Joy of Freelance - Suitable Locomotives & Rolling Stock

[Regularity]

32 minutes ago, Johnson044 said:

They are perfectly normal early Twentieth Century people from Somerset!

If you ever saw “Meet the Ancestors” from Wedmore…

[CKPR]

Re. motorising a Sharp Stewart 'small goods' 0-6-0, this is a bit of a pig to do to put it mildly. I speak from experience having two Furness engines of this type in EM, both of which have the  motor in the firebox to drive the rear driving wheels. A more straightforward albeit throughly heathen solution that I have subsequently come across is to power the tender with a Tenshodo SPUD of the appropriate wheelbase. 

Edited May 9, 2022 by CKPR

[Caley Jim]

31 minutes ago, CKPR said:

 A more straightforward albeit throughly heathen solution that I have subsequently come across is to power the tender with a Tenshodo SPUD of the appropriate wheelbase. 

Why does no-one in 4mm scale think of having the motor in the tender driving the loco via a shaft under the footplate?  If it can be done in 2mm scale, why not in 4mm?   See the link in my signature to my 2-4-0 build .  I now have 4 tender locos powered this way and parts for a 5th waiting a start to be made on it.

 

Jim

[ChrisN]

51 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Chris,

 

I have little to hand on the hobby front, most of my books and all of my modelling stuff are still packed, so cannot give you an exact answer.

 

Here is the Electrotren chassis under an ex-Cornwall Minerals Railway locomotive (WNR No.9):

 

 

The chassis, therefore, is very similar to the GWR 1361/1366 dock tanks, which were derived from the CMR locos, but I do not have the model to hand, so can't take any measurements.

 

IIRC, the wheel diameter of the Electrotren 0-6-0 is something like 13-14mm (3'3" - 3'6"). 

 

That makes them too small for your use; the Cambrian Queen class, aka the Small Goods Class, which are the same Sharps Stewarts also supplied to the Furness Railway (D1) and the WNR.

 

I believe the dimensions are:

 

Coupled wheels      W/b

4’6”                           6’9” + 8’    

 

You'd need 18mm driving wheels, therefore.

 

Further, being a tank engine, the manufacturer has filled the tank space with gubbins, if you want to assess the extent of this, look at one of the saddle tank versions, which requires some rather unsightly blanking to cover the engine block.

BTW, this model rather resembles those Sharp Stewarts sent to Spain pictured earlier.

 

Returning to the Sharp's Cambrian Small Goods Class, there is nothing particularly close in wheel diameter and w/b available RTR, as you will have discovered, hence I'm going with Knuckles' 3D prints.  There is also a kit by Cam Kits, as you're probably aware, though would work out more expensive than motorising Knuckles' prints, which anyway better suit the WNR configuration, which have similar cabs to the Furness versions. 

 

 

 

James,

Thank you.  I had assumed that it would not do, but at least I can stop hoping that it would.

 

[Johnson044]

Just some further thoughts on freelance locos- I think the "Get out of jail free" card has to be the "Cancelled Order". Provided the boundaries of time aren't too stretched and anachronisms are avoided then it's just a matter of sliding doors - as Dylan put it "A simple twist of fate". We are tweaking history anyway and it just takes a bad investment or some other financial misfortune or political upheaval for a completed or nearly complete loco from an independent builder such as Sharp Stewart, Dubs, Beyer Peacock etc to be available at a bargain price - there are quite a few out there in the real world- the Somerset & Dorset got some SER Cudworth 2-4-0's this way, the Furness got their Small Seagulls instead of the Cambrian and the Highland got their Yankee Tanks rather than the railway in Ecuador - I'm sure there are many others.  This way it's perfectly reasonable (within reason!) to tweak history a little so that your freelance company can get their hands on your favourite loco. 

 

I'm not sure how this might work with a design that was built exclusively by a railway company as opposed to a private builder though.

[Johnson044]

Another one is the loco that is built speculatively by a builder purely to exhibit at some great public engineering exhibition to drum up interest - and then sold on afterwards to whoever wanted it. There are a number of these around. The Midland and South Western Junction Railway 0-4-4T Fairlie and the 2-2-2 that was sold to Egypt spring to mind, as does the Little England by George England of Lewisham. Several of the last two seemed to have been built. The Fairlie not so popular. 

 

Maybe the justification for something completely freelance could be that it's a speculative one-off?

[Edwardian]

LT&SR 49 Class 0-6-0

 

Sharp Stewart designs, a pair was acquired by the LT&SR from a cancelled order by the Ottoman Railways of Turkey in 1899.

 

Coupled Wheels          w/b

4’6 ½                             7’5” + 7’11”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Johnson044]

I love the safety valve!

 

[Edwardian]

Just now, Johnson044 said:

I love the safety valve!

 

 

I think we must assume that the brick safety valve casing was a MR addition!

 

(after all, Deeley would do anything to ruin the look of a locomotive!)

[Regularity]

59 minutes ago, Caley Jim said:

Why does no-one in 4mm scale think of having the motor in the tender driving the loco via a shaft under the footplate?  If it can be done in 2mm scale, why not in 4mm?   See the link in my signature to my 2-4-0 build .  I now have 4 tender locos powered this way and parts for a 5th waiting a start to be made on it.

 

Jim

They have done, many years ago: Tony Miles for Adavoyle, I think that Ross Pochin may have done so in EM.

[CKPR]

2 hours ago, Regularity said:

They have done, many years ago: Tony Miles for Adavoyle, I think that Ross Pochin may have done so in EM.

Indeed so, the very same Sharp Stewart 0-6-0 engines and other FR tender  locomotives as built by Ross Pochin and now in the care of the Cumbrian Railways Association (search the CRA website for the Pochin & Shillcock collection) mostly have the motor mounted in the tender as described. As well as Tony Miles' articles, there's a good article by Sid Stubbs in RM from 1968-9 or so on this method of motorisation (basically 'old school' Manchester Model Railway Society "EM-F" from the 1950s - 60s).

Edited May 9, 2022 by CKPR

[ian@stenochs]

20 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

Why does no-one in 4mm scale think of having the motor in the tender driving the loco via a shaft under the footplate?  If it can be done in 2mm scale, why not in 4mm?   See the link in my signature to my 2-4-0 build .  I now have 4 tender locos powered this way and parts for a 5th waiting a start to be made on it.

 

Jim

 

Jim,

 

I still have 3 of my P4 locos I built in the early 70's. All three have the motor, large KTM, in the tender with the drive under the footplate to the engine.   However if modern motors, more efficient and smaller, had been available then I would gone for the simplicity of a self contained unit.

 

Ian

[Edwardian]

50 minutes ago, ian@stenochs said:

 

Jim,

 

I still have 3 of my P4 locos I built in the early 70's. All three have the motor, large KTM, in the tender with the drive under the footplate to the engine.   However if modern motors, more efficient and smaller, had been available then I would gone for the simplicity of a self contained unit.

 

Ian

 

This has been an interesting discussion for me, not least because I face motorising 5 of these little Sharp 0-6-0s.

 

Obviously, working in P4 you'd have more width, but I don't understand this to be the issue here. 

 

I am using 3D prints from Knuckles of this Parish.  He gives suggestions for motorising:

 

You will need 3 sets of 4' 6" (18mm) wheels.

Alan Gibson 14 Spoke 4' 6" driving wheels, code 4854W for 00 and EM and code 4S54W for P4 are suitable and these wheels have the correct crankpin throw.  No doubt other companies wheels can be used too.

 

A London Road Models 1/50 Motor Mount (Gearbox) and a Mashima 1020 motor with added 6x12mm diametre flywheel with 1.5mm shaft hole is reccomended but as is usual there will be many combinations that can be utilized.

 

The only potential problem with this combination is a small hole in the cab below the firebox hole may need to be cut out slightly for the gear wheel, but after backhead, levers and crew were added to the finished locomotive you won't easily see it, that said there are many other motors and gearboxes out there that might fit better.

 

Emphasis added. 

 

Given the unavailability of the Mashima motors, I wonder if anyone has alternative suggestions, including compatible motor-mount and gears to? 

 

Edited May 10, 2022 by Edwardian
spelling

[Caley Jim]

3 hours ago, ian@stenochs said:

 

Jim,

 

I still have 3 of my P4 locos I built in the early 70's. All three have the motor, large KTM, in the tender with the drive under the footplate to the engine.   However if modern motors, more efficient and smaller, had been available then I would gone for the simplicity of a self contained unit.

 

Ian

I was making the comment in response to @CKPR's 'heathen' (his word) suggestion of simply motorising the tender, proposing that the arrangement might be a solution where there is insufficient room in a small loco to fit motor +gearbox in the loco.   Nowadays there are plenty small coreless motors available (eg Tramfabriek*).

 

Jim

 

* No connection other than a satisfied customer.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Caley Jim
Add disclaimer

[CKPR]

In my defence, I once motorised an 0-4-4wt by installing the motor in the well tank under the bunker with a drive shaft to a gearbox on the front wheels. 

[Edwardian]

Well, I note the Amberdale topic, which prompted this one to some extent, has disappeared from view.

 

Come on now, 'fess up, which one of you did it? 

[Regularity]

I checked in, to find I had been quoted, went to see what had been said, but it was all gone. Not just a post or two, but the whole thread.

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, CKPR said:

In my defence, I once motorised an 0-4-4wt by installing the motor in the well tank under the bunker with a drive shaft to a gearbox on the front wheels. 

I was disappointed when I got to the end of that sentence, as I hoped you were going to say you had powered the bogie!

[CKPR]

1 hour ago, Regularity said:

I was disappointed when I got to the end of that sentence, as I hoped you were going to say you had powered the bogie!

Alas, my middle name is Julian, not Nigel...or Archibald for that matter. 

Edited May 10, 2022 by CKPR

[Schooner]

11 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Given the unavailability of the Mashima motors, I wonder if anyone has alternative suggestions, including compatible motor-mount and gears to? 

 

https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/motors

 

https://www.highlevelkits.co.uk/gearboxes

 

Two out of three ain't bad... :)

[Johnson044]

A little off-piste but has anyone noticed the little outside framed 4-4-0 in one of the colliery scenes in Amberdale? Reminds me  of a Whitby Bogie.

 

[Edwardian]

10 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Well, I note the Amberdale topic, which prompted this one to some extent, has disappeared from view.

 

Come on now, 'fess up, which one of you did it? 

 

9 hours ago, Regularity said:

I checked in, to find I had been quoted, went to see what had been said, but it was all gone. Not just a post or two, but the whole thread.

 

It's back, following an exchange with Andy last night.

 

Someone - and you know who you are - reported the post for copyright infringement. Unfortunately this individual's zealous passion for upholding intellectual property law caused the whole topic to be hidden.

 

By arrangement with Andy, it has reappeared, with the original post stripped of its pictures albeit retaining the layout plan for context.

 

Much of copyright law, in my humble lawyer's opinion, is b*ll*cks, but it does put site moderators like Andy in a difficult position, even where the pictures are, as in this case, poor reproductions, shaky ones taken on a moving train, so in no way a substitute for those in the book. It cannot be said, then, that the post was doing any actual damage to the copyright owner, indeed, the post was a massive plug for the book and other forum members seem to have added to its sales having seen it.

 

It seems to me that this was not a complaint by the copyright owner, but by some officious soul volunteering to police other people as such people so often feel compelled to do. I will leave that person to reflect upon what they have done and consider whether here they succeeded in adding to the store of human happiness.

 

It takes all sorts, however.

[Johnson044]

I'd best not upload the photos of the little outside framed 4-4-0 in that case. Model railways are all, I sometimes think, that stand between me and a padded cell (or don't care in the community) and I really don't want the copyright police feeling my collar.

 

Just buy the book folks! You won't regret it.

 

 

[Edwardian]

4 minutes ago, Johnson044 said:

Model railways are all, I sometimes think, that stand between me and a padded cell

 

 

 

You and me both!

[Johnson044]

Let's just get through the day as best we can Edwardian