Beer and Buckjumpers

[Paul Willis]

Paul,

Rather than make up new frames perhaps I could suggest folding up some strip into a U shape and soldering it all the way around the milled hornblock slots? if you use the right thickness of strip hopefully the High Level hornguides will slip in nicely. Seems a shame to waste the frames.

Hi Phillip,

The frames won't be wasted - they'd go in the scrap box! Nice source of thick brass...

Actually, I may try Jol's thoughts of alternative hornblocks. I realised that I was perhaps getting too precious about the integrity of this, and it was only a box on wheels dragged along after the locomotive... The tender chassis has outside frames, so you can't even see what is inside.

I don't have any LRM hornblocks at the moment, but I do have Alan Gibson ones that may fit. I'll have a look this evening to see what may be possible.

Cheers
Flymo.

[Paul Willis]

Paul,

you could try LRM cast brass hornblocks. I think they are wider than the HL ones. If you let me know the width of the frame slots, I'll check a couple from my own collection tomorrow.

Hi Jol,

A quick whizz with the digital micrometer suggests that they are averaging 6.3mm wide.

Cheers
Flymo

[Paul Willis]

I couldn't face a return to the computer last night, so it's a post-event write-up... They say that trouble comes in threes, and yesterday proved the truth of that. After the gearbox glitch, and the tender hornguide hiatus, came the soldering iron woes!

I thought that I'd do something very straightforward and knock up some wagon suspension for a little side-project (of which more in a couple of days time). I switched on my Antex TC660 soldering station, the "heating" light flashed once, and that was it

Much switching on and off, dismantling, probing, etc, etc, and it still did exactly the the same. Flashed once for heating, the element got _slightly_ warm, and nothing more. My suspicions are that the temperature sensor in the element has died, so that it gets to the minimum level of heat (75 degrees C) and then switches off. Replacement elements are available, but not readily on a bank holiday evening.

Fortunately, my nearest Maplin is only ten minutes drive away, and after a quick phone call to confirm that they woul be open until 6pm, I whizzed off down there for a replacement soldering station. It's Maplin's own model, 48W, and with a digital temperature display. With a packet of spare bits, it cost me 55 quid as an emergency purchase, versus about £30 for a replacement element for the Antex - not that I could have got one until the New Year anyway.

It does the job, but I have to say that I don't like it as much as the Antex. The iron itself is more bulky, and somehow feels more "clumsy" to use. The bits don't seem as well built, and are not as fine to use and don't seem to hold the solder on the bit cleanly. And the up/down temperature control is not as quick to use as the dial on the Antex.

All this makes it sound as though the Maplin iron is rubbish. It's not. However I've clearly been spoiled by the Antex, and I'll be getting a new element for it as soon as I can. I can then keep the Maplin station as a spare in case the Antex dies again.

So that is my three items of bad luck out of the way! Let's hope that is it for the festive season...

Flymo

[Russ Elliott]

Chris Gibbon is very aware that his standard 1/8" bore blocks produce lateral space problems for some of his gearboxes, and is introducing a slimmer version of the 1/8" block, which he calls the 'spacesaver'. I discussed it with him at Scaleforum, but I can't remember what the new bearing length will be. I'll do a new drawing soon.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Paul,

the LRM hornguide casting is 10.9mm wide across the "backplate".

The bearings are 4.25mm deep, but that includes a circular extension that can be easily filed off (it's useful when checking the fit of the bearing into the guide), reducing the depth to 3.25mm. The inward projection of the bearing from the inside of the frames is 3.5mm (can be reduced to 2.5mm as above). If you file more off the back of the bearing, until it is the same depth as the guide on the back of the casting, you can further reduce this to about 2.0mm.

Jol

[Will L]

Paul

As a mater of interest, how far apart are the frames on your Y14. In the picture it looks like the gearbox isn't even a near miss.

Will

[Paul Willis]

Paul

As a matter of interest, how far apart are the frames on your Y14. In the picture it looks like the gearbox isn't even a near miss.

Hi Will,

They are 13.8 mm apart, across the inner faces. That's using the 18.83 spacers supplied in the kit.

The gearbox is 11.8 mm across the outside faces of the bearings. I could lose another millimetre off that by thinning down the bearings outside the gearbox, but that isn't going to win the war.

Cheers
Flymo

[HowardGWR]

I've just checked the spacers on my Perseverance 57xx pannier and the frames are 15mm apart inside and 16mm outside.

Could there be a simple solution here Paul or was this another time for this comparative amateur to shew his ignorance?

Regards Howard

[LesGros]

Paul

As a matter of interest, how far apart are the frames on your Y14. In the picture it looks like the gearbox isn't even a near miss.

Hi Will,
They are 13.8 mm apart, across the inner faces. That's using the 18.83 spacers supplied in the kit.
Cheers
Flymo

Flymo,
There's Interesting... I suspect the the spacers are the problem. I've just checked a 4-6-2T comet chassis (under construction) the measurement between the frames is 15.56 mm.
Although it is closing the stable door... I built my roadrunner gearbox before soldering up the frames, that way I was able to position the frames to allow the gearbox and motor and driving wheels to be dropped out of the underside of the chassis as an assembly; thus avoiding disturbance to the quartering. Just a thocht.
Happy New Year

[Will L]

Howard has the point and that's why I asked the question. All my recent chassis have been 16mm over the frames which does leave a bit more room. However even if you started again with and additional 1mm from with wider spacers you'd probably still need to do more. A SlimLiner still looks favourite.

Will

I'll have to remember this when I get round to putting my assorted Gibson GER loco's together for my proper railway, which will be GER/LNER. All this GCR stuff is just to suit the available layout, and not my preferred period period to boot.

[David Thorpe]

They are 13.8 mm apart, across the inner faces. That's using the 18.83 spacers supplied in the kit.

Well, if you've got it wrong, so have I. I've built a Gibson J15 and the frames are 13.75 mm apart across the inner faces, 15.00 over the frames. I'm also building a Gibson E4, on the other hand, and the frames there are 15.4 mm apart across the inner faces, 16.10 over the frames. It is therefore clear that AG's P4 spacers for the J15 are over 1.5 mm narrower than those for his E4.

I built the J15 quite a number of years ago and it is currently in the workshop awaiting reconstruction of the chassis with which I have never been all that happy. I'll fit some new spacers when i finally get round to it.

DT

[Clive Impey]

You raised the point about he number of handrail knobs on Y14 smokeboxes. On the right hand side the two closely spaced knobs have the blower vale crank in between them which is operated from the cab by a rod within the handrail. On the left hand side, with just a plain handrail, there is only one knob. What to do? You seem to have soldered the rail to only 2 or 3 knobs so removing it would not be a great problem and you could then remove the 2 from the LHS and fit a single knob. You could also leave things as they are, its suprising what people never notice.

Clivelincs.

[barhamd]

I just measured between the frame on my old J15 (built C 1990) and it is just a whisker over 14mm. I used a small portescap up in the boiler with an extra gear on the rear axle in a manner suggested by Allan Sibley.

It has been rewheeled since 1990 as the wheels got a bit loose on the axles over the years. Still runs nicely though.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... f-the-j15/

David

[Paul Willis]

Chris Gibbon is very aware that his standard 1/8" bore blocks produce lateral space problems for some of his gearboxes, and is introducing a slimmer version of the 1/8" block, which he calls the 'spacesaver'. I discussed it with him at Scaleforum, but I can't remember what the new bearing length will be. I'll do a new drawing soon.

Thanks Russ. The news is very welcome. I think that the standard ones are a superb product, and anything that helps the adoption of them to ease the fitting of CSBs will be a Good Thing in my book.

I need to speak to Chris in the New Year about gearboxes, so will try to remember to ask about these as well.

Flymo

[Paul Willis]

I've just checked the spacers on my Perseverance 57xx pannier and the frames are 15mm apart inside and 16mm outside.

Could there be a simple solution here Paul or was this another time for this comparative amateur to shew his ignorance?

Hi Howard,

I'm a simple soul, so a simple solution will always be best for me

Unsoldering the existing spacers and putting in new, wider ones is a possibility. I have one of Eileen's Chassis2 jigs, and it is still set up for the Y14 chassis spacings as I haven't used it for anything else yet. So it should be comparatively simple to re-jig the chassis with the frames a further distance apart.

However I am going to try the option of using the different SlimLiner gearbox first.

The reason for this is that when I built the chassis originally, I used the highest temperature solder that I had (Carrs 224) to do the basic structure. the hornblocks, CSB fixings and then details have been added on using lower temperatures (179, and then down to 145 for the last parts of detailing) on top.

So whilst I could de-solder the spacers, there is a risk (no matter how careful I try to be) that in getting enough heat into them, and also in re-soldering new spacers in afterwards, that the other components move, or just drop off...

That would bring me back to re-assembling the whole thing again, and I don't want to go there if I can avoid it. Yes, I could do things with heatsinks and clamps, but even that is less simple than just trying a different gearbox. Nothing would be wasted, as I'll just put the too-wide one into the spares box for use on a future project.

Thanks for the thought though - I appreciate it.

Flymo

[Paul Willis]

Flymo,
There's Interesting... I suspect the the spacers are the problem. I've just checked a 4-6-2T comet chassis (under construction) the measurement between the frames is 15.56 mm.
Although it is closing the stable door... I built my roadrunner gearbox before soldering up the frames, that way I was able to position the frames to allow the gearbox and motor and driving wheels to be dropped out of the underside of the chassis as an assembly; thus avoiding disturbance to the quartering. Just a thocht.
Happy New Year

Hi Les,

Yes, you and others seem to have hit the nail on the head :-/

I'm not saying that the extra 2 mm or so would have solved this particular set of circumstances, but it is definitely something to bear in mind in the future. As I already mentioned, I was so chuffed at how well my first CSB chassis went together when I built it at Missenden that I overlooked the aspect of powering it. I'll try not to do that again!

I had planned for the gearbox/motor to be able to be dropped out as a single unit, with the relevant axle as well, and that struck me as a key advantage of the CSB method of construction - pull out the springing wires, and all of the axles drop out of the bottom of the chassis. Assuming that there isn't brake rodding and similar in the way, but the way that Chris Gibbons has designed that for the Pug chassis has given me some good ideas for use on other models.

Cheers
Flymo

[LesGros]

Hi Flymo,
De-soldering those spacers would make a suitable subject for a U-tube cartoon, with all the detail bits pinging of in all directions...
All is not lost though, I have used a mashima 1624 with Comet supplied GB1 2-stage 50:1; it is only 9 mm wide x 31.5mm high x 15.5 front to back (or back to front if you prefer ) so the motor sits above the frames. Hopefully, the space available between the spacers will be sufficient. If you have a fax machine, I can send you the data sheet if you wish.

regards

[grovenor-2685]

If you have a fax machine, I can send you the data sheet if you wish.

Both drawing and instruction sheets on line at Comet, this is the drawing
http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/modules/viewcatpic.php/5/721
For other details and downloads go to the Comet site and then products\motors and gearboxes
Regards
Keith

[Will L]

....

I had planned for the gearbox/motor to be able to be dropped out as a single unit, with the relevant axle as well, and that struck me as a key advantage of the CSB method of construction - pull out the springing wires, and all of the axles drop out of the bottom of the chassis. Flymo

That's what I planned but it turns out its difficult/impossible to get even a small motor through the frames with the hornblocks, handrail knobs/fulcrum points, and frame spacers in the way! Once the motor is off I have always been able to get the gearbox through OK but clearances still need watching!

Will

[Andy W]

This is probably heresy, but if the driven axle was running in top hats and the other drivers were sprung I presume the springing would still work? Maybe not as smoothly? This would at least give less obstructions for the gearbox etc.

[Will L]

This is probably heresy, but if the driven axle was running in top hats and the other drivers were sprung I presume the springing would still work? Maybe not as smoothly? This would at least give less obstructions for the gearbox etc.

No that's heresy.

Because one fixed axle would mean you lose most of the ride improvements we are doing this for

Not only that, the fixed axle would produce all sort of complications in getting the springing on the other axles right and
you would lose the advantage of being able top drop the axles out that we have just been discussing.

Don't lose perspective on this, it isn't a show stopper, the simplest answer is a thinner gaerbox, which Highlevel do. Mostly it just a lesson on checking you clearances before build the chassis, whether its a kit build or a do it yourself job.

Will

Paul, you have checked that you have got 6.7mm between the hornblocks?

[Paul Willis]

I'll have to remember this when I get round to putting my assorted Gibson GER loco's together for my proper railway, which will be GER/LNER. All this GCR stuff is just to suit the available layout, and not my preferred period period to boot.

Consider me intrigued

What are the plans for the "proper" railway?

Flymo

[Paul Willis]

You raised the point about he number of handrail knobs on Y14 smokeboxes. On the right hand side the two closely spaced knobs have the blower vale crank in between them which is operated from the cab by a rod within the handrail. On the left hand side, with just a plain handrail, there is only one knob. What to do? You seem to have soldered the rail to only 2 or 3 knobs so removing it would not be a great problem and you could then remove the 2 from the LHS and fit a single knob. You could also leave things as they are, its surprising what people never notice.

Hi Clive,

Thanks for the explanation of the handrail knobs. As the two photos that I was working from were of different locomotives, although sequential in build order, then I assumed that it was down to the idiosyncrasies of what was put together in the workshop on that day. Owning a number of Italian motorcycles, I'm very used to the idea that your machine's particular specification could depend entirely on what component Luigi had to hand on that particular Friday!

I'll have a think about adjusting it. My preferred way would be to drill a new hole for the single knob on the LHS, then dremel one of the knobs off. The remaining one can be slid along and fixed in the correct place, and the two holes back-filled with solder.

Or I could just leave it

Cheers
Flymo

[Paul Willis]

Don't lose perspective on this, it isn't a show stopper, the simplest answer is a thinner gaerbox, which Highlevel do. Mostly it just a lesson on checking you clearances before build the chassis, whether its a kit build or a do it yourself job.

Paul, you have checked that you have got 6.7mm between the hornblocks?

I'd echo Will's comments on this - nothing is a disaster, and I've been a bit of a muppet for not thinking things through on the way.

On the other hand, I'm going to smile and learn from it, as it's only the second (the first was the High level Pug chassis, and the instructions in that are most comprehensive) locomotive kit that I've tried building in nigh on twenty years, so there's a lot that I've either forgotten or never learned.

Yes, I did check the clearance and it should be sufficient for the SlimLiner to fit between the axleboxes. Also, Chris Gibbins pointed me in the direction of a very slim motor, so it should also drop out from between the frames, avoiding all the springing wires and suchlike.

I'll keep you all informed of the victories and defeats on the way through the New Year

Flymo

[Will L]

. Consider me intrigued
What are the plans for the "proper" railway?

I can't say there are real plans, as I can't actually see myself going it alone on a layout, but there are fantasies. Despite being born within smelling distance of Bletchley shed (LNWR/LMS), this all comes down to a GER cross country branch lines in one form or another. My wife was born in Sudbury. At the time we were courting, Stephen Poole started going on about little blue locos under a big blue sky and I fell in love with the railway as well.

I've considered Wells-Next-The-Sea which has a fascinating layout, but possesses both a layout logistical problem, as a terminus with lines in from three different directions (the third is the harbour branch), and an operational problem. For much of its history it didn't have a run round loop usable by passenger stock. Coaching stock was shunted by gravity.

Then there is Long Melford, or rather, the concept of Long Melford as a junction between two long distance single track cross country lines. Although the prototype is, as you might expect from the name, far too long, the actual junction intertwined with two lay by sidings is a gem. I would want to run a beefed up passenger service with some trains joining and dividing, some terminating and some just making connections. As a concept I have a worked through version in 00 which came out quite big, even with 3ft minimum curves. It would be bigger in P4.

Then there is Outwell Basin. Again the track is a gem and suits a corner site. This is a much more likely one man project, but as a tramway, very limited in terms of operation and stock, locos particularly. That said I have a loco and 4 coaches built and more in the kits awaiting attention pile. To do the job properly will need a lot of buildings, including a large church. There is an 00 version on the exhibition circuit at the moment. This captures the track work quite well but needs more of the buildings, particularly the Church.

I've also wondered about Sudbury, as an interesting prototype again made to measure for a corner site and with a track work oddity; and Chapel and Wakes Colne as another junction where train services did divided/join etc. The track work at Chapel isn't very exciting but could be got into a relatively short space, assuming you ignore the best bit which is the adjacent huge viaduct. I've never seen a model of this but I have a feeling that, as a preservation site, it must have been done before.

Well you did ask.

Will