tomparryharry

If we swing over to GWR.org site, there is a Mitchell kit of a 44xx by Ted kanas. 

Opinions, please?

54 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Of course, but I'm not sure where we started from.

 

Aren't we all!

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

You have to take the conn rod off first.

 

I think we're talking at cross purposes here. For he sake of clarity, shall we start again? 

15 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

Use of 2021 wheels on 44s/45s can be ruled out because of their crankthrow.

 

More importantly, the 44xx is outside cylinder, whereas the 850/2021 is inside cylinder.

I still can't find a decent photo of a 44xx coupling rod knuckle joint. 

Russell's Vol2 shows a 45xx with the coupling rod knuckle behind the centre crankpin...

There s a direct correlation between cylinder stroke and crankpin throw. You cant have any discrepancy, otherwise the pistons will be playing 'peek-a boo'....

As far as coupling rods are, I thought the initial wheelsets were altered in relation to the crankpin-knuckle joint. The 45xx being the improved version, and the 44XX  being the original layout. 

Researchers please note that I might have got it wrong, so some further looking is required. After all, it's what our forum is all about...

Hello Folks,

Just wondering if Mr McDermott & his merry team of pollsters are publishing a 2024 poll?

Apologies if this has been answered previously, but I took a rest from the forum.

Many thanks,

From here, it looks good. I wonder if Llantrisant ever borrowed a 44xx tank?

One enquiry I might ask, and it's a big ask, is about the gear ratios. 40-, IMHO, is a bit fast. One wonders if say, 54-1 might be a bit more realistic. Coupled with the projected weight mentioned earlier, it would theoretically be capable of hauling 50-60 wagons, which was a prototypical load. 

Naturally, it's not going to be to everyone's taste. Just me, I guess....

Well, I'm not sure if I'm a leader of the topfeed uprising, but I'm most certainly in the throng. 

I strongly recommend the book by J.W.P  Rowledge 'GWR Locomotive Allocations' (David & Charles ISBN 0-7153-8820-7 ). It lists pretty much all of the locomotives, when & where.

With the 67xx, 6700 made its entrance in 1930. I'd surmise that these were replacements for the numerous pre-grouping locomotives that plied the docks networks for the Western. According to the book, Swansea had a fair allocation of the 67xx. I'd suggest cross-referencing other books to nail the period you'd like.

The big thing to remember is that the Western was a company, pure &simple. The 67xx came along because there was a requirement. On a personal level, I'd like a 47xx, but I'd never have a model, because they didn't come into my preferred area. By the same token, accountancy practices dictated that assets would be retired at the 25-30 year mark. A perfect example would be Taff Vale 28. Built in 1897, Grouping in '22, (25 yrs), sold off in '27 (30 yrs). Diesels came in the late 50's, just as the  steam locomotive fleets of BR hit their superannuation. 

In a manufacturers defence, it must be pretty tricky to announce any new product in Western. The slightest error in a model will reach untold howling from the ranks. I fully know this 'cos I'm one of them.... Full credit to the Western manufacturers  nowadays, they know the benchmark is high, and those purchasers will, by & large, accept those rules. For our part, we've learned to ask rather than demand, and there is a huge amount  of research sources to get it right. 

Finally, spherical joints (Rose Joints) were on the coupling rods for a 42-52-72xx, as well as a 67xx. 

Triang-Hornby ( and later, Bachmann, have indeed become complacent. Having become ''the' go-to' provider of Western models, they rested on their laurels a little too hard, methinks.  With a  very good chassis, they must have thought that the situation was pretty much sewn up. 

The forgotten aspect of the 57xx model is that the Western had 100's of earlier locomotives on its books. Firstly, without topfeed, and later, with improved boilers, and the topfeed. Boiler pressure went up from 165 (ish) to 200 PSI. A simple re-tool to accommodate the principal differences between 57-8750 class would have wiped out any prospect of another competitor getting involved. 

It's the publics fault, I'm sure.. After all, we've only been asking for these changes (upgrades) for what:- 25+ years? Well, it's only a small class, about 300 locomotives....

For us south Wales modellers, the real gem might well be the Accurascale 67-6750 class. The 56xx might bring traffic down to Cadoxton,  Crwys or Penarth Curve, but the 67xx would take over for the last part of the journey. The simple reason being the trackwork was usually awful....

Bring on the niche models, I say. Oh, and well done for spotting those gaps!

A very nice e-mail from Planet Industrials...

The extra bits for a Westernised 'Victory' loco should be available from the Light Railway Stores soon. 

GWR 666 & 667 were lifelong residents of Pill shed, as was 2161before being  sold off in 1929.

Information in the first instance to Planet Industrials.

Nice!

On 11/06/2023 at 07:12, Mikkel said:

 

So here I have mapped the 1921 shed distribution of the 2021 class. 

 

 

The Google "My Maps" feature has limitations but the online version of the map allows a bit more play (select class then zoom in and click marker): 

 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/3/viewer?mid=1ukwWmwpqiPGZUrZvlm2pHKAHw1JLXtoF&ll=51.87204469255919%2C-2.566403999112987&z=7

 

Below I have listed the 2021 allocations by shed, in 1921. Swindon and Lydney accounted for 28% of the class between them:

 

(*) Swindon allocation includes Swindon Works (18 locos)

 

Below are the three classes I have mapped so far compared, left to right is 2721, 1854, 2021 classes.

 

 

 

The 2721s are the most concentrated of the three classes, but there were also fewer of them.  

 

 

Does anyone know a mapping app that would allow the shed markers to have different sizes depending on the no. of locos allocated? 

 

 

Have I got this wrong:- No Llantrisant?

On 26/11/2023 at 10:07, F-UnitMad said:

 

Keith was correct the first time - he quoted The Johnster's 'Tondu Valley' which had more *coughs* than my 'Forest of Dean'.... 🙄

Tondu Valley is very much in Wales. Anyway as the F-o-D is close to the Welsh border, certainly in later years the railway was no stranger to locos from Welsh sheds, Ebbw Junction for one.

 Plus, of course, Severn Tunnel Junction.

2 hours ago, New Haven Neil said:

The front buffer plank had to be removed to access/remove the pistons, which could be done at a relatively minor shed - I have a photo of one at Lydney in a Ben Ashworth book - so replacement of the relevant fixings could end up as just about anything.  I doubt these would be fitted bolts, so could be re-rivetted (if indeed they are rivets, not round headed coachbolts) or hex head.  As ever, the only guarantee is a dated photo!

It's pretty much the same for any inside cylindered locomotive. The buffer plank or headstock needs to be capable of being 'taken down' for repairs or replacement. The drawbars exert tremendous force between the frames at their extremities, so distortion is quite common. Short of total failure, a shedmaster would have noticed on his defect sheets, and have a kit of parts via the Enparts network. Bolts were slightly oversized. This allowed skimming the shank diameter down, or reaming the hole out to suit. 

From the drawbar centre, the force is in tension, to the centre of the frame sides. Moving outwards, the force is now in compression, which is why you see gusset plates tucked in behind the bufferbeam. A good example would be the 18" Austerity, modified for steelworks service. There, double gusset (Oo, Matron) is pretty much standard requirement.

I've been away for a while, so once again, late for the party...

Have I missed anything?

Just a question, if I may. What sort of gearing, and weight proposals?  I'm just curious, that's all. Initial photos look rather good. Power to their elbow, I say. Nice!

Well, well, well. What do we have here then, panniers without topfeed? Will I have any? Oh yes! The requests have fallen on deaf ears for a decade or more. 

I hope Accurascale sell mountains of them. They certainly deserve to. It just goes to show what happens when a customer focused business takes heed. llantrisant had about 5-6 down the years, plus the topfeed (8750) variant, so I can, in theory, achieve a full stud. 

I need to dig out some reference books....

17 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Which reminds me of an essential spare part for classic Brit cars.

Please don't confuse this with the negative earth version!

 

https://www.orarc.org/?p=2348

Negative earth is just the same, but the label is upside down.

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Now it was £50 the first time I heard a version of this joke, nearly 30 years ago. Does this indicate that rhino numbers are back on the up? 

I like to give my jokes an airing from time to time.  I was going to tell the one about the Monkey, the doughnut & the Traffic Warden, but I think the mods wouldn't like it...

1 hour ago, Buhar said:

You do need to use good quality screws and bits with an impact driver as the torque can mash either if you hit a firm bit of wood.

 

Alan

Yes, quite right. The impact bits nowadays are rubbish and the screws are not much better. If its wood, then I'll pilot half of the depth, and the minimum diameter of the screw. That way, the difference between minimum & maximum is cutting in virgin wood, as is the leading point. Once again, if it's C24 CLS, Then I'll be using old chip-oil for lubricant. 

Oooo, Matron! 

if you're going on safari, watch out for charging Rhinos....

£30 quid is quite extortionate, if you ask me...

'Tarzan called in today'

'Did he?

'yes, he was in the area, so he swung by'.

My Grandad got a job as a lifeguard in the local leisure centre. He was so pleased, you would think he won the pools..... 

Impact drivers are just the job for larger work. For this, I'll use my standard drill for the pilot, and fire them in with the impact driver. I also use a small pot of old cooking oil to act as a lubricant (Ohh, matron!).  Using them turn & about means the ordinary drill gets half of the workload. 

As Dave Bacon & others have said, if you've seen them being used on site, then you would know why. After all, would you see a builder forking out for something that doesn't work?

Ian. 

It happened when the Cardiff-Pontypridd route was rationalised. Maesmawr 'box was switched out at approximately 21:30, as it was only gap in the service when it was possible for the afternoon man  to switch out. Although the Maesmawr signaller accepted on the up relief, 21:30 was the recognised closing time.

As a consequence, don't send traffic on the up relief , after 20:00, from walnut Tree Jcn.  But! It did happen. Arriving at Maesmawr to find the 'box in darkness. "Where's the bobby? 

In the ongoing argument, a solution for closing ticket offices has been found.

"Aha! We'll close the stations instead! We'll get those pesky passengers yet!

You might try 24/7 Developments.