body shown below. At this point I was able to fit for effect an MJT extruded aluminium roof and found it to be a perfect fit; no rolling of roofs for this build! Set aside for later. Onwards for the sake of amusement added the underframe. Not much of this comes in the kit - queen posts, battery boxes and v-hangers only. The instructions downloadable for Bill Bedford's site (Mousa Models) show 0.5mm wire suggested for the turnbuckle rods, but unless you are planning to fabricate the distinctive turnbuckles, I suggest an alternative. Being fortunate in the contents of my kits boxes I opted to use the complete MJT 61' 6" turnbuckle kit. Now, my understanding is that the quads had only two turnbuckle braces (as opposed to the four in the full 61' 6" coaches), but the Isinglass quint drawing shows four. Awaiting the quad drawing, I remain unsure, but the middle two would be aligned differently to clear the vacuum brake machanism. We'll see. For now, I have built it with only two. The turnbuckle rods need to be trimmed between queen posts. Be careful here to get the queen posts and turnbuckles in the right place; fortunately the solebar rivets show exactly where they should be. As for the trimming, I suggest a cut midway between the queenposts and a butt joint braced by thin wire behind. I tried a butt joint at one of the queenposts, but it kept coming loose as work progressed. Many lower-deck expressions later drew the aforegoing suggestion. Vacuum cylinders and mechanism as well as battery boxes are from the MJT kit. The bogie mount is based around a 6BA bolt and the bolster provided, while the articulation coupling makes aimilar use of a 6BA bolt. There is another weakness here, so we'll get to that in the next installment. That's the written part for now. Photos later tomorrow. Over to you, Richard...('back to Richard in the studio...') while I photograph 'one I made earlier'. Bogies will be MJT 8' 6" LNER heavy-duty. best, Marcus