Another G3 brake van

[jamiepage]

Thank you.
Left the hub slightly overlength at the back when it was parted off. Reversed, held in the tailstock by the hub and backed into the three jaw. Jaws lined up with spokes. Held by the rim, tailstock removed and the final 1/4 dressed very carefully with a fine tool held at 45 deg. followed by emery. It remains the roughest 1/4 but also the least visible.
The dividing was done with a dividing head but just realised that to have been completely unnecessary because the scrap end was hex. section so would have indexed itself.
Have subsequently fitted the hand hold bit, and will now leave well alone, overscale or no.

 

[Mike W]

Jamie, I feel humbled. Makes my etched spiders look very poor.
That's what I like about this forum - inspirational.
Mike

 

[jamiepage]

Mike,
I can assure you I would have used one of your etches, had one been to hand at the time.
Jamie

 

[jamiepage]

With the exception of some strapping that go around the corners, the bodywork detailing is just about completed. Footboard brackets have been made and solebars drilled from them. This has all now allowed the main elements to be assembled.
Axleboxes have been milled out so work on the underframe can now get underway properly.

 

[jamiepage]

I thought Steve Cook's idea of a separate chassis was excellent so it has been appropriated (Thank's Steve). Four screws underneath will allow the whole caboodle to be released should it be necessary. It will certainly make the fitting of brakes easier because it can now be done away from the body- the complete ensemble can then be placed into position as the threaded end of the shaft from brake wheel is screwed into the linkage. In theory.

 

[Steve Cook]

Shes looking a picture Jamie
I've not yet decided on the glue or screw method for chassis fixing - I can assemble everything to the chassis whether its attached to the body or not, having them separate makes the initial fab work and the painting easier. Still, I need to make a choice fairly soon as the screw method requires some hiding with a veranda at each end.

Are you going to replicate the chassis framing under the veranda floor or is the gap small enough to render it all invisible anyway?

Looking forward to seeing all the brake components come together - great build

Steve

 

[jamiepage]

Hello Steve,
Yes I will put in a representation of the chassis framing. You're right to think that very little will be visible through the gap, but the verandah end is presently held in position only by butt joints on the solebar ends. It needs more support, and flooboards won't help much, so it might as well come from something representative underneath. Drawbar loads will be taken by the metal chassis crossmembers nonetheless. The metal crossmembers align with inside face of prototype crossmembers so the brake gear can be hung from them with correct relationship to wheels, and scale framing can spring from them towards the headstocks. Well, sounds good in theory.

 

[Steve Cook]

Sounds good across the internet too
Thanks for answering the question re framing - I'd forgotten about factoring in the drawbar loading...
Steve

 

[jamiepage]

I hope this is not starting to become too boring, but to be utterly selfish this forum is helping keep momentum..
Small progress- sandboxes/ seats are in, operating mechanisms put in place. Brake handwheel has been temporarily fitted to check clearances but will need bushing for final fit.

 

[Dikitriki]

Not boring in the slightest. Lovely to see.

Richard

 

[Steve Cook]

I hope this is not starting to become too boring...

Quite the reverse Jamie, it gets better with every post
Steve

 

[AndyB]

Quite the reverse Jamie, it gets better with every post
Steve

What's more - you're bringing to life, in 3D, something that has (probably) never been seen by anyone still alive, and of which there are no known photographs.
It also really shows the technology and facilities of the day - possibly one of the earliest examples of a sliding plug door, the 'remote operation' of the sanders via the loop handles, the lack of a stove......

And it's a great advertisement for Gauge 3!! Keep it up, Jamie.

Andy

 

[JimG]

Oh Lord!! Am I going to have to fit operating brake gear to my S scale one to keep up. The brake wheel really does look the part. Keep the momentum rolling.

Jim.

 

[Mike W]

Well, I've never seen a brake wheel at an angle like that usually have bevel gears on the inboard side of the partition. How strange and make such a model all the more interesting.

Mike

 

[Mike W]

Jamie,

I assume its a 10 ton van. My knowledge is restricted to LNWR (sorry!) and to get that weight they had a wooden box below solebar level. I can't see on your drawing any such box, so where did they put the weights?

Mike

 

[jamiepage]

Thanks, all.
Jim, if anybody can...
Mike, the brake wheel shaft seems to simply run down at an angle, threaded end rotates within a ferrule on an actuating lever which in turns rotates a cross shaft. A fixed bearing at the top within an angled casting (presumably) seems to be the only support, the very slight vertical displacement as the actuater describes a part arc presumably just lost in slop or flex.
The vans were indeed apparently rated at 10 tons, but I have no idea where weight was added unfortunately. There is no reference on the drawings at all, nor on another works drawing for some earlier but similar vans.
it's an interesting question- what volume would be needed I wonder? There isn't much in the way of obvious clear space underneath especially with the central transverse drawbar/ buffing springs.

 

[Dog Star]

The vans were indeed apparently rated at 10 tons, but I have no idea where weight was added unfortunately. There is no reference on the drawings at all, nor on another works drawing for some earlier but similar vans. It's an interesting question- what volume would be needed I wonder? There isn't much in the way of obvious clear space underneath especially with the central transverse drawbar/ buffing springs.

How about asking Mike Barnsley?

 

[AndyB]

The vans were indeed apparently rated at 10 tons, but I have no idea where weight was added unfortunately. There is no reference on the drawings at all, nor on another works drawing for some earlier but similar vans.
it's an interesting question- what volume would be needed I wonder? There isn't much in the way of obvious clear space underneath especially with the central transverse drawbar/ buffing springs.

Jamie,
I think the information is on the drawing you have. Take a look at the floor planks - they are laid longitudinally. Why do that when it is much easier and material-effective to just lay them transversely as is normally done in wagons. They are actually laid on top of transverse cross-members 2 1/2" (or is it 2 1/4") deep, and looking at the plan view they have something like 1' 5 1/2" spacing, and I think I can read the word 'plate' or similar. So I believe there were cast iron plates laid over the main chassis members - the early MR brake vans had something similar, but with a deeper casting in the centre.
In terms of quantity - the tare weight would have been around 7T I guess (similar sized open wagons were a bit over 6T).
So with apologies for mixing my units - CI has a density from around 7T/m3. Take the approx floor area as being 2.4m x 3.6m, at 63mm thick gives approx 0.5m3 of CI slabs -i.e. added weight of around 3.5T
Andy

Edited note - I see you have even modelled the floor support at the verandah end - ready to put the weights between!!

 

[jamiepage]

For those who may not know, Mike Barnsley is the HMRS Steward for the MSWJR and he knows everything there is to know about the Company. He is a thoroughly nice bloke and has been of immense help over many years. I was communicating with him in just the last few days about a different subject and I have now taken your advice and asked him about this also. Thank you.
Andy, thank you very much for that. You may very well have cracked it; at the least it is plausible and contemporary. I can't find a reference to 'plate' on the drawings (mind you, I missed the 1/2 in. bolt as well!) except a comment on the plan view concerning number and width of plates to make up the transverse spring. It's near the spring in question- was that it or is there another? There is also a reference to flitch plates, I have just noticed.
However, even without that, it is a very credible idea and makes perfect sense of the flooring arrangements. Why bother otherwise, as you say? It must have been driven by a need.
Failing other evidence before I have to put the planks on, I will aim to put in a couple of blocks either side of the floor support under the verandah to represent ci blocks.
It will lose the gap which would have been attractive on the model, but the ends of a couple of slabs either side of the transverse member will still be a feature. A slab will also strengthen the verandah end/ solebar joints on the model which would be no bad thing.
Thanks again.
Jamie

 

[AndyB]

. I can't find a reference to 'plate' on the drawings (mind you, I missed the 1/2 in. bolt as well!) except a comment on the plan view concerning number and width of plates to make up the transverse spring. It's near the spring in question- was that it or is there another? There is also a reference to flitch plates, I have just noticed.

Just above the centreline on the plan view, on the second floorboard up - there is a chain of dimensions running the length of the van. They show the 2" x 2 1/2"? cross members, and between each a dimension that looks something like 1' 5 1/2" and with a word after it each time. Maybe it doesn't say 'PLATE'? If not, what does it say?

Andy