Scalefour Forum

Tim V wrote:Does the thread get stuck to the shaft?

No, remember Loctites, either retainer or nut locker, aren't glues as such and work by expanding in a joint around a shaft as they go off and locking it solid mechanically. So the thread may expand a bit and go harder, but it will still unwind from the joint without difficulty.

Tim V wrote:Does the thread get stuck to the shaft?

Errr no, cos loctite is not a glue, it's a retainer. Meaning that it hardens in a/ the presence of steel and b/ in the absence of oxygen.

Excellent, thanks for the ideas - I'll have a play...

Put the wheels on the Ivatt today - may even be ready for Burnham at Scaleforum 2018....

Made the springs for the pony trucks today, out of one piece of wire.

Getting ready for Scaleforum, found the brushes in the motor on the railcar are a bit short. Overheating and smoke coming out of the motor.

My models are high mileage, I suppose it's inevitable. However, doesn't give me much time to sort out.

Meanwhile I have stretched the springs - which were looking a bit short. Probably they are overheated. Looked in scrap box, no luck there. There was another 12:20, but that had no brush gear, swapped with the dud ones, it worked, so I assume - as I don't remember, I've had this problem before.

Going with the Burnham crowd to Scaleforum.

Tuning the Ivatt tankie, plus built some leads so we can have some spare controllers.

Tim V wrote:Tuning the Ivatt tankie...

Candidate for Templecombe 49 Duty, then. Inbound 1/15 Passenger ex Evercreech Jc., back to Templecombe on the 'Milkie' at 3/20. Details of 41249 that I have are: allocated to Templecombe July 1953, away to Barrow Hill in January 1959, returning June 1965.

Better get on and finish it ...

Finally running satisfactorily, found the balance weight was being rubbed by the coupling rod.

On with the brake gear, utilising these frame spacer jigs.

John Palmer wrote:Details of 41249 that I have are: allocated to Templecombe July 1953, away to Barrow Hill in January 1959, returning June 1965.

According to "Shed by Shed 6:Western", John, it was at Templecombe, as you state 7/53 to 1/59, Bristol Bath Road 1/59 to 8/60, Bristol Barrow Road 8/60 to 12/63, Barnstaple 12/63 to 11/64, Exmouth Junction 11/64 to 5/65, then Templecombe again 5/65 to 3/66 [presumably S&D closure; another source states loco withdrawn 3/66].

Noel, 'Shed by Shed' isn't in my library, so the additional allocations you cite help to fill out the picture – thanks for these. I am working from hand written tables compiled many years ago by an author I am ashamed to say I cannot immediately identify. His focus was on the S&D and the tables concentrate on the shed from which engine migrated to the Dorset and the shed to which it was despatched away from the line, disregarding any other allocations.

One interesting note with regard to 41249 appears from the tables I hold: from 2 to 31 January 1966 the engine is shown as having been in store. Evidently she was treated as surplus to requirements for the purposes of the emergency service that operated from 3 January 1966 and her revival at the end of January suggests that she took the place of a casualty previously employed on that service.

My tables confirm 41249's withdrawal on 6 March 1966, with no note of her being used for shunting at Bath thereafter, so I assume that she duly took her place in the line at Pylle Hill for her final trip.

I doubt there will ever be a definitive list of all allocations. One other source is the BRDatabase at http://www.brdatabase.info/index.php.

The author admits it is still a work in progress, but is trying to cross reference details to improve the accuracy, so currently shows 2 sets of data. The search facilities are quite comprehensive, including loco number, shed snapshot, shed chronological changes, builders and scrap yards.

The page for 41249 is here http://www.brdatabase.info/locoqry.php?action=locodata&type=S&id=114639&loco=41249

In case you have missed any updates on the workbench, I have been busy building my new layout which I'm featuring on RMweb, as it's part of the Cameo Layout challenge. It is not P4, but it does have scale flanges L shaped ...
http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... at-wellow/

It has just been invited to Railwells 2019, so I'd better get on with it ...

Very interesting Tim. I was unaware of the thread on RMWeb so am coming to this rather late. The reason for this post is that this reminded me of the horse (and man)-powered plateway less than half a mile from where I live and known as The Ticknall Tramway. Work on this began in 1799 to take limestone from Ticknall to the Ashby Canal and beyond. The well-known engineer at the time Benjamin Outram (from whose name some have thought, wrongly it would seem, that the word "tram" is derived) was involved. I mention this because in a booklet entitled "The Ticknall Tramway" by Geoffey Holt and published by the Ticknall Preservation and Historical Society, are some drawings of the track (or is it plateway?) construction including one of a "transfer point". I know little about such things but just wondered if this was similar to the construction used in "your" plateway. For what it is worth I have attached an extract which may, or may not, be useful. Good luck with the layout.

Thanks for that, all information is useful.

Outram proposed a standard gauge of 4'2" for the country - if he had succeeded (instead of Stephenson), there wouldn't be a standard gauge of 18.83mm, but a gauge of 16.66mm - which is pretty close to another gauge we have all heard about ...

Sorry - me again. I forgot to add in your quest for an understanding of the historical building fabric of the area you may find something of interest in the Conservation Area Appraisals carried out by the local planning authority. I have been on the local council web site and have found this one relating to Radstock which may be of interest.

http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/sites/default ... k_1999.pdf

This goes for anyone modelling a particular area. You'll be surprised what is hidden away in the the dusty old vaults of our town halls. (As a now retired writer of such tomes I have a passing interest!)

Bryan

Interesting read, a pity BANES does not give more regard to the historic character of Radstock, merely designating it as an overspill housing area for Bath - 10 miles away.

'Ow d'yer make the 'oss move, then?

That'll be worth seeing at Railwells!

[Ah, I've got it - the horse is DCC controlled.]

Joking apart, this looks to be a very interesting project.

The reason why I chose the 1826 date (before Stephenson's Rocket), was because an early steam engine was tried along the line. Surprise, it broke the plates. However, I can have a go at building an engine, the horses - well you'll have to see ...

The genesis of Tim's latest oeuvre goes back further than you might think:This was an outing of Winchester Chesil to which Avon and Somerset Area Group members were invited to bring some stock - quite some years ago, as you can tell.

I got a bit of a laugh from the BANES conservation area appraisal: it was a bit previous in its suggestion that Radstock 'became an important junction' of the Bristol & North Somerset and Somerset and Dorset railways in the second half of the 19th Century - such a junction not, in fact, being effected until the day before the S&D's closure in March 1966! (I've discounted the connection theoretically attainable through Ludlow's Colliery)

The link posted by Tim in his RM Web thread led me for the first time to details of the caisson boat lift implemented by the Somerset Coal Canal. A fascinating concept and the link is well worth following, but the thought of taking a ride in the caisson was truly one that gave me the shudders.

That was October 1986!

We effectively 'took over' Chesil for an exhibition, here is my Ivatt 2 (subsequently stolen) in the station.

John Palmer wrote: but the thought of taking a ride in the caisson was truly one that gave me the shudders.

You have got wimpy!

You used to think nothing of driving a steam traction engine of weight exceeding by double a certain bridge loading.

Age caught up ?

Paul Townsend wrote:

John Palmer wrote: but the thought of taking a ride in the caisson was truly one that gave me the shudders.

You have got wimpy!

You used to think nothing of driving a steam traction engine of weight exceeding by double a certain bridge loading.

Age caught up ?

Have you read the technology of the caisson? The box was submerged in water - like a submarine. You went in on the barge, and if it got stuck (as it did), the air would run out. The bargees got out just in time.

“Officer, I emphatically deny that I played any part whatsoever in the decision to take that engine over that railway bridge. There was I, sitting in the traction truck as a passenger, minding my own business, when I started to notice that we were passing these prohibition signs with the legend '6 tons mean gross weight'...”

If I remember the article correctly, it wasn't the bargees but the board of the Somerset Coal Canal that got trapped in a caisson that started to tip downwards at one end, a process assisted by the free surface effect on the water in the caisson. By the time rescuers had drained the whole lift chamber to get the directors out, the breathable air in the caisson had nearly been exhausted and the directors, once revived, lost no time in abandoning the caisson lift concept.

Where Tim's analogy goes a bit astray is that, unlike the constrained water in a submarine's ballast tanks, the water in the caisson was, in effect, already within the 'crew space' and free to flow in whatever direction gravity might take it.