Building an Ace Kits "K"

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Wot! No decoders in preservation ;). They'll have to go back to using steam :p

If it's for sound then I'd look at 2 cylinder sound profiles for similar size and vintage engines.
Very helpful replies from all, and I'm really tempted by the Zimo (as are the rest of the club members). However, dear David, wot I was looking for (or for wot I woz looking) is a suitable loco on which to base the profile. As you know I'm not as erudite as you, and I don't know of any Billinton locos to which we could refer. But in truth you are my best bet:bowdown:.

D'you reckon there is a loco profile out there which has the right puff (not that anyone would actually know) and whistle (not that anyone would know).

Otherwise, John,it's back to the generic profile, but Brighton was so different.

B
 

Yorkshire Dave

Western Thunderer
The only 'large' active LBSC loco active is the E4 2473 on the Bluebell. All others are Terriers which do have a different sound. This is evident from You Tube, enginemen's descriptions in journals of the day and D L Bradley's LBSC books.

As for the Southern - the closest active locomotive in size would probably be the S15.

Now..... taking the famous 'Elementary my dear Watson' approach....

Lt Col Billington followed Marsh as the locomotive engineer and Marsh, being of GN, descent introduced large boilers to the LBSC. Under Billington's control it would be unlikely he would have radically changed the large boiler. More than likely he may have tinkered with the boiler design for the J, K and L classes (as well as introducing the Belpaire firebox to the LBSC). Taking this logic further, perhaps a LNER sound profile for a Gresley 2-6-0 may be closer than a 'standard' Southern sound profile.

However.... it still leaves the whistle. I have noticed during my reading of various publications whistles were generally bought 'off the shelf'. Therefore if you know the type of whistle fitted, perhaps the relevant sound profile could be imported onto the decoder. Not forgetting the Westinghouse pump if they were still retained. And of course speaker location and size can make a difference to the sound.

But.... apart from those on the ESU downloads pages, sound profiles produced by UK decoder suppliers for UK locomotives are 'locked' and as yet I haven't found a way of unlocking them so I can import different sounds and alter individual volumes to tailor the decoder to my requirements. This is one reason why I developed my own sound profile for my LBSC E4 using the ESU open source German sounds from locomotives of similar vintage.

And finally..... As you alluded to earlier - who can remember what a particular a locomotive actually sounded like as it would have been dependent upon the individual's hearing, how the loco was being driven, background noises, wind direction, atmospheric conditions, buildings, countryside, etc, etc.
 

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Seriously helpful, Dave. I wonder whether the way forward with the K is to use an E4 and settle for that. I saw a few Ks, but there's no way I can remember how they sounded. The problem with this approach is that I'm not sure I'll find the profile for an E4 anyway, but I've not looked yet.

The alternative is a generic two cylinder loco. As long as it doesn't have a Stanier hooter or an A4 chime whistle (which wouldn't qualify anyway on the grounds of the number of cylinders!) it might be worth listening to. I'm tempted by a "U" or "N".

Thank you.

Brian
 

Yorkshire Dave

Western Thunderer
YouChoos....

YouChoos

....offer an E4 Zimo sound decoder and after hearing the sample I'm very tempted to convert my ESU v3.5 E4 sound profile to ESU v4. Furthermore it would give me a bit more experience with the V4 programmer.

I believe a copy of my E4 sound profile was used as a starting point for Roger's SECR E1. Steph will be able to confirm.
 

Steph Dale

Western Thunderer
I believe a copy of my E4 sound profile was used as a starting point for Roger's SECR E1. Steph will be able to confirm.

It was, but I think it may have only been the mapping, rather than the samples. I can check if needs be; they're both on an old (although serviceable) computer.

Steph
 

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Well, it's only (nearly) three months since my last post on this subject, but it feels like longer.:) I'll get a bit more done before the builders depart once again, and I'm left with the decorating. Then there'll be the garden.........

During this imposed thinking time it came to me that I should really not be making value judgments. After all, I'm one of the Finney7 team and so should declare an interest. All comments will therefore be objective - I'll let others be subjective.

I also owe William an apology. The frame extensions are right, and the location of the smokebox saddle looks correct too, judging by the works GA, but it's rather a jumble around the front of the loco and a bit difficult to decipher. In fact it's the line drawing which comes with the kit which is, I believe incorrect, and photos tend to suggest that this is the case, so I'm going with the original frame extensions.

During my period of enforced absence from the workshop Steph kindly took pity on me and provided me with a "no solder" kit which I could assemble from the comfort of my easy chair.

IMG_20180121_171828976.jpg

:))

I rather suspect that the designer has never seen a steam engine in their life!

More very soon, when I've had the opportunity to edit the photos.

Brian
 

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Firstly, a minor problem of my own making.

I've been using Adrian's panel beating technique to good effect, as you'll see later. However, in the early stages I was a bit too brutal and have created these dinks and dents in the firebox. I'll not lose sleep over this, though, as I reckon a bit of judicious filling will put the issue right. Regrettably the inside of the sharp curves are half etched, and needed tiny mallet taps, whereas the full thickness metal is quite robust.

IMG_20180121_140739448_HDR (1).jpg
But, suddenly, things are starting to come together!!

I thought about how to approach creating the front to the firebox long and hard, and decided (probably against better judgement - certainly against the judgement of people who know better than me) to "let in" a piece of metal using high temp (243 degree) solder rather than cut the front off and make up a front of several thicknesses of metal which could then be shaped. Here's what my result looks like:

IMG_20180116_140354840_HDR - Copy.jpg

I'm the first to admit that this does not look pretty, but all the bends, nooks and crannies will be filled with solder and filed to shape. I reckon that, at the end of the day, it'll be difficult to tell the difference, and if it doesn't work I'll simple have to strip the front off and go back to the multi layered approach.

Next was the smokebox saddle. Having soldered them in place it then became apparent that the front and back were different heights, so the back one came off and was filed down to match the front one. I fitted the frame extensions and then needed to fit the sharply curved section above. This is shown on the instructions as "part 13". Here's a photo showing that it'd never fit, so I used some sheet brass and curved it over an appropriate sized roller before cutting to size and filing to fit. It was a quite complex process and took a whole afternoon, but got there in the end.

IMG_20180121_140403934_BURST000_COVER_TOP (1).jpg
IMG_20180121_140040815_HDR (1).jpg

I spent an age looking for what the instructions describe as the drawbar. I then went through all the part numbers on the etches, and the rear loco buffer plank (or I think that's what it's called) was identified by the part number. I've not found an actual drawbar yet - in fact there is no fixing on the tender for a drawbar and I suspect there's none on the loco either, although I wonder whether the body/chassis screw fixing is intended to serve the purpose. However, the rear buffer plank is now fitted. There is, of course, the very real possibility that this actually is the drawbar, in which case further apologies will be in order.

IMG_20180121_140156607 (1).jpg

Next the cab floor. It makes up OK

IMG_20180121_140451002 - Copy.jpg

But doesn't fit front to back. Side to side looks OK. The cab front/smokebox assembly is not fixed, just dry fitted to give some sense of how much will need trimming.

IMG_20180121_140602243_BURST000_COVER_TOP - Copy.jpg IMG_20180121_140640424 - Copy.jpg

Neither is there anything to support the floor where it meets the cab front, so I fitted a couple of pieces of brass angle which will hold the floor at the correct height when I come to solder it in place. Fitting the cab floor is actually in the instructions to be done now, but if so the cab front will be compromised, as will, I suspect, the sides. I'll create the sub assemblies and work from there! This shot also shows, quite nicely, the plate let in to the cab front so that the firebox can be screwed in place. I'm sufficiently insecure about the final fit of all these parts to want to retain the option of removing parts to fettle them individually should that be necessary.

IMG_20180121_145824117 - Copy.jpg

Suddenly we're making progress, because it's cab time! On a "K" the cab is quite a simple affair and here are the parts:

IMG_20180121_152926759 (1).jpg

The cab roof as provided is for both the LBSCR and SR cabs. For my SR/BR version it has to be trimmed to shape. Note that this roof does not overhang the cab sides but forms what is essentially a continuous curve where it joins them.

IMG_20180121_153800473_BURST000_COVER (1).jpg

Cab sides were curved to match the profile of the cab front - this is also modified as the LBSCR version had sharp corners whereas the SR version has the aforesaid continuous curve profile. These were started in the rolling bars, then laid over a bar of approximate diameter and "persuaded" in to shape using the Adrian method (ie, a large plastic faced mallet - although I think Adrian actually recommends a hide mallet). This took a while, but the sharp and complex curve has been created more convincingly, more smoothly and with far less frustration than I've ever managed previously.

The roof was a simple curve created in the rolling bars.

IMG_20180121_164139914 - Copy.jpg

The instructions recommend fitting the cab beading before proceeding, but I've decided to do all the detailing when the basic assemblies are complete, so that will wait until later. The cab sides were now spot soldered to the cab front and checked for fit. All looked good so the final act was to trim the roof width to fit.

IMG_20180121_170155438 - Copy.jpg

Prototype photos suggest that, although the side/roof of the cab looks to be a continuous curve, there is a witness mark where the sides meet the roof. Once the roof is soldered in place I'll file it back to match the side profile which should, I hope, leave the merest indication of the join.

IMG_20180121_171329319 - Copy.jpg IMG_20180121_171349220 - Copy.jpg


Suddenly - very suddenly - I've realised that I'm within an ace of having all the sub assemblies complete. I wonder whether, when they are all joined together, it'll look like a "K"?

Brian
 

Yorkshire Dave

Western Thunderer
Cab sides were curved to match the profile of the cab front - this is also modified as the LBSCR version had sharp corners whereas the SR version has the aforesaid continuous curve profile.

The original LBSC cabs were generous to suit their loading gauge. The SR cut them (and the boiler fittings) down to their composite loading gauge to give the locos a greater route availability.

The LBSC was one of the few companies which had a larger loading gauge than the British norm. Almost the Berne loading gauge as adopted by the GC on their main line.
 

simond

Western Thunderer
Brian

Given the “approximate” fit of the cab floor, might it be convenient to keep it as a separate part, to be assembled with crew, and painted as a subassembly prior to insertion?

Best
Simon
 

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Well, I'd not thought of that, Simon. It'll have to fit around the back head but with appropriate bodging it might be made to happen..... in fact I could possibly mount the back head on the floor so that it slides in. Hmmmmmm......

B
 

simond

Western Thunderer
Brian,

Do have a look at my various builds - it’s much easier to paint the crew & cab bits & pieces if they are not in the way of one another! I have done it both ways, floor & crew, or floor, backhead & crew.

Also, if you have whitemetal crew, you can solder them to the floor which tends to be more robust than glue.

Best
Simon
 

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
I've been licking my wounds from the ribald comments received from my "so called partners" in F7.:) However, I will not compromise my original intentions of using as many parts as possible from the provided materials. (Apart from which I've invested so much time in that b****y firebox I'm determined to use it.):D They were very rude about that.

So, I fitted the cab and screwed it to the firebox. So far so good. And I added the smokebox front. Also OK.IMG_20180123_154708834 (1).jpg

Since this photo I've added the rainstrips to the roof, filled the half etched lines which are supposed to represent the position of the rainstrips and soldered the boiler/smokebox to the firebox after reducing the height of the boiler mounting. Photos and a further description of progress will follow...... (Decorating the new bathroom allowing):'(

Brian
 

simond

Western Thunderer
Stand your ground, Brian!

What are you going to do with the front top corners of the firebox? Solder & low-melt or isopon?

Best
Simon
 

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Hi Simon.

I'm going down the low melt route. I have no objection to Isopon/Chemical Metal, in fact used it very successfully on the corners of the tender, but I believe that low melt will give a more controllable result, and if it all starts looking silly(!) can easily be patched. I might just have to use Isopon on the top corner of the firebox where I've hammered in some dents, but I may yet use low melt on there too and attach any local fittings with two part epoxy.

Brian
 

SimonT

Western Thunderer
Brian,
use 145 or 180 for the leading. 70 goes flat and is horrible to build with. Biggest iron at max chat, good sized blob of solder on the tip, good amount of flux and then touch the metal with the blob only. It soon builds up. Used to do it to bodywork when car restoration was my main hobby. You can use lolly sticks to round soft solder, it saves on clogging up old files.

Simon
PS We weren't that rude, but we might be next time;).
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
You can use lolly sticks to round soft solder, it saves on clogging up old files.
I use 'Lions tongue' a heavy grade abrasive paper, the open mesh allows it to unclog itself rather effectively.

Though being double sided it can also be very effective at taking your finger prints off, not good if your works clock in system requires index finger recognition :eek: Don't worry though, they grow back in about 4 days :thumbs: But it is a pain having to go each day to the police station to manually clock in :rolleyes:

In short, don't use your finger as the backing piece, wear gloves or use a lolly stick or something.
 
Last edited:

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
Thank you Simon and Mick.

Having determined that I'm not using the preferred F7 route of scrapping everything and starting from scratch I much appreciate the time you are taking to educate this madman. (Readers with long memories will remember the initial posting from Dikitriki about this build when he warned about the men in white coats).

I'll look for some "Lions tongue", Mick. I'll also use the higher temp solders, Simon. I may also just have a little go with the 100 degree solder as an experiment - it seems to have the characteristics of a higher melting point solder, although there are considerable benefits in using a high melt solder as I'll then be able to use lower temp to attach the bits and pieces. More in my next, although the rugby might get in the way this afternoon.

B
 
Top