Gotta build a loco shed...
Got plenty of engines to help you out at exhibitions!
JB.
It's looking that way, but added to that I like scenery and well laid track, signal boxes, signals and bridges too, hence focusing on somewhere like Belle Isle or Princes gardens where trains move but slowly and sometimes stop waiting for platforms (fiddle yards) to clear, as well as lots of light loco moves. But! I do so love the nitty gritty crunch underfoot of ash and cinder at depots
There is clearly no hope for me LOL, it's a mind game that will keep me busy for a while yet.
Mick, I haven't checked what is on p173 yet but we could probably have saved you the months of hand wringing
, based on the amount of effort you go to to find out what the details should actually look like (EMD cabs etc, etc). Although being told isn't as satisfying as working things out for yourself. I have never found a reason to look at LNER pacific frames in any detail but it strikes me that those flat rivets are just asking for a half etched overlay on the outside of the frames. That would hide the unwanted holes as well.
This is true, a half etch overlay would be the answer, inside and outside and if your going to the trouble of all that then you may as well get the rest of the frames on the same art work. There's little mileage in just getting one small part etched, it'd just make the rest look sub standard. As I'm also modelling in S7 then all the stretchers need redoing anyway; but yes, your right the 'correct' way forward from this point is a new set of CAD frames and stretchers. The rest of the kit (if the A1 tender is to go by) I.E. the upper works tend to go together quite well and require a modicum of care and detailing to bring them up to a high standard.
I haven't checked either but I suspect it's the John Dorman[?] 7mm King on shed.
Certainly is and if they had dropped the exposure a couple of stops you would be very very hard pressed to not think that was a real loco, and there's nothing there that anyone here could not do with a little bit of hard graft and dedication. However, to get to that level your foundation model has to be sound.
I'm in the same camp as you, Mick, but as my knowledge and research is never as great as the detail you have clearly gone in to here a lesser result satisfies me, which rather confirms your suggestion that ignorance is bliss!
However, looking at the photo you supplied whoever is rebuilding that loco really should get another set of bogie wheels cast and it will be a bit bumpy going round corners with only those wooden bearers to slide on.
Brian
Brian, quite true, we all have differing levels we are happy with, there's nothing wrong with that, that's what gives this place it's broad spectrum of interest
I think that is the 'Flintstone' variant of A3
Anyway, back to the A3 frames and some details on my previous ramblings, Richard you might want to look away now
As far as I can ascertain, the only kits that get this area right are the Finney A3 and A4. The rest of the LNER Pacifics do not as far as I can ascertain, I don't know why as it's not difficult to achieve and requires but a few strokes in CAD work to replicate.
The genesis of LNER Pacifics is the A1 class and virtually all locos from this point follow the same rear end.
A1 chassis
The red line is the main frames which run the full length of the loco, the green line is the strengthening plate (not the one I mentioned earlier, that comes later and is ahead of the rear axlebox) that bridges the joint between main frames and Cartarzzi extensions shown in light blue. Thus there is a distinct step in the frames when viewed externally and the bend outward is some distance from the wheel rim.
In orange is the general line that most kits seem to take, they kick out almost right behind the real wheel rim, and as most kits are designed for finescale, the angled bit will be the wrong size to compensate for the narrower frames and incorrect bend line.
On the DA kit the width of the Cartazzi extensions is also wrong, it's width is 45mm which is 3mm too wide. I can see why it's been done as it allows more sideplay in the rear Cartazzi axle for tight corners, but it does mean that anything attached to them, steps, axleboxes, pipework or linkages does not line up with the body above.
Moving onto the A4 chassis
Exactly the same principle but the Cartazzi extensions are a little longer at the front end, only a few inches mind.
Finally the Peppercorn A1 where things change
On the Peppercorn A1's they moved the reinforcing plate outside of the main frames, this means the main frames are a few inches narrower (3' 11¼" as opposed to Gresleys 4' 1½" between frames) as the extension plate has to fit behind the real wheel, the Peppercorn A2 is identical, the Thompsons I plan to research and get the GA's from NRM in the new year.
