buffalo

No problem, do what Churchward did and put it between the frames. That way, you won't need to model it until you've had a bit of practice Nick

Well said, Arthur! As you say, both methods work and it's all down to personal preference. Sometimes I use one, sometimes the other. Whilst I agree with much of what Kenton has to say about soldering, I do wish he would stop repeating this nonsense about 'boiling' solder. Soldering irons are just not hot enough to boil off any of the constituents of any modelling solder. As I've said more than once before, the idea that you shouldn't carry solder to a joint is only appropriate with flux-cored solders and we should only be using them for electrical work. Nick

I doubt it, in neither case is the centre axle close to the firebox and the rear is directly underneath * The overall weight and the weight distribution were certainly different, but remember the 44XX came first. If anythying can be said to have been moved, it was the centre axle of the 45XX that was moved forwards. The distribution was: 44XX: 7T 7c, 13T 0c, 13T 10c, 13T 10c, 8T 8c 45XX: 6T 10c, 14T 10c, 14T 10c, 14T 10c, 7T 0c The trailing wheel weight for the 44XX increased to 9T 16c when the bunkers were enlarged. That for the 45XX was probably a similar increase. Given that the 45XX is much more evenly balanced, it may be that the difference was part of a deliberate attempt to improve on the the distribution of the 44XX. Nick EDIT: ps. I did wonder about clearance for the eccentrics on the centre axle, though. It looks like there's enough but we'll need frame drawings or to send someone underneath a 45XX to be sure...

Although there were always exceptions in various classes, the GWR painted over the bonnets on all but express classes from the early 1920s and many were probably painted when in the simple liveries of WW1. Similarly, the 28XX were built with cast iron chimneys from about 1918 and all copper caps were subsequently painted over. By the early thirties the remaining painted copper caps had been replaced by one or other cast iron type. The 'model' shown in # 489 has outside steam pipes and a curved drop in the running plate which were only introduced in 1935. I could go on, but it's just not worth it. Still, it does have the right number of spokes in the pony truck wheels. Nick

I don't have one of those Hornby pugs to compare, but it looks a bit on the large size to me. Raven and friends had 3' drivers, so I estimate no more than about 21 or 22 ft over headstocks. One fly in the ointment is that when they were converted to standard gauge in 1892, they received new domed boilers and tanks. The original tanks were around 450 gallon capacity, but the new tanks held 700 gallons. They covered the smokebox but left a longer length exposed at the rear to clear the new raised firebox. Of course, you could try converting to Broad Gauge... Nick

Peter, if you are using google for searching, you could try adding "site:*.uk" to get uk sites (or "site:*.bz" for Brazillian sites) -- other countries are available. Nick

Thanks for posting those links, Adrian. Some very useful info there including a couple of sources I wasn't aware of. It's strange that the table in GWW doesn't include the 32' 13 sleeper variant as it appears to have been quite widespread, both with inside and outside keys. Of course, it's not the only omission in that book... Nick

I'll send you a PM On branch lines it could be much longer. For example, the Camerton branch was opened in 1880 with a mile of 72lb flat-bottom and 2.5 miles of double-headed 82lb inside keyed track. The latter was still there in the 1930s, though they may have some replaced some rails and/or sleepers by then. That's probably a good compromise. The GWW figures don't cover all possibilities, though. The track in Camerton station appears to have 13 sleepers in each panel. A siding added in 1907/8 when the line was extende had 12 sleepers per panel with outside keys, presumably the 1882 type. It was indeed a typo -- fixed now. Nick

Hi Dave, The trackwork is looking very good, I particularly like the double slip. However, This will not match your stock. The GWR didn't introduce 60' panels until 1929, and it would have been some time before it appeared on branch lines. You would be much more likely to find earlier shorter panels and nothing longer than 44'6" with 19 sleepers. Even that is unlikely as it was only introduced in 1898. More likely would be 23' (8 sleepers), 26' (9 sleepers), 29' (10 sleepers) or 32' (11 sleepers), all of which were progressively introduced through the 1870s. The 32' panels were increased to 12 sleepers in 1882. All dates propbably imply when they first used on main lines. There's a table listing these types and their sleeper spacings on p147 of GWW. If you don't have a copy I can let you have the sleeper spacings for each type. Nick ps. When first laid, the 1870s types often used inside-keyed chairs.

The Ratio 531 kit is a good representation of a known type of GWR 2 Ton crane. Unfortunately, it is far too big for 4mm scale. See also this topic. Nick

Looks like the A end. There are A/B letters below the bottom of the outer cab door handrails. Whether Dapol got it right is another question... Nick

How about . Looks like I might need one too . I think I would put the carriage truck and horsebox together at one end or the other. If at the rear then behind the van, otherwise the van would be the last vehicle. This would be most convenient if they had to be shunted off to a separate dock. Carriage trucks are meant for end loading so, if the destination is a terminus, it should probably be in front of the horsebox. Most photos I recall show either one or other of these arrangements. In cases where photos show horseboxes and/or carriage trucks marshalled elsewhere, I suspect the train might have been intended to split en route. Nick

Is there a door at the other end? If so, it could be a porters' room/cupboard, or perhaps the entrance to the general waiting room. I'm not sure about the writing over the central side door in the first photo, but that in the last photo may say "Ladies". Nick

I would guess that the second pair of small windows is the "Ladies'" and, in typical GWR style, it would be accessed internally from the "Ladies' Waiting Room". Nick

Yes, see Mike's photo here for the mechanical variety, and Dave Holt's lovely model version (last photo here). Nick

It's the feed for an exhaust steam injector. The pipe goes behind the valance and can often be seen wrapping around the outside of the steps. There will also be a large valve or trap(?) below the valance near the end of the rear splasher. The injector is behind the cab steps. It's a standard LMS component, but is more widely seen on 2Ps. Nick

No, the compensator is there to equalise the length of pull and push sections. The direction of movement at the blades is set by the crank arrangement. Nick ps. the compensation effect (converting pull to push and vice versa) can also be achieved by a crank when the direction changes through ninety degrees.

3'6" Mansell wheels? Nick

Hi Mike, I recently spent some time looking for information on the brakes on c19 carriage trucks, but found very little conclusive information. However, I suspect that they were fitted with the Armstrong vacuum brakes around 1888-92. By this time, new stock was being fitted and the early horse boxes (N1, N2) were being fitted at this time. They would have had clasp brakes with the external linkage. See, for example, the photo of an N4 in fig 24 of Russell's coaches vol 1. Nick

Yes, but note that the heavily rivetted type shown in 471 is typical of the original Dukes, but had been replaced by those in 481 well before the Dukedog rebuilds took place. Compare, for example, Duke of Cornwall in original (fig 472) and final (fig 480) condition. Of course, those are Dukes, whereas the lower parts of Dukedogs were more Bulldog in origin, so Russell vol 2 figs 11 and 12 are probably more indicative. There are many on-line photos of Bulldogs, a few of which do show details of the balance weights. Links to many of these are at http://www.gwr.org.uk/no-dukedogs.html. This one shows the vestigial rear balance weight very clearly. Nick

Hi Jock, I'm not entirely sure what you are asking. Do you want to change your user name so that 'Jock 67B' appears at the top of your posts? If so, only the admin folk can do this, so your best bet would be to send a PM (personal message) to Andy Y. Click on that link and press the 'send me a message' button. While I'm at it, and as others have said, all of your blog posts so far would have been much better posted in the forums, e.g. in prototype questions, forum help, or in Phil's own thread. Blogs really are meant for showing examples of your work or other substantial content. Take a look around the blogs and see how others use them. Nick

Hi Adrian, I'd forgotten about the 1907 naming! I think all of the early ones that were renumbered into the 2900 series (100, 98, 171-90) must have been finished in the red frame livery when built. Most, if not all, of the Saints would have had black frames, so maybe the ladies are open to question. Do you know of any clear evidence of their as-built condition? Most photos I've seen are after naming or after superheating. Holcroft was there at the time, but it's always possible that he made a mistake. As far as the county tanks are concerned, I think he was referring to the August 1906 builds as one photo of 2221 as built a year earlier does look as though it has red frames. Nick

Beautiful model, but I'm suprised no one has pointed out that it can't be 1906, unless someone has borrowed those lamps from a railmotor. The GWR used black loco lamps on everything except railmotors until about 1915 when red was adopted for all. If we're going to be really picky, the livery is also open to question. Holcroft says that the first black frames appeared on the county tanks in 1906. Whilst 2221 was built in September 1905, the next ones were built from August 1906 onwards. Lady Disdain was built in May 1906 so may well have had the final form of the red frame livery when first built. Nick

Well, 'Kate Plus Ten', filmed in 1937, was the second film made on the branch. The first was 'The Ghost Train', filmed in 1931, featuring a 43XX hauling a mock Cornish Riviera at camerton (renamed Fal Vale for the film), and a Dean Goods hauling the ghost train itself at Camerton and Dunkerton Colliery sidings. Nick ps latest photo captures the original well!

Somewhere, I found a suggestion from Bill to mount the wheels on a piece of 2mm o/d, 1mm i/d tubing. This is cut flush with the outside of the wheels. The tube then slides on a 1mm pinpoint axle, either home-made or from Exactoscale. Very simple and works well on the couple of examples I've tried. Nick