Etched Pixels
-
Posts
2,006 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Posts posted by Etched Pixels
-
-
Love the gull in the bin..
-
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/53112-2mm-coach-experiments/page-4
is my current stuff - mix of everything from 1865 to 1980s.
-
The GWR did have a link to the Metropolitan Railway in early years, to the extent that much of the western part of the Hammersmith and City line was built for broad gauge. Just a little food for thought!!
Bit more than just a link. The GWR ran the original Met trains until they fell out and the H&C was jointly owned for a long time.
- 1
-
Though I won't have time till late next year to construct a layout I have been acquiring stock for a proposed GWR/GCR joint line set prior to WW1. It would be a fictional location but loosely based on obviously the GWR & GCR joint.
I wonder if I can sneek in a numer of MR and LNWR trains as well!
The Great Central and LNWR/Midland link wouldn't be hard to do. Working the GWR in at the same spot may be trickier.
-
SRman - I'd be cautious of the LSWR salmon. I know pre-group colours are a bit imprecise but the tins I have are a fair way from what appear to be the currently accepted shades.
-
FUD will reproduce detail down to about 0.1-0.2mm - exactly what you get depends upon the structure.
-
That one I finished a while ago (as 5116) - scariest part was actually drilling holes in the body side and fitting the token catcher.
The bits are
- 2mmSA wheels for 2fs running
- token catchers (Bernard TPM)
- class 24 detailing/conversion kit (mine, but is available commercially)
and although its not all on that photo the roof was corrected using a knife and fine plasticard to move the bits Bachmann messed up.
There are some shots on the Mercig web site gallery of a much better conversion than the one I did but using some of the same bits.
Alan
-
But you've also got to change the bottom of the cab, adjust the doors and so on. It's easier to stick a headcode box on a 24/0. In fact its a pretty easy conversion.
Mine (when part done)
25/1 was the big cab change - recessed doors, cab/body line "bump" along the bottom etc.
Alan
-
Very hard to tell what they are from the website - downloads, card kits, precut or not ?
-
I'm not sure I'd start with it for the 24/1 - the cabs are all wrong, the roof is wrong, the valence/solebar is wrong and the fuel tanks are wrong (on the model at least).
The 24/0 at least has the right cabs and the roof is closer (despite the mess Bachmann made of the panels). The panel edges are at least not hard to move and there isn't too much other stuff to adjust for a 24/1 from a 24/0.
A 25/0 is kind of half and half but I think even that would be easier off the 24 to be honest.
Alan
-
- They are also missing their prominent hinges (2 per grille).
Doesn't that rather depend upon the prototype you pick. If I remember correctly some (eg 25067/D5217) don't have the hinges.
Must admit I'm not expecting them to be fixed - Bachmann didn't bother fixing the class 24 CAD for glaring errors like the roof mess up, they just replicated the OO model. I guess for the volume sold in N, and the lack of competition its too expensive to bother to fix the CAD ?
Not sure there is much for the third party folks to do beyond the obvious grille improvements. The cab shape isn't the kind of thing you can easily fix while the solebars really involve a file not a casting set.
Fuel tank maybe but thats tricky because if its like the other models its constrained by the motor block base and integrated into the solebar/buffer beam moulding.
Alan
-
I'm going back to modelling the 70s before you tempt me into spending far too much money !
-
Thanks, my guess on the flats came out just right then!
Those bogies aren't available in N, I think the options are fairly limited so either Y25 or Gloucester through the NGS. Which could be the best match?
David
ATM do Axle Motion bogies
-
Obvious places would be to fix a container on the runner and put the motor in there. I think however you ought to just about be able to get the Kato tram chassis motor and drive shafts into the area between the bogies. I'm not sure how you'd drive the axles from it though, or more importantly how you'd get any weight on it. At least with a runner you'd be able to stick a whole load of weight in the rest of the fixed container.
Rotating the crane looks easier as you can get miniature 1.5v pancake motors.
-
Will be very interested to know how it works and more about your laminator setup. I've got a pile of weird and wonderful decals I'd like to be able to make (for some reason KESR and WCPR decals are not widely available off the shelf!)
-
I've been using LNER loco numbers for some of my four wheelers - they have the right kind of look. It does mean you have to number your LNER locos with the digits 0456789 8)
Alan
-
What are you using as a primer ? I've found some of the "proper" modelling primers pretty dismal and several of them have a very short shelf life too. Halfords make much better primers in my experience. Theirs has to not fall off cars after all.
Alan
-
If you heat them up to about 60-70°C they'll soften and you can then do things like fitting wheels into bogies by gentle bending or fitting parts into one another.
Alan
-
Hi Alan, you raise an interesting point - does anyone have any experiences of FUD in large thin pieces, such as you would have for an O gauge model? I am wondering what the material behaves like say 200x100mm but only 1mm thick. As it is quite brittle, I would imagine you would have to include a lot of structural support to go underneath it - probably over a plasticard or metal frame.
David
Well you are in part limited by the bounding box Shapeways allow but how it scales is more complicated - ideally it has other support but you can print girder type patterns on the inside of a wall of FUD rather than just thicken it.
Also as your size goes up you can do lots of the core stuff in WSF instead.
-
Thanks for the kind words everyone!
As for scaling to OO, it's possible just not cost effective. As the print costs are based on volume, doubling the scale increases the volume of material used by a factor of eight, so a £50 print in N would cost £400 in OO. I've even had interest in scaling to O, but put them off when I explained it would cost over £3000!
David
Not if you are keeping the required wall thicknesses. It depends upon the model but its usually nearer a factor of 5-6 so merely £250+ in OO.
Is £3000 for an O gauge one unreasonable given the price of O gauge wagons ;-)
Alan
-
That has to be one of the cleverest bits of 3D print modelling I've come across. Looks excellent, I fear my wallet is going to get clobbered again and I don't even have a use for it 8)
Alan
-
That Tomix chassis integration is really neat.
-
As far as I am aware, the only changes to both of these post ww2 was internal refurb and a new paint job back into Chocolate and cream. The 1936/8 changes mainly appear to the change in bogies, from 4 wheel to 6 wheel and some alterations to the windows. I would think that this configuration would be of a more agreeable version to offer.
I doubt whether any of the mainstream outlets, i.e. Dapol or Farish would be able to produce these, but perhaps Etched pixels could add to their range of 70' Toplights to cover this.
The existing ones were screenprinted from the Cav'n'dish range. The inks and materials used are not practical today and the volumes required for screenprinting are large.
I'm playing with some rather more modern techniques at the moment to build myself a 57ft Ocean Mails coach as a test then move onto other more generally interest stuff. Just need to find the willpower to draw up all that ... lining
Alan
-
ATM had a pre-production one on show a few years ago but then it seems to have died the death. Might be worth asking Ben Ando about it ?
Alan
3D Printed N Gauge Pendolino and On Track Plant
in 3D Printing, Laser Cutting, CAD & CNC
Posted
The problem with "check the render" on the website is that for a large detailed object the postage stamp sized viewer is unusable.
Being able to say "all or none" for an order (at least for those items that fail before printing is tried) would be a big win. Right now I end up sometimes deciding to put a pile of bits into one single FUD object not so much to save $5 but to to ensure it fails/succeeds in one go.
Do you know if your STL tools use point dictionaries to deal with floating point inaccuracies ?