Mickoo's BR modelling

[mickoo]

Remarkable research and after all that Mick - I'll try not to complain about my 9Fs too much!

LOL, I dare not open the Seven Models Brit and 9F boxes I already know just from photos of other peoples models that both kits suffer terribly with either the firebox shape or throat plate clothing, or, both. I already know the Princess is going to need work after Nicks detailed research and I suspect the Jubilee and A1 under the desk will be the same.

There probably isn't utopia in the kit market, except maybe MOK, Finney or MMP and one must accept you get what you pay for, but the errors so far on the A3 are not anorak details, but fundamental basic shapes and sizes, overall the DA kits go together really well and 90% of it represents the real thing rather well

The Problem is, knowledge is often detrimental, one feels obliged to replicate ones research as far as is reasonably practicable, thus one tends to end up in a rather sticky mess, rather more quickly than one appreciates

After a sleepless night I re-looked at the A3 footplate and measured up against the GA, my previous thoughts on the footplate being the cause is mis-founded, the footplate was the right shape but it's the frames that are wrong, see attached.



The red line is the correct frame top shape, the DA kit splits the forward frame section above the footplate by the smoke box saddle and is shown green, this is the correct shape and if you follow the top green line it tracks the red line of the 1:1 frames. However, the DA frames follow the blue line which is also the foot plate line, note how it sweeps up above the frame line over the drivers by about 4", it was this gap I was trying to replicate as it can be seen under the boiler.

And on the model



The red line is the correct frame shape, from the GA the frame depth is 3'.9" which in 7 mm is a depth of 26.2 mm, the kit is 28.0 mm deep.

By pushing up the centre section on the DA kit to get the gap I made the drop link bracket too high, it's still the wrong shape mind, and once the splashers are added their crowns will impact the boiler, a bodge on a bodge and in the end a right fine pickle.

So, the footplate is now formed correctly and the next stage is to finish the cylinder wrappers and solder that assembly in to add strength at the front end, then remove the wheels and new spacers, attack the top of the frames with a big file and reduce the height and then put it all back together again and deal with the other bits as I go along. Fortunately other than rivets near the top, all the other holes and openings seem to have been measured from the base of the frames so will still end up in the right place

 

[mickoo]

Glad to hear it's not been too easy so far...

JB.

Your a wicked man

 

[Steph Dale]

Mick,

I think you've hit the nail on the head with the 'overall the DA kits go together really well and 90% of it represents the real thing rather well' comment. All manufacturers make compromises, some and more (or less) acceptable to most (or fewer) of the intended audience. Fir what it's worth I think David does admirably by focusing on the ease of build of his kits.

Most people don't do the research you or I do. Most kit builders seem to go along with 'I fancy an A3; what's the cheapest/easiest etched brass one to build' and go from there. Whereas you or I do the research and then go for the one with the most potential for our needs, including an evaluation of whether the kit approach will save us enough time or money to be worthwhile.

It's a shame you're having problems with this, but I do recognise a number of typical kit manufacturers dodges in the design, which are there to make construction easier. Most of which would be acceptable to most people.

There's also the problem of whether a kit manufacturer actually has enough research material to design the sort of kits you or I want. In general manufacturers will go for it if they think they have enough to fill in the blanks of the design. There are still a relatively high number of people who consider that an Ian Beattie drawing copied from a Railway Modeller magazine represents the limits of necessary research (there's a thought - might be worth checking against your kit!). As long as the manufacturer has more info than the builder a positive response will be gained.

When the model builder has more info than the kit designer there may be disappointment all round...

Steph

 

[Dog Star]

When the model builder has more info than the kit designer there may be disappointment all round...

Seems to me that you have been considering WT-ers who are trying to build 7mm kits for BR Mk.1 coaches.

 

[mickoo]

Steph,

Fully agree with you there and was going to post something similar in the next update, words to the effect that "I am looking for something more than the basic kit can ever give", which is not a reflection on the kit quality but on my demands.

A lot of the A3 etches date from 2000-2001 that's an awful long time ago and proves it's longevity in the market, it may also mean there's room for an upgrade or improvement as modelling has advanced massively in the last five years, let alone the last fourteen.

The kits are a very good base, for a very good price, for those that are so inclined to desire those extra anorak details, would I buy another?, with out hesitation and I'm currently looking at a couple of his other kits. Would I use the A3 frames?, almost certainly not, they do not meet my criteria and I fully accept they will meet almost 95% of everyone else's criteria. I model in S7 so new spacers would be required and if your going to all that effort then you might as well whizz up the main frames on the same sheet.

I accept I'm in the minority of kit builders, try as I might to swing toward the majority and just accept what is I just cannot. I find uncomfortable and unsatisfying, thus, I acknowledge and accept that my future modelling is going to be both time consuming and probably expensive.

The A3 has really opened a can of worms, it was just intended as a quick rebuild of the previous owners work and then push on with something else, now I've always liked A3's, but I didn't think I liked them this much so the project has changed quite rapidly into wanting something more. I already know the finished item will not meet my final needs and that there will be another A3 after this one, so this one will be more of an experimental test bed for the next one.

 

[Eastsidepilot]

Mick,
When the model builder has more info than the kit designer there may be disappointment all round...

Steph

......................

Steph,



I accept I'm in the minority of kit builders, try as I might to swing toward the majority and just accept what is I just cannot. I find uncomfortable and unsatisfying, thus, I acknowledge and accept that my future modelling is going to be both time consuming and probably expensive.

This is some of the reasons why I prefer to scratch build, and save the money wasted on a kit.

Col.

 

[Stevesopwith]

Me too........except in special situations, eg. etched panelled coach sides, where I pester those who can, to help me make my own kits.

Happy New Year......... Steve.

 

[Pugsley]

I accept I'm in the minority of kit builders, try as I might to swing toward the majority and just accept what is I just cannot. I find uncomfortable and unsatisfying, thus, I acknowledge and accept that my future modelling is going to be both time consuming and probably expensive.

I know the feeling!

I've just started my MMP tank wagon, which I think is the one of the few kits available where I'd build it as supplied. A lot of what I want to build isn't available in kit form in any case, particularly the wagons, so I've already resigned myself to having to design and build the majority of my 7mm stock myself.

On the plus side, I've decided that my 4mm endeavours aren't going to be quite so detailed in future, which should free up a bit of time

 

[mickoo]

Better!

But still miles to go, the top front extension is perhaps a little too deep so might need thinning down so that it's upper edge is closer to the bottom of the valance, the camera angle isn't quite square on so that will account for some mis-alignment, but at least the drop link fulcrum is in better alignment.

I'm not happy with the cylinder wrappers, the kit supplies half etched riveted wrappers so the skin ends up really thin and buckles when bending. The real things were pretty bent and battered, so it at least looks like the real thing, but still feels wrong, I'm also not happy with the previous handyman's work on the rivets on the valance so may even chop that section out and fit a new bit with neater rivets. Having said that there's the AWS conduit to run along this side so that will hide some misdemeanour's.

Of course, with the correct footplate profile and reduce centre height to match the new frames...it's grown in length, note small gap at front of frames behind the buffer beam, this'll need a small fillet to make good.

Overall view

The centre section is now the right height so the rest should fall into place hopefully, and I now have my correct 2 mm gap between frame tops and footplate .

Some general views.




Next up splashers, which are totally enclosed and deeper at the rear wall (not included in the kit) as they go all the way down to the frame, which is primarily why I went to all the trouble to get it right.

 

[mickoo]

....... already resigned myself to having to design and build the majority of my 7mm stock myself.

Rapidly coming to that conclusion myself, even though a lot of what I want is available, I loose so much time getting it to where I want. That time would be better spent working up some new CAD etches.

 

[mickoo]

Hachette A4, I've got a couple of these already and always looking for extra bodies as and when they turn up, given the few faults with the front doors the rest of the body is very good, especially shape wise.

I've opted to de skirt mine and the way the kit is this means either drastic work on the skirts as supplied which will leave thick edges or a whole new interface between footplate and casing, always looking for the quickest and easiest way out, I opted for a whole new footplate so I could get thin valances and footplate edges.

Overall side view of the loco so far, the only parts from Hachette is the casing and nose and frame outer skins, the rest is home brew, which is not a lot in this view.


Of note here are the polished shoulders to the casing, there's a distinct mold line along here and it takes a bit of effort to get smooth and retain other details, specifically the washout plugs which once the gloop...sorry paint is removed, are very nicely cast.



The nose, smoothed off and showing the moats around the superheater covers and front doors.

Rear three quarter view.


New casing footplate evident and new cab floor base, the whole cab will fix onto this, the two nuts are soldered to this base and the bolts pass through the Mazak that protrudes from here and through the new footplate, thus trapping all three parts together.

Underneath


View showing the new casing footplate, new stretchers for S7, no need to be neat or fancy, just functional L, U, C and Z shaped to give strength and rigidity. The kit comes with inner and outer skins for the frames, these are quite thin and being as I didn't need...or have on the first kit I've made my own along with the kicks at the rear to give the correct visuals below the cab buffer beam.

The whole foot plate is 20 thou thick with a 10 thou skin to give the lip along the footplate and a straight edge to solder the thin valance too. It is attached in three places to the Mazak casing, at the rear you can see the two bolts that go through the rear Mazak cab extension (drastically narrowed and trimmed), second are two small screws that screw into the Mazak casing in the fire box area, have to be careful here as it is easy to strip those threads and they are just place holders and have no strength, that all comes from the rear clamping arrangement. Finally where the nose joins to the casing there's a small lug arrangement, there's a gap under the lugs, big enough to slide a 20 thou strip under and hold the front of the footplate securely to the casing, I will add a fourth fixing at the front end, maybe directly into the rear of the buffer beam, which is a very thick casting, or to some other secure point.

The nose as supplied




The paint is very thick and fills a lot of the trenches in the doors. regarding the door rivets, first the lower door, it has two rows of three, I've not seen any photos to match, some locos have none, the rest have two rows of two, but rather than being outboard of the outer hinges are in board. The top door, outside of the top door are two rows of four rivets, not all locos have these, some only have three, other than that the castings are pretty good as I've said before.

 

[Scale7JB]

Sterling work mate, but looking at the undercarriage of that A4 does send s shiver... There's a lot to do eh?!

JB.

 

[Compton castle]

I shall be watching with interest and if you don't mind pinching some of your pictures to file away for future reference
Steve

I've just had a quick look at Mallard Circa 1963 and I can see some discrepancy in the rivets on the kit.
Picture copyright to owner and shown for illustration purposes.

 

[mickoo]

Sterling work mate, but looking at the undercarriage of that A4 does send s shiver... There's a lot to do eh?!

JB.

It's not too bad, once you get the cylinders in there and springs it'll start to bulk out quite quickly, a lot of the castings I will get from Ragstone and others, it'll cost a bit but the total cost so far for that loco is about £35, that's the cab etch, backhead casting, two outer frame etches, casing and nose castings, even if I spend £200 on 3rd party parts and castings it'll still be the cheapest A4 on offer. The second one cost me £60 but has all the chassis parts and other nick nacks upto partwork 14 I think, I'll keep a sleepy eye out for the cab roof etched part but other than that, I'm quite happy to scratch or CAD the rest.

The biggest down side is getting the lacquer off the etched parts, it's all designed to be glued, not soldered, I wish we could get a base coat paint that was this durable and resistant to removal

 

[mickoo]

I shall be watching with interest and if you don't mind pinching some of your pictures to file away for future reference
Steve

No problems, carry on young man

 

[alcazar]

Got a spare A4 body you want rid of? I have a project for one, but "someone" keeps outbidding me...........

As for the lacquer, Wilko sell their own brand paint and VARNISH stripper. It contains Benzoyl Alcohol. I soaked my cab parts in it for an hour, then scrubbed with a stiff old toothbrush, finally finishing with same loaded with Cif cream and it all came off.
I then replaced most of the paint stripper in the bottle with the aid of a 1/2" paintbrush, since it's quite thick. It will now do the body parts when they arrive.

Nice pic of Mallard, btw...she must have run that not long before withdrawal, she went into the Plant that year for preservation, afaik. Didn't the Plant stop doing any steam repairs the same year? Making Mallard the only A4 they actually preserved, the others were taken to Crewe.

I still reckon it was a disgrace to cut up "Silver Link" and even "Silver Fox", while preserving the likes of "Bittern" and "Union of South Africa". Oh well, that's preservation.........

 

[mickoo]

Interesting, I tried polycells super paint remover and it didn't even touch the lacquer I ended up using cellulose thinners and a fibre brush in the end but even then the lacquer gummed up brush.

I haven't got a spare body to be honest, I need a spare nose to make three complete locos and am looking for a fourth to probably convert to the W1.

 

[OzzyO]

Glad that I've got a grit-blaster! It will remove most things, off most things.

 

[mickoo]

View attachment 39971 I shall be watching with interest and if you don't mind pinching some of your pictures to file away for future reference
Steve

I've just had a quick look at Mallard Circa 1963 and I can see some discrepancy in the rivets on the kit.
Picture copyright to owner and shown for illustration purposes.

If your going for BR period then the side skirt castings will either take a lot of thinning and reworking or you'll end up with very thick valances and edges. I think you mentioned you were going to use the Finney corridor tender, swapped for a GNR one, that might not be the right choice, the Finney one is a flat ended corridor, I think 22 had a bow ended corridor.

The only kit with a bow ended is the Piercy one and they won't supply the tender as a separate item.

I need a bow ended for one of my A4's so was going to whizz up a CAD etch just for the rear bulkhead, you could probably use the Finney rear bulkhead, the bow is about 6" at the outside from the rear cill, so if you bow the Finney bulkhead it will then become too narrow by about 1 maybe 2 mm. I might then slit mine vertically down the middle and add a thin section, most of the joint will be covered by the corridor connection and an overlaid access door, only the bit of the bulkhead above the vestible will need visual cleaning up. the sides can be then trimmed back easily, theres no rivets as they are smooth sided. I will try that option first before going down the CAD route for the Finney kit, bu the Hachettes will require all new tenders and I am planning to do a full set of etches for those and other projects in the future, primarily bow ended corridor streamlined, flat ended corridor streamlined, streamlined non corridor and new type non corridor, can't remeber which of the last two is the beaded non corridor....need to refresh my notes to memory again

I've no idea what tender Hachette are going to supply, the kit is based on the DJH model (no longer available), not the Piercy model so may come with flat ended corridor or the Piercy Bow ended corridor, but either way I may keep an eye out for those parts and grab a couple, even if just as place holders for the tender construction until the etched artwork is finished.

Ohh, one other thing I've remembered, the cab roof/cab front isn't quite correct. the cab front is V fronted ok but the very front isn't a V, it's flat, so the beack is chopped back slightly, the chopped back area lines up with the safety valve cover. The cab roof is in two parts, the main cab roof as one radius, but in the middle at the front half theres an extra domed cover, sort of a hump, it's faired into the cab at the rear but has a flat front face, not V shaped, this means the cover needs triming back and the small triangle left in the casing filling, I'll try and find some photos that will explain it better, the front is not cut back as much as the Thompson Pacifics and no where near as much as the Peppercorn Pacifics, but it is cut back. From memeory the only pure V fronted cab roofs were the V2, A2/1 and A2/2 (not all) some A2/2 were cut back when replacement boilers were fitted where the safety valve position differed and obstructed the cover, and maybe one or two A2/1 as well.....details later when I get home.

For what it's worth the Hachette cab is also pretty close to the V2 and A2/1-2 cabs, I have lots of spare cabs now, more cabs than locos actually, if not identical, but I need to check the GA's to make extra sure all the openings and windows are the right size and location to be really sure.

 

[mickoo]

Glad that I've got a grit-blaster! It will remove most things, off most things.

Thats a bloody good idea!!

We've got one at work and I've got a spare body that I can subject to it's fangs, it may be a bit industrial and might be a bit harsh for the brass work, but the Mazak would certainly stand up to it I think.