ArthurK

I must have had similar thoughts when I built the original GN G5. All the bits of that crank on mine used the original GA and all were made from scratch Including the forks. (Photo earlier on this thread). I note it even has the return spring! I must have been very keen in those far off days. I wish I could do that now but old age is taking over and my eyes aren't as good as they were then. (Sigh!) ArthurK

Mike Like you I had trouble bending up the water balancing pipes but I eventually succeeded. In my kits those that require these (N10 & A6) I supply cast white metal ones. I have measured several of these from GAs and they seem to have been a standard length. I can supply these by request. The pipes along the footplate angles were vacuum pipe (right hand) and heating pipe (Left hand). In the earlier days they were tucked away behind the angles but latterly (in the let it all hang out days) they were below. They were joggled backwards to avoid the step strengthener and upwards to avoid the sandbox filler. At the front joggle the pipe (usually) passed between the step and the strengthening stay. ArthurK

Taking the Q7 as an example: the rods were 5" deep. The GA does not show the fluting on the plan view but the only measurable dimension on this is 2" with the bearing width being 3 1/4", increased to 4 1/4" at the rod hinges. Edited: Although the power output of the two is vastly different the J21 rod dimensions are remarkable similar to those of the Q7. On the J21 the rods are not shown on the side elevation but plan shows the rods in section with width at 2". Thickness of the fluted part is 3/4". Measurements over the bearings are virtually identical with those of the Q7 ArthurK

Yes, they do look too deep but what worries me more is the minimal clearance between the rods and the steps. On the J25 the rods that I used were 4 inches on the Q7 they are 5 inches. Not all GAs show the coupling rods however the Q7 GA does. Just checked the Q7. Five inches is correct. ArthurK

I didn't adorn this controller with text of any kind but I did replace the knob. This which came from a Scalespeed controller. I could see instantly what the setting was and didn't have to look at the dial. It was all done by feel. ArthurK

Seems the reviewers are getting very confused about the Bachman J72. There were three basic versions built. Those built before 1900, those built after 1914 (including those built by the LNER) and those built by BR. The first batch of twenty were put into service before 1900. The last of these was 1763 (68689). This batch had the shorter bunker and had the frames cut away between the driving wheels The second batch was built from 1914 with Raven in charge. These and all others were built with the extended bunker (but not the frames). The latter were however strengthened by not cutting away the frames between the driving wheels. The first of this batch was 2173. The last batch built by BR had only minor differences from the second batch. The most obvious difference was the appearance of external sandboxes under the footplate behind the cab steps. Less obvious was the disappearance of the sanding rods to the front splasher/sandboxes. This batch had Downs sanding with sand delivered by steam pressure. Three of the earlier engines 68675 (1st batch) 68732 and 68744 were also fitted with Downs sanding and external sandboxes at the same time as 69001 appeared from Darlington, ArthurK

I have had a closer look at the original scan. Yes it is 63444. My apologies. ArthurK

Quick check - nineteen of the first twenty were numbered 17XX by the NER, the first was 462 ArthurK

My notes give 63443 but I must admit the last digit is obscured. ArthurK

These any good? The first is August 1961 and the second two years later (and even dirtier). Note it had acquired group standard buffers. ArthurK

I purchased a Trix A4 (Mallard) secondhand many years ago (cost £12.50). It was tender drive with traction tyres. It was certainly not quiet but one thing in its favour was that it would pull anything that I could find to put behind it, I repainted it as "Capercaillie" - the only double chimney A4 at Gateshead at that time. The loco wheels tended to lock but that had no effect on its progress. Not a bad model for its time but was a full scale ten feet over the cylinders (as was the A2 from the same stable). ArthurK

NORTHEASTERN KITS RE-RELEASE OF THE T/T1 (Q5) 0-8-0 Although not yet packed themI have a new batch of this popular kit. There are three only available Please let me know if you want one. These will probably be the last. See page one of this thread for further details. ArthurK

NORTHEASTERN KITS FURTHER UPDATE J77 One kit not mentioned in the previous posting was the J77. I have limited numbers of both versions of this available Anyone wanting one of these then send me a PM. ArthurK

NORTHEASTERN KITS UPDATE Things have been slow over the past few months but I hope to do a bit of catching up. I have recently received a new batch of D20s. Some of these are reserved but there are others available. N10 I have a few available but I am unable to contact one of the intended recipients (due possibly to a change in Email address) so if you are waiting for one of these please send a PM. I also have names against the W 4-6-0T and the 4-6-2 Rebuild. The etches for these are expected shortly. I will be in touch with those on the list. These two kits are unlikely to be repeated. J25 0-6-0 This awaits a new chimney casting with "windjabber". This should be available in March. First deliveries will be available in April. I have a queue awaiting this. If you want one let me know. J71 & J72 0-6-0T Still awaiting missing castings on these but the end is in sight! Q7 0-8-0 and C6 4-4-2 These have been delayed whilst I try to clear the backlog of the others above. I have made some progress on the 'innards' of the Q7 but there is a lot of detail still to resolve. The C6 will appear in both variants - narrow and wide splashers. ArthurK

The actual G5 frames were inset by 1 1/2". In Model terms that is 0.5mm. I think we need more than that on a model. I use a rear frame behind the main frames with a piece of frame material sandwiched between the two. This gives a total inset of just under a millimetre on each side which I have always found adequate. ArthurK

That kit was purchased from George Norton in person. I am not sure when he died but it would be 2-3 years before that. I know that I had plans to build it as a push-pull fitted loco to operate on my Teesdale layout to replace my ageing scratch built G5 of 1965.. ArthurK

I general terms the inside height of NER cabs with low arc roofs was 7' (give or take a little). The F8 (NER A) cab has a lot in common with the G5 insomuch as the dimensions of the cab side sheets were identical, the GA for that gives 7'. The external overall diameter of the smokebox was a shade over 5' (5[' 0 1/2" if my memory is correct). If you need an extra layer you could use the one left over from your J25 build. If you used the riveted version there will be a second half etched layer available from that. It should be about 0.4mm from and from back of the smokebox proper. ArthurK

65645 was fitted with a saturated, short smokebox, boiler when withdrawn. I have two photos of this loco one at Low Fell and one at Gateshead shed. You will note that the smoke box handrail knobs are very close to the flange of the door. I can help with the smokebox door if you are wanting a replacement, white metal and full detail. Send me a PM if you are. ArthurK

It is a common misconception that the cabs/tanks of the G5 were the same as the N8/9/10. They were not. The G5 had a wider can 'window' opening. Whereas the cab side sheets were the similar front and back of this the overall cab length on the G5 was some nine inches longer. In 4mm that is a difference of 3mm. The boiler was also smaller although the same diameter. The front sandbox/splashers are too bis and have a secondary splasher for the coupling rod. I would advise against using the G5 body for a N8/9/10 conversion. My own N10 is still available although it is awaiting packing. ArthurK

In doing the research for my kit of the J71 that I found out that there is more to simply changing wheel diameter to produce a J71 from a J72. The wheel spacing is different and the whole "works" was lowered by three inches and moved forward by one inch meaning that the visible cylinder ends above the footplate were more prominent on the J71. The frames of he J71 had large cut-outs between the wheels (as did the first twenty J72s). The boiler on the J72s was placed one inch further forward so increasing the front frame overhang and the length of the cab by the same amount. And of course there is the thorny problem of the size of the bunker. The tanks and bunker (but not the cab - see above) of the J71 was the same as the early J72s. A lot would depend on whether Bachman produce the short version as well as the long one As an update, my own etched brass J71 is being pushed forward. It is already twelve months overdue as this has been a very traumatic year for me. I have etches for about twelve but they are still missing some castings. ArthurK

The last superheated J27 was 65880. It was still superheated in 1965 when I photographed it in North Blyth shed. The Gresley anti-vacuum valve can be seen behind the chimney. Note also the wraparound handrail and LNER GS buffers. Sorry John I don't know where you got the chimney and dome from but they don't belong to a J27. ArthurK

As a rule NER tank engines did not have beading of any kind on the tank sides. The cab opening was framed with 'T' section strip. The top was wider than normal beading for the enginemen to lean on at the cab opening the ends carried the support for the can handrail stanchions. Apart from the half round beading used as rails to the coal bunker, plated behind in later days, the only other beading was at the top of the flared top of the rear of the bunker. It was customary for flared tops like this to have beading along the top edge. NER tenders are an example of this. The handrails on tank engines normally stopped near the tank front. That on the left carried the control rod for the blower valve which extended rearwards through the cab front sheet to a control wheel inside the cab. Using micro-bore tubing and 0.3mm wire could be used but would be very flimsy and very easily bent. Many NER locos retained the Westinghouse pump right through to BR days for the loco brakes but pipes for the train were removed. When wood sandwich bufferbeams were added the footplate plating was not commonly extended to cover it. On my own G5 (Norton kit) I did not follow the instructions. I simply used frames inset from the front frames (not tapered) to give further clearance and without wheel cutouts to clear the wheels. This was adequate (P4) for 3' radius track. The prototype used the same method. Rarely seen on models several of the photos clearly show the narrow angle between tank and footplate. ArthurK

Yes that is the one. It is obviously 67340, The one with the extended tanks as based at Botanic Gardens. ArthurK

The tank tops of NER tank locos was 2" (0.67mm) below the tank side.There is only one photo that I know of showing the G5 from above. It was taken at Beverley and is of the left side rear. ArthurK

The curved 'front' to the tanks was in fact a blanking plate to 'fill the gap' between them and the boiler. The plate was attached by bolts which can be seen top and bottom in the photo. The original boilers were Dia. 55 having a diameter of 5' 6". These were replaced boilers of Dia. 63 which was 5' 0". diameter. Obviously Darlington thought it necessary to fill the gap, perhaps for appearances sake. The A8s were similarly treated when they received the Dia. 63 boiler but in their case there was a curved angle between this plate and the boiler cladding. The original tanks did have curved inner plates but not to the extent suggested in the photo. There is a photo of a side tank lying on the floor in the Darlington erecting shop which shows this clearly. I must find out which book it was in. ArthurK