JimG

Western Thunderer
I think your right, I've arrived from the other side and deduced that for slots in half etch areas then the slot needs to be reduced by about 15-20% of the 'original' material thickness.

Mick,

I was also thinking that the formation of the cusp might not be the nice regular shape shown in the diagrams if a larger area of the underside is being half etched and the compensating formula normally given might not apply as well as it could. But at least your problem is erring on the correct side - i.e. being on the large side. An undersize slot can be an absolute PITA.

Jim.
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
I think they look better than lots of etchings in commercial kits so don't beat yourself up too much. The errors could be down to the stop etch process, ie when the etcher stops the process. I've seen a lot of variation in identical commercial kits.. Well done they look super.
Nick,

Your probably right, I think they let this one go just a touch longer than normal, as everything seems to be over etched by a few thou, that's my biggest concern, slimming everything down and then they either under etch or do it correctly and the slots are too small.

I'll let y'all look over it at Telford and see what you think.
 

Pugsley

Western Thunderer
Your probably right, I think they let this one go just a touch longer than normal, as everything seems to be over etched by a few thou, that's my biggest concern, slimming everything down and then they either under etch or do it correctly and the slots are too small.
That's most likely - I used the same calculation (IIRC) when I drew the slots on my Cargowaggons and the slots have a fair bit of slop in them. Like you, I'm reluctant to shrink them for the next iteration in case they come out under done and too narrow!

What you've accomplished so far looks great :thumbs:
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
So, cracking on, and the list of corrections grows, actually not really corrections, more like preferable amendments as OOTB it goes together pretty well, I might still do a MkII, only problem is, what do I do with this set of Fine Scale of frames, I have no need for two, possibly Ebay or down the scrappy with the box of etch waste.

If they were A3 or A4 frames then a second run would be a no brainer as I'd like several of them over time, same for Thompson's and Peppercorn Pacifics and V2 etc.

Still, the etch sheet gets smaller
IMG_8041.JPG

And the chassis gets bigger
IMG_8043.JPG

Front end showing middle cylinder basics and buffer beam
IMG_8044.JPG
Still have to add the bogie stay in here and the combination lever stay, at the moment everything this end is just pushed into place and not fixed, I started at the rear end when with hindsight I should of started here as the buffer beam and middle cylinder ensure that the frames are perfectly aligned to each other, ho hum.

The rear end
IMG_8049.JPG

Holy smokes Batman! It all fits :eek: Not without some juggling I hasten to add, the downside of starting at this end first I suppose.

On the whole the rear end went together reasonably well, though I am at home to Captain cock up and his merry band of holligans, the outer frame extensions with the multi bends in I had the half etch grooves etched the wrong side of the main frame, not the overlay. I actually designed it like this and clearly didn't think it through...I'll do a picture later...and bending it was fraught and not easy on the first side. Having learnt my lesson the second side (modified) went easier.

The firebox front support stay has also been revised on the art work, whilst this works it can be made better. I also half etched recesses for some of the other stays, ensures they are in the right place but the over etching means that the full dept piece that goes in there has a small gap around it, MkII will have all of these removed and it'll be down to the builder to make sure they are in the right place, sometimes being helpful smacks you in the face :rolleyes:

The half etch cross is for the boiler rear support stay and that will go in tomorrow along with probably all the others, which will leave the external parts like cylinders and motion brackets for next week :thumbs:

After all that it was time to relax and surf Flickr with a bottle or two of Englands finest
IMG_8042.JPG
 
Last edited:

JimG

Western Thunderer
So, cracking on, and the list of corrections grows, actually not really corrections, more like preferable amendments as OOTB it goes together pretty well, I might still do a MkII, only problem is, what do I do with this set of Fine Scale of frames, I have no need for two, possibly Ebay or down the scrappy with the box of etch waste.

Mick,

I think I would just do a new, smaller sheet with the parts you want re-done to keep your additional etching costs down. It's such a situation that has put a damper on me attempting more complex etches for a one-off project - i.e. the repeat costs of correcting my almost inevitable cock-ups. :) But it looks as though your first etch has a very high success rate, so maybe getting the piercing saw and a bit of nickel silver sheet out would be the quickest and least expensive way out. :)

Jim.
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
Mick,

I think I would just do a new, smaller sheet with the parts you want re-done to keep your additional etching costs down. It's such a situation that has put a damper on me attempting more complex etches for a one-off project - i.e. the repeat costs of correcting my almost inevitable cock-ups. :) But it looks as though your first etch has a very high success rate, so maybe getting the piercing saw and a bit of nickel silver sheet out would be the quickest and least expensive way out. :)

Jim.
Jim,

You may be right, the target audience are not adverse to doing such things normally, so long as I make detailed notes and explanations they should have no issues, it just depends if it goes to a wider audience. The only down side with bits on a new sheet, which is perfectly possible as there is the cab etch to do as yet, is that some or the errors (quite small actually) are on the main frames and if this were to go to a wider audience then they really would be better corrected.

Overall the main corrections are the slot widths in half etch material and some design changes, like the recessed pockets for the ends of some of the stays, that'll be more obvious later today hopefully. Plus some ideas I had about making up some of the more complex stays, opting to have them as fold up assemblies rather than a dozen parts that need soldering together. The other changes would be to things like half etched rivets, most need another 0.05 mm added to them as most look like they have been over etched, as does the whole sheet actually, again were going back to being in the hands of the etchers for quality control :cool:

Regarding cost, as noted above, if it were for the A3 or Thompson Pacifics then I'd go for another etch, but for a solo W1 which is mostly hidden then it's not as cut and dried, still I'll push on and see how this goes, hopefully what I have here will suffice with a little tweak here and there by end users.

Mick
 

Dikitriki

Flying Squad
Hi Mick,

You need to remind yourself:

1) It is considerably better, more detailed and more accurate than the DJH alternative.

2) The prospective builders will have cut their teeth on Jim Harris kits, and any minor shortcomings - and they do appear to be very minor - are as nothing compared to the major restructuring required for the Jim Harris etches.

3) As a first test etch, it is coming along tremendously well.

Cheers,

Richard
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
Richard,

I accept all that, but the standards we discussed in the early days, has not been met, not for me anyway, I want more, better & neater :cool:

Moving on, a quick photo update to show that some parts fit really well, this stay I am more than pleased with.

This is the main rear structural stay for the locomotive and like all of Gresleys Pacifics is of the same basic cruciform shape though the shape and holes differ with each class, and in the case of the A3 within the class. On the W1 the stay O-12818D of which no drawing is listed at NRM so it's a best guess on the holes in the middle from what little information is available on the frame GA I'm afraid. General views are that the rebuilt W1 is the same as the A4 or close, in this area it most certainly isn't, there are some common parts but a fair few are loco specific and drawings are either non existent or not available.

The component parts
IMG_8054.JPG

Unlike other stays this one couldn't be folded up so had to be made of individual parts, on the left the vertical sheet and its two flanges, on the right the horizontal sheet and its two flanges, the slot in the vertical sheet accepts the horizontal piece, which the sharp eyed will have noticed is not big enough to let the flange through, thus the last flange has to be added once the part is assembled. Not too difficult, even for me and my pudding fingers ;)

IMG_8058.JPG

Stupid camera and short a focal range, can't be bothered to set a tripod up and go to manual mode :cool: but y'all get the idea.

In place from below
IMG_8061.JPG

From above
IMG_8062.JPG
In the above you can just see the shadows on the vertical and horizontal sheets caused by the over width slot in the half etch cruciform, you could flood fill this with solder from the rear through the frame slots hoping the solder will wick along, but cleaning it up to get a crisp joint will be next to impossible.

IMG_8063.JPG

IMG_8064.JPG

The horizontal piece needs moving forward a touch as the flanges do not line up with the half etch part on the frames, but that's easy to do, there's enough play in the slots to do this, just must of moved when I took the photo :rolleyes:

Above this goes the rear boiler mount stay (A-193) again no exact specifics for the W1 as this stay seems to vary between locos, that'll be later today as well as the rear brake cylinder stay which drops into the recess up near the top of the frames by the rear splasher supports. At the moment all of these stays are loosely fitted, only the firebox front support to the left (A-23) is fully fixed, plus all those to the rear. This stay (A-23) is pretty much common for all of the Gresley Pacifics as well which is why I'll rework that art work for future projects.

Enjoy.
 
Last edited:

Dikitriki

Flying Squad
Richard,

I accept all that, but the standards we discussed in the early days, has not been met, not for me anyway, I want more, better & neater :cool:

Hi Mick,

That's fine, and I am the last person to accept a lesser standard. I just didn't think you needed to beat yourself up about it:)

Cheers,

Richard
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
Y'all too kind LOL.

Last bit for today and this is where my ineptitude starts to show, I'm really not very good with small pieces :mad:

First up the brake cylinder stay, the W1 has two massive 27" vac cylinders, no idea if anyone makes one so it'll be a turning exercise on the lathe at some point. Anyway, the stay starts out like this.
IMG_8130.JPG

There are two of these, which is handy as the mistake I made on the first one I'll avoid on the second...and promptly make new ones no doubt.

Simple fold up construction, the 'daggers or blades' drop through the stay whose ends are folded up, after pressing out the rivets :rolleyes:, the daggers then form the fillet for the hinge bracket underneath. The brackets were a conundrum as I planned that they be folded to help construction, the choices were, full etch with pressed rivets and separate bearing boss soldered on, or half etch with embossed rivets and bearing boss, I chose the latter but it does mean you need to score the half etch at the hinge to get a nice clean fold.

Next up was the boiler support stay (A-193) again a bit of guesswork here but it starts out like this
IMG_8134.JPG

Again the half etch ends fold up after scoring the edge between full and half thickness, it's easy to make but heres the rub, your stuck with a given width of stay and if anything is slightly out elsewhere, like filing too much cusp off the rear frame cruciform stay edges (o.15 mm), then this bit will be too big and force the frames apart, which means the brake stay won't sit in it's recess correctly. All very clever in theory, in practice it needs someone better than me to make it all work, so, future projects will have to revert to another method to make sure they are all the same width.

Both folded and soldered.
IMG_8139.JPG
You can just see that the base of the hinge brackets extends past the fillet, correctly, but I really need to add a filler piece here on the artwork so your not left with a 'fork tine' type effect for the base.

In the frames, a bit hard to show this as it's all very shiny and condensed so little contrast here to help the eye see what's what.

Front above view.
IMG_8144.JPG

Rear below view
IMG_8147.JPG

In reality I think the rear brake cylinder hanger will have to be sacrificed to get the motor gear box in, even if kept I don't think there will be room for the massive 27" vac cylinder in there, tender drive anyone :cool: All joking aside it might be possible to fit the motor in the tender and have a thin drive shaft under the cab floor onto the rear axle with a small gearbox therein.

Next, well there's one more brake cylinder stay to fabricate and the inside slidebar stay plus two other simple folded stays, after that the middle cylinder to finish off, bogie stay and combination stay, another little fabricated complex beastie to finish up way up front.

I may go back to the boiler support stay and pop one side off, trim it by the required 0.15mm and pop the side back on, it should be a drop in fit and sit on top of the cruciform stay, not wedge in as it does right now. Just depends how much it niggles me...right now...quite a lot :cool:
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
Andy,

The W1 is 9.4 mm deep, joint ring 2 mm from the base and pivot 4.6 mm from the base. So if you chucked it up in the lathe and took just under 2 mm off the base it'd be pretty close ;) Certainly easier than making ones own:cool:

All the best

Mick
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
Well, the errant boiler stay had to go for the chop, flipped one end off, trimmed, refitted end and test fitted, perfect :thumbs:

Faffed with another simple spacer stay up front, really no idea what it achieves on the real loco, probably some bod found it lying around on the floor at Doncaster and thought they'd better fit it, even if it wasn't needed?

With frames fairly rigid I test fitted the bearings and axles, to make sure, by eye, they were square with the frame and then one thing led to another ;)

Out with the A1 tender and a piece of test track, the foot plates line up almost perfectly height wise.
IMG_8152.JPG

IMG_8153.JPG

IMG_8157.JPG

Big bugga isn't she, the front bogie is from the A3 kit and I'd been using it as a place holder as I'll be making a whole new one for that engine in due course, as such it's a 6'-3" wheelbase and only three inches too short it shows a mile off.

A quick look between the frames at the rear end shows loads of space for the trailing wheels and a rather left field idea formed about the rear Cartazzi set up, the inner of the two axles. Rather than faff around with radial slides, I think it'll work perfectly fine as a simple lateral sliding axle between the guides, others may wish to fabricate the real deal but being as the axle is pretty close to the rear driver then a simple sliding axle should work fine. Actually, I'm not sure what the W1 Cartazzi axle box angles are, the rest of Gresleys locos are 7°... I think, being closer to the rear axle then the W1 should, logically, be less.

I'll pop some S7 axles in for the Sudbury meet this month and run it through Love Lane and see how much clearance I have at the back end there, I'll have to spacer out the main axles as they'll be miles away from the wheels, but that's a compromise I'll have to live with....unless I just make up a small etch sheet with S7 stays to replace the current ones.

Still being fidgety, I decided just for grins to pop a Hachette body on :cool:
IMG_8158.JPG

IMG_8160.JPG

IMG_8161.JPG

Ok, now I know what all the burnt fingers, niggles in etching and swearing were for, an almost prefect fitting body, more accidental than planning if i'm honest as it's been designed around the DJH casting. It is still only an A4 body which requires a lot of hacking into a W1, but none the less, it does look rather dashing.

Looking underneath I can see that I simply need to trim the buffer beam width to allow it to go up into the casting at the front about 5 mm
IMG_8162.JPG

Looking at the side view a few pictures above, we can see the opening in the casing for the lubricators on the firemans side, this needs to be centred between the intermediate and rear driver, trimming the buffer beam will allow the body casting to slide back and fit perfectly. There's still a lot of space between the frames but that will fill up quickly with gubbins and stuff I'm sure.

IMG_8163.JPG

The rear end of the casting will go and I will make all new casing footplates and valances just like the A4 I already have in progress elsewhere.

All in all, pretty pleased with how it's going and just the boost needed to finish it all off toot sweet :cool:
 
Last edited:

Steph Dale

Western Thunderer
Mick,

All very interesting stuff and I can see that your thoughts are mirroring some I'm working through at the moment.

Just one quick point, the Cartazzi angles will be tighter on a shorter wheelbase as the effective radius of the 'truck' will be shorter. I guess that in practice it won't have been much different to the Pacifics though...

Steph
 
Top