Tim V

Ran my pannier on Wenford Bridge where it performed very well. I put this down to the accuracy of the etchings and assembly jig. Needs a bit of running in on a continuous line now....

Funny you should say that you wanted a basic controller. I have been experimenting.

I normally use an ancient H&M Powermaster, but then I connected a DCC chip between my DCC controller and the test track and found a new degree of control, far better than the ancient Scalespeed could ever deliver. Plus the extremely rough PWM delivered by the Scalespeed won't do my Mashima motors any good.

I've got a Scalespeed controller - I leave it on the shelf as a museum piece.

Probably a saturated market, there are lots for sale.

Or slip some plasticard half washers in. I reduced the length of the muffs by a smidge using no more than a scalpel, just put your callipers between your bearings, and calculate the required cut.

I expect the jig is quicker to set up, but it is £35, and I had the lathe. One thing the jig will have is repeatability - so if only one wheelset needs setting, that can be done with the assurance that it will be the same as the others.

Thanks for that I'll see if I can find the sheet on the YAG I must have missed it. Will also look up article.

The problem I foresee is quartering. Dead easy when there's no slop in axles as the etched rods are so accurate. But add in the axle slop and you're into a completely different game with possibility of jerking wheels as coupling rods "rotate" if quartering not spot on and you've lost one of the ways of it happening naturally. Just a thought.

I don't see a problem, as you're quartering the wheelset against against the other wheelset, not relative to the chassis. Therefore any slop in the axle holes (and we are talking about 0.1mm here) won't affect the quartering.

I don't have a quartering tool, but I do have a lathe, a few minutes work produced this tool which is mounted in the tailstock and a dividing/indexing tool (Unimat). A slot is cut in it for the crankpin to fit through, you can just see the slot on the right hand one (right hand leads). The tailstock chuck is given bias with the key to ensure it stays in the same place. Using the tailstock wheel, I can push the wheels towards each other, checking with the back to back gauge as it advances.

Axle holes reamed to 1.5mm then carefully enlarged by twisting a 1.6mm drill in all three axle holes. Then the Simpson springs put on. There is a sheet about it on the VAG, plus an article in the magazine. Jerry Clifford (Queensquare) put me on to it.

Electrical pickup was the problem, it ran smoothly enough. Haulage power not ascertained as I don't have any other stock!

Just stripped mine down, as I wasn't satisfied with its performance. Fitted Simpson pickups in enlarged axle holes as recommended. Having the removable motor and gear was a boon.

Running transformed, hoping to sneak it onto a 2mm layout in the near future....

See that bit of swarf that the gear wheel has cut on the muff - it could mean trouble. It might mean the gearwheel is eccentric, or it might be OK. Don't forget to remove it anyway - before the eagle eye of the camera spots it!

At the latest Canterbury Area Group meeting, thanks to Nick, I understood exactly how all the transmission inside the chassis works. As a result, I have ordered more stuff from Shop 3 and I progressed a bit with my Hunslet Austerity chassis.

 

All the gears and muffs are imperial; yes, Nick, I have ordered and received the 14T (bore 1/8") code 3-341, so I do not need to use the stepped muff and all the metric gears (spears for a future project).

 

 

3-362 is the gear set but here is pictured the gear only, without worm

3-110 are stubs, cut from the 75 mm long axle; there are two stubs inserted in the muff which don't touch each other (no short-circuit)

Funny, I didn't find them tight - maybe it was my batch of wheels.

I feel the same about motors/worm mounting (and indeed about the whole chassis assembly with brake gear etc) but in discussion recently somebody asked, how many times have you taken a chassis apart for repair once built and nobody could give a single example. Is it possible we are being too cautious?

Point taken, but having an "easily" removable motor means that setting up the wheels and gears will be easier, plus I didn't like the thought of pushing the motor through the worm in the frames. And there is still the problem of the unsupported outer end of the motor, as I intend using DCC having seen the benefits it brings to small scale models.

I wasn't happy with the unsupported motor, plus I didn't like assembling the worm wheel inside the frame, so I've made these slight modifications.

A simple L piece of scrap nickel is soldered to a base plate which is screwed to the frames, using the existing spacer and 14BA screws.

The motor can be removed for setting up the wheels etc.

That was the impression I got from your instructions Chris, which I'm impressed with by the way, thanks.

I used the association motor for my conversion.

I "may" remove the metal under the boiler, but at the end of the day, it's still the Farish pannier, which doesn't strike me as a "scale" model.

I decided that the amount of metal to remove to fit the motor in did not justify the extra work. After all, the loco is light enough anyway. And it's pretty awful metal to do anything with.

Finally started on 57XX.

I started on the rear wheel drive frames, as practice. The frames were quite easy to separate from the etch, and bend up, but what is that extra bend line for on the frame spacer piece?

Having ascertained the body needed a lot of surgery for these frames, I opted for the centre drive frames. These were not so easy to separate, or get my cutters in - I'm using the Xuron ones. However success. Pleased to see the axle holes etc accept the bearings accurately, but I'm concerned that the holes for brake supports clash with frame spacers.

Look more like Romans to me - which is far more useful for Somerset.

Gosh, I missed the pictures of the new layout. And I was getting very excited!

What's this I see at Warley this year Jerry?

http://www.thewarleyshow.co.uk/2mm.htm

Umm, I do like your instructions Chris, but the lack of a numbered parts list does hinder it.

Thanks for this additional information, how about adding this to the instructions? I find the 2mm price list a bit unfathomable at times.

So, I've been looking at the parts list which comes out as for a pannier tank

set of frames

6 x 9mm wheels

3-257 can motor

3-156 frame spacer

3-359 Skew spur gear

3-383 worm

3-385 spur

3-387 Spur

3-113 frame bush

What muffs do I need, it isn't too clear, and have I missed anything else?

What about that lorry number plate?

Pauline and I (together with many others) have been working to restore the Stover Canal for some years now. The canal, built 1792, runs exactly parallel to the Heathfield branch, actually the other way round I guess, from Sea Lock behind B&Q to the interchange at Ventiford with the old Granite tramway which runs down from Haytor. From time to time there has been enough water in the canal for several of us to paddle our canoes up and down. We have often jested that it would be fun to race a train in a canoe one day, never even dreaming a train would ever actually appear. We were delighted to see the timber train today of course but as you can see not enough water to float a rubber duck. Better luck next time. Challenging photography here as well 10800 - sun in the wrong place - to low - wrong colour- moan moan, Brian. Ps do have a look at the Stover canal website, not too many people know the canal even exists.

Good news about this Brian, there's plenty of future in Canal Restoration. Something else to investigate next time I'm down that way.

Having looked at the flicker site, the change in Bristol seems to have been for the better. SWMBO was looking over my shoulder at the images and she was shocked by the general tatty state of the city- burnt out cars and decrepit buildings. Did we really like the place in those days or are we blinded by the rose tinted nostalgia specs?

 

Tim

The point of the site was to record the final days of those buildings. Fray Bentos does state that the bulldozers went in shortly after his visit. So of course the buildings are decrepit - they ain't long for this world!

Right bridge, but it had long gone by '98.