Fen End Pit

Hi David,

 

Excellent stuff as always. Does anyone out there do brass dome and door? Your wonderful work - and skill with an iron - do make these fittings "poor relations" to me.

 

Cheers

 

Jan

I think I'll have to take this on a piece by piece basis. I'm not religiously opposed to white metal fittings, after all the whole thing is going to get covered in a decent coat of black paint in the end. I think it is more to do with shape and detail. We'll see how it goes.

David

Very much like the Claud, inspires me to keep on going with my PDK kit.

Looking very nice so far, does the PDK kit cater for the original decorative frames not that i'm planning on building another, just wondering.

 

Without looking at the PDK site , they used to offer two versions - I built mine with the the decorative running plate.

Yes they do.

PDK 9

It looks like it will be a shame to paint this. Some cracking fettling and finishing.

 

How long do you think it has taken you so far? Only asking as I have a Gibson J15 that has been in stasis at this stage since 1996!

 

Cheers

 

Jan

Looking back through the blog I must have started the kit about a month ago as the first blog entry was the frames and gearbox and that was posted on the 2nd April.

I got the tops of the rear splashers on tonight, around an hour and half to add two bits of brass with a total surface area less than 10mmx10mm. Also I soldered an additional cross member onto the chassis and put a fixing bolt through the footplate.

David

I can recommend an outfit called 'GiantCod' for buying servos in the UK. Very good service and reasonable prices, probably easier than going to the far east, no connection except satisfied customer.

David Barham

Have you considered Scalescenes brick papers? If you can get access to a colour laser printer then you can use whatever quality paper you like?

David

Very Nice. I like the change in levels; and that you've included the road/rail interface in your thinking. I'm also interested in your modelling of a hydraulic acuumulator tower; I've set myself the challenge of a model lf the Limehouse Basin one on Watkin's Wharf. I'm forced to guesttimate dimensions/footprint etc from photographs; it's a bit of a trek from deepest, darkest Devon just to get up close and personal.

 

Cheers

 

Jan

This guy seemed to get pretty close judging by his photographs on flickr

Hi David,

 

Interesting use of the word 'net' to describe the 2D layout. I've not come across this term in over 20 years in the CAD and 3D industry and I'm wondering if it's a TurboCAD term? Technically, it's called a development, though I have used the crude term 'pelting' for laying out texture space for characters.

 

Paul

Hi Paul

I'm probably getting my terms wrong, I just seem to vaguely remember being told to 'draw the net of a shape' in O level technical drawing in 1980. I'll have to ask around work next week and see if anyone else remembers the term. Mind you, with the bunch of Phd mathematicians who write Parasolid (3D solid modelling engine used in SolidEdge, NX and a multiple of other CAD systems) my chances of understanding their answers are low!

David

...and now you have all pointed this out to me I guess I'm just going to have to change all of them because now I know it looks wrong to me. Sometime ignorance really is bliss! This will teach me to forget the first rule and not have a decent photograph in front of me when I build something.

Still I just reversed a train of 10 minerals back over the single slip and into the goods loop and nothing came off. Says a lot of Bill Bedford's sprung W-irons and a back-to-back gauge.

David

Thanks to a PM from a member for pointing out gently and in private that of course the brake gear appears to be on the wrong way around. Looking at the kits this morning I can see that he is correct and the brakes would indeed go 'off' as the brake handle went down.

Looking at the molding the detail is on one side only so it isn't just that I got the molding the wrong way around, which begs two questions, what were Airfix doing and how do I fix it?

I could either, take the brake gear off, make some detailing on the other side of the molding (a strip of microstrip to form the edge of the brake shoe) and then reverse them. Alternatively I think what might be the issue is that Airfix were actually looking a wagon with Morton brakes and just misinterpreted what was going on. There seems to be a particular design which had brakes on one side only and the Morton clutch which would have reversed the direction of the movement on one side.

Any better ideas anyone?

David

Hi Neil

Good to see the 48DS under construction. Much better to see it started than just sitting in my unbuilt kit pile.

David

I'd suggest 'play to your strengths'. I'd been building bits of P4 and 7mm narrow gauge when I built Fen End Pit in 16mm. The thing that was clear was that there was not anything quite like it on the exhibition circuit and I got a great response to the layout because it was 'different'. It is pretty clear that your work to date on the G diesels has got a great following on this blog. How about building some thing more to demonstrate that stock? Could you build something which actually 'uses' the locos rather than just having them running in and out of a shed? In G you should be able to do something that actually loads or unloads? How about a shunting yard with something like a wagon tippler! shunting 16ton minerals and unloading them in G would be quite something!

David

David - your point lock lever should normally be in the 'pulled' position in the frame. The point should only be released for operation after releasing the lock. The starter should not be pullable unless the point is in the normal position and the point locked. The shunt signal should require the point to be reversed, but should not require the point to be locked.

I think that all depends a lot on the manufacturer of the frame and the region of the country where it was installed. I think having the FPL 'normal' in the frame as being locked was common in some places. Probably a question best asked of one of the signallers on this forum.

David

David, Following your lever Frame building with interest. Your latest version is an excellant design, my only concern is the Micro switch attached to the lever may cause premature failure of the wiring due to lever movement. I wonder if you'd cnsidered something along the ines of Leslie Bevis-Smith (MERG) design where the micro switch is fixed? I'm sure that your current design could easily be adapted.

 

regards

 

David (Pannier Tank)

I can understand your concern but I think it will be ok when I feed each pair of wires through a hole in a baseboard. Another possibility is to half the number of wires by using the frame as the return. This would work with the CANACE8c I'm using now but not if I extend the frame and use the CANACE3 instead as this needs the different signals to have different returns with various diodes in the way.

David

I love mission redesign statements! How's about the locking being initiated only when the microswitch reversion (confirming the locking) is checked to be the same one that initiated the unlocking?

The point here is that with 'whole frame' locking it is possible to pull the catch on lever 1, unlock the frame, then pull the catch on lever 2 and pull lever 2. In order to avoid this pulling a second catch handle should result in the frame being locked. However if in this case lever 1 was 'half pulled' it could prevent the locking bar from locking the rest of the frame unless there is some kind of separation between the locking bolts. I think this is probably achievable. As to mission redesign, well I'll fix it in the documentation for the next release!

David

Another thought I had was that if the locking was actually 'spring loaded' on a per lever basis then the electronics could be made to automatically return the lock to 'locked' in the event that a second catch handle was pulled. That way only one lever would ever be free at a time.

David

Well the electronics seem to work pretty instantaneously. On the test rig I can't sense any time between my pulling the catch handle on a free lever and the light indicating the locking is clear going on. So the delay will be how fast I can move the locking bar out of the way. It has been pointed out on the MERG forum that I might be better off with a solenoid but I'm going to have a go with a servo for a start. I reckon I only need a few millimetres of movement which would only be a few degrees of turn on the servo. To be honest until I build it I don't know whether it will feel quick enough. I don't really want the operator to have to think 'catch handle - PAUSE - pull'.

David

Yes, there is a separate switch on the frame that is closed when the lever is reversed. The intention is that the switch on the catch handle is used to tell the control system that the signalman wants to pull a lever. The electronics will then clear the locking bar if the lever should be free.

David

Shades of Far Ings. You'll need a re-engined Simplex with no cab and the driving seat from an old van!

Good luck with it.

David

Hi David,

 

The brickwork on your buildings looks impressive...what have you used?

 

Robin

Believe it or not it is a Scalescenes building, made up with the Brassmasters etched windows I did the artwork for. Although it is basically brick paper, printed out on a Dell laser printer, I'm really pleased with the effect. Maybe not up the standard of your shed, but probably several orders of magnitude cheaper.

David

Hi David,

 

Smashing stuff. I'm interested in the handling of the "joggle" on the 3 way... is this GE practice for inset trackwork? If so, I'll have to change mine... I've gone for the "kink in a single length" rather than the offset... but the offset you've employed looks considerably more practical (not so "main line" and more "cost-effective" if you get my drift).

 

By the way, I think the "tarmac" looks excellent.

 

Cheers

 

Jan

I'm not sure I quite follow. There is a joggle on the stock rail, more by dint of practicality than anything else. With the two switch blades being so close I found I needed a slight joggle to keep the rails in gauge. The guard rails are just guessed at, I simply put then in near the blades where they would foul. As for GE practice for inset trackwork, I'll leave that to the experts, I've enough trouble making it run in the first place.

David

What are you planning for a fiddle yard for this? Looks like you will need something pretty big to handle trains for scale length? Well certainly a little longer than the J39+3 wagons needed for Sheep's Pasture.

David

If you take look at my blog (fen end pit) you'll see there is quite a similarity between your plans and what I've been building in my spare room in P4. I have a radius down to 40" and this works fine with AJs though obviously you can't uncouple on that radius.

Good luck

David Barham

I think 7mm scale curly telephone wire would be an excellent suggestion for Eileen's Emporium's Extreme Product competition!

David

Hi, Fen End,

 

Nice to see this progressing. Please keep us informed.

 

I did suggest a way of ovecoming the problem of using jig-axles in this type of axlebox with a clarification following a comment from Horsetan. Did you try this at all? Might be worth a thought for any future Bradwell chassis. If you do, it's important to keep the front and back of each box in the correct orientation but the top temporarily becomes the bottom and the bottom becomes the top but the single flange ends up on the inside, allowing the normal spring arrangement to locate the horn-guides. Afterwards, the boxes are reversed, top over bottom, for fitting onto the wheel-sets.

 

Regards,

 

Dave.

 

Hi Dave

I thought about this, but by the time I'd got to the setting up with jigs I'd soldered on the tabs on the bottom of the hornblocks which forms the basis for the springing. That would mean that turning them over end would have the tab between the top of the hornguide and the hornblock. I felt this would sit the hornblock a bit low in the guide for setting up.

David