Etched Pixels

First thought would be that if you mount the second bogie on a piece of thin metal strip pivoted off the bogie at the join (ie off the same mount and the bar able to rotate separately ditto the second bogie) then it ought to go around anything. Might look a bit odd on a 9" curve but it ought to traverse it fine.

Not sure that is so true in N. You end up with a very fragile framework and a minimum of scale 5" x 5" ribbing and even that is likely to warp if not with a fair amount of trussing. FUD can do 0.1mm detail on a solid 0.8mm backing but it can't do 0.5mm thickness in thin air. The cheapest way is still to get out the craft knife and the microstrip

Shapeways don't care about "one part per print" - in fact for FUD they positively encourage sprues or multiple parts by their pricing. As to buffers. In N for some stock I couldn't get the right buffers at acceptable prices in small volumes so I 3D print them but keep them as fittings. That way if I do ever break one I can just swap it. I've done vans both as FUD prints and also as a WSF framework+roof with glued on etches. There are tradeoffs in each approach. The etched one definitely looks better and in any volume is cheaper to produce but needs more fiddling or cunning origami to get the right raised details. The FUD ones cost more, need more cleaning up and have a slightly poorer finish but they are one part and you can often get raised detail in one go. In both cases the very small details like torpedo vents I put holes in the 3D print and fit off the shelf plastic or white metal vents into them. The main tip I'd give you is to start on a shortish wagon (cheaper). For longer vans in FUD IMHO it is worth putting some cross bracing into the body shell to strengthen it. Unlike plastics you don't have to worry about shrinkage messing the sides up. Alan

Devonport flask would be very interesting to me too ;-) especially as it seems Bachmann are issuing the Mark 2 squaddie coach that goes with it. Alan

The other thing to watch is the university regulations small print. Lots of them in this time of grasping commercialism like to claim they own the rights to anything you do as part of a university course or hand in as an assignment etc. It's been a big problem in the software case. Some are more obnoxious than others but Bristol is fairly typical for example I have to hand in saying So be very careful not to mix student stuff and work or you may get a nasty shock.

Given the time it takes I can't see why its worth taking the risk of not giving it a good dose of polyurethane varnish before assembly. Alan

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 ?

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.

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.

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) http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=35057 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

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 !

I didn't think P4 would work - its 6'x4' layout so the curves are too sharp ;-)