The Heybridge Railway, 1889 to 1913

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
It was quite funny. I was sitting outdoors in bright sunshine beside a garden railway and looking underneath my Lomac and I could see dozens of pin pricks of light. Never seen them before. The holes don't show up in normal photographs and clearly the paint had no effect.

I suppose, the solution is to grind a tiny amount of metal from the very tip of the punch, just enough to make it rounded not cutting.
 
Last edited:

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
I have done a simple test to see whether the truck affects the alignment of the chassis on a curve, I hope this isn't too formal but I may want to repeat it:
  • I have a short straight track connected to a Setrack curve (the straight is to the left of the curve, out of shot).
  • I have placed two markers beside the curve so I can stop the chassis in a consistent location.
  • The chassis is placed on the straight track and driven from left to right onto the curve and stopped at the markers.
  • Power is removed from the track and an engineer's square placed on the track to check the alignment of the chassis.
. . .

I did four runs (all with the chassis running 'in reverse') and the results were consistent.

So at the moment, I think the truck can and does influence the alignment of the chassis. I expect the truck to either do this or climb off the rails and derail, because its pivot is in line with its axle and not offset as with a pony truck.

What I do not know yet is whether the lateral forces from the pony truck will influence the alignment of the complete locomotive; this will weigh c.350 g more than the chassis in its test configuration here.

I have done some test runs with the body in place on the chassis, and the truck on ‘Nellie’ continues to guide the chassis on a Setrack curve.


On a prototype, the carrying wheels would be carrying part of the weight of the loco as well as guiding it. On the model I have the C of G firmly above the driving wheels to maximise traction, while the pivot between the carrying wheels lets the wheelset provide some steering effect. If this arrangement proves reliable running on a layout a bit more extensive than my test track then I will feel I have achieved something.

The video also shows the crane in place. There is going to be about 1.5 mm clear between the jib and the cab roof.
 

Rob Pulham

Western Thunderer
I am enjoying the build. I can see myself struggling to solder the smokebox and boiler together because of their bulk (I might just resort to Araldite!), but apart from this I know pretty much where and how the remaining parts need to fit. I have enjoyed stills photography for years but video work is completely new to me. WT is giving me an outlet for all three.

I want to catch up on some progress on the body.

View attachment 166529
The top of the crane base now has four small magnets and a fixed pivot. The idea was to put scraps of a baked beans tin into the base but the modern food tins are almost completely non-magnetic. So I had to use eight magnets instead of four. The pivot is fixed because the crane jib is going to be within the loading gauge and the loco can run on the main line with its crane in place.

The Connoisseur kit includes some simple cab fittings including a cast floor and a backhead. The backhead sits flush with the front spectacle plate and has a cut-out to go over the motor bracket, and this means the bracket appears in the cab. The footplate of my model is quite a bit more generous because the crane base uses only a part of the chassis extension and the original coal bunker has gone. So I can try for more modelling in the cab.

View attachment 166523
The size and pitch of the windows on the rear spectacle plate matches those on the front so I can model the inside of the windows. I have rebuilt the backhead so it moves backwards into the cab, and made a new cab floor.

View attachment 166522
All of the soldering on the backhead is 145 solder. I got away with it. The hole in the floor is to accept a cheese head screw, this is to let me use the original rear body mounting hole if I ever want to try a pony truck or fix something detachable inside the chassis here.


View attachment 166525
The inner spectacle plate has gone on with offcuts of fret to make a small gap to slip in the glazing. The backhead has a bit more 'presence' now. On the left is the back of the new coal bunker and on the right is space for the reversing lever and a representation of the back of the side tank. I have just noticed the gap above the top of the coal bunker, the driver's bag or a large oil can will have to stand here. The thin ring around the crane spindle holds the gear for rotation clear above the panel to make it look more realistic.

At the moment, the floor and the backhead are loose. After the floor is fixed I won't be soaking the model in hot soapy water, so they will need to be fixed near the end of the build.
I like the idea of the second skin to house the glazing. I may pinch that one at some point, especially for my crane tank as like you I will have a spare cab rear.
 

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
I like the idea of the second skin to house the glazing. I may pinch that one at some point, especially for my crane tank as like you I will have a spare cab rear.

Years ago I used to go out of my way to find clear styrene or polycarbonate for this sort of thing. Nellie will be getting offcuts from a blister pack, I think this will look fine.
 
Last edited:

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
DSC_9884.jpg
I have stripped down the chassis for painting.

The rear guard irons have gone back on, I had cut these off before I folded up the chassis etch. These got their rivets too, the front ones got forgotten until it was too late to get the chassis into the punch. The motor bracket here is supplied with the kit.

The Plan here was to assemble all of the brake rigging before painting. However, my enthusiasm with the tiny Allen key has left one of the driving wheels locked solid onto its axle. This annoying because I put a drop of oil on the thread of the wheel screw but it is clearly not going to move. So the sequence of final assembly is going to have to be wheels and side rods and motor, and then brake gear.

This is my last sight of my handiwork here. The primer went on yesterday and the top coat is scheduled for later today.
 
Last edited:

Chas Levin

Western Thunderer
Hello Richard, I've been reading through your thread and latest build and very much enjoyed it - you've been grappling with similar things to me when I was building a 4mm 4-4-2 chassi recently.
Re. a couple of comments you made a page back:
I am a bit prone to over-thinking things. I need to accept, this is a model-making task not an engineering one. If it doesn't work as expected, I can dismantle it and try something different.
I too am described by others as prone to over-thinking, but I don't think there is any such thing! I don't think anyone can think too much about anything... Ok, exaggerating to make a point, but...
Second, I'd suggest that this sort of project is both a model-making task and an engineering one. Surely, when we build a motorised chassis like this, it's engineering, just on a small scale?
Thirdly, yeeeees.... you can dismantle: I find though that once something's finished, I'm not keen to do that.

Anyway, very interesting and very impressive work, looking forward to further updates, Chas
 

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
Hello Richard, I've been reading through your thread and latest build and very much enjoyed it - you've been grappling with similar things to me when I was building a 4mm 4-4-2 chassi recently.
. . .

Sometimes I feel unsure who I am writing for. When this happens I think of a pen friend, a modeller much the same age as me. We both have decades of experience in the hobby and yet encounter quite remarkably stubborn obstacles. I think, "surely everyone else just does this, they don't go writing about how they did it so it must be blindingly obvious". So I am rather heartened by your comments.

I also have a need for a sink, to share achievements with others. Logically, if I am posting here next year about my third or fourth loco build I will be writing about completely different things and they may well be more advanced than the details of Nellie, but everyone has to start somewhere. I am fortunate to have bought my first brass kits from Jim McGeown . . . they fit together really well and this has left me to work out how to build them and how to modify them and not how to make them go together in the first place.

I too am described by others as prone to over-thinking, but I don't think there is any such thing! I don't think anyone can think too much about anything... Ok, exaggerating to make a point, but...
Second, I'd suggest that this sort of project is both a model-making task and an engineering one. Surely, when we build a motorised chassis like this, it's engineering, just on a small scale?
Thirdly, yeeeees.... you can dismantle: I find though that once something's finished, I'm not keen to do that.

Maybe (still not sure!), yes and yes/yes.

Sometimes I think over-thinking is an excuse for putting things off. I have left fixing the smokebox and boiler onto Nellie until today. "Because I can see the motor without them". But truly, I am not learning anything from being able to see the motor. Gear meshing needs to be done by listening and feeling not looking. I put a marker on the flywheel but it was a blur on the videos. There is also a fear, "oh I wish I hadn't fixed that on now, I didn't need to do it". The trouble is, having built chunks of a model steam loco and its chassis, sooner or later I have got to accept I must add the smokebox and boiler. I must try to get them on straight, and if they are crooked accept that I did my best and not beat myself up about an error only a camera can see.

Yes this is a model-making task and an engineering one. I would have better written, this is a hobby not employment.

DSC_9892.jpg
I took this photo to show how I adjusted the position of the smokebox to get the boiler as level as I possibly could. I expect some people would say this 0.15 mm shows an error in the design of the kit or in my previous assembly work, while others would say know-one will see the difference. I measured the gap because with many of these things the gap looks bigger than it is, and the solder hides it soon enough.

For dismantling, I have made provision by leaving some of my chassis unpainted. So I can see the solder joints I would need to release. But these things are like works of art, they have to be created and then given a controlled abandonment. Re-work, if it is to satisfy me, has to come after the abandonment, and probably after the next build!
 
Last edited:

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
DSC_9902.jpg
I was so pleased with the joint between the boiler and the smokebox I missed off the boiler band in case it made it look worse. I am sure those holes in the smokebox are too big for the handrail split pins.

DSC_9894.jpg
I left off the frame extensions (each side of the smokebox) because I had convinced myself they were castings. In fact they are strips of brass so I must do a bit of fiddling around to put them through the slots in the wing plate. I stopped reading the instructions because I have broken the suggested sequence so many times (because of the crane tank conversion) and I usually find myself re-reading things I have done.
 

Chas Levin

Western Thunderer
Morning Richard, I started replying last night to your post of yesterday, but it was too hot to think!

I'm glad my comments struck a chord - likewise. I too have sometimes thought about quite who we write these things for and I've certainly thought about the fact that others just get on and do things I spend a long time considering, planning and worrying about. When I first got back into modelling - having done all my previous work long before the internet - I used forums for research but told myself I'd never post my own work... But as you say, there's great appeal in communicating our ideas to others who do similar work (it often clarifies my thoughts, just to set them down on 'paper') and great value in learning from others' work too. My build thread on here is (so far) mainly summaries of older builds (I will start some new builds on here soon) but the thread I have on RMWeb is a warts-and-all account of my current (and several previous) builds and like you, I've spent ages agonising over things, back-tracked sometimes, and been gently steered by lots of very helpful people. But in the end, the models I've produced are far, far better than I could have achieved all on my own, through the help and guidance of lots of more experienced people who are very generous with their time. It's great to see your work appreciated by people who understand what you've doing, and, as another reason for posting, people who are less experienced and haven't tried something we've spent ages fiddling with but finally achieved will find the thread and draw inspiration.

I'd agree too that sometimes - only sometimes, mind - thinking about things can tip over into procrastination. But I've lost count of the times now when I've been a little unsure how to do something - I just haven't felt I quite had the best way of doing it (or perhaps any way!) - and I've let it sit at the back of my mind for a day or few, only to have the solution pop up, totally unexpectedly, after 'background processing' has done it's thing. I love that system, when it works! Now, is that over-thinking? Or procrastination? No, I think it's using our brains to solve a problem in the best way we can. Providing of course we've been getting on with other parts of the job in the meantime...!

Measuring gaps with a feeler gauge; seeing the gaps in the first place; seeing little else for a while whenever you look at the model; realising, weeks or months later, that you can't definitely remember the exact location of the gap you thought looked so awful without referring to photos of the build: all part of the process!

As far as dismantling goes, several people - with far more experience than me - have strongly advised designing sub-sections that are held together by nuts and bolts, not just for possible future work but also to aid painting and I intend to do this much more in future. I only began to understand the value of it late in my current loco build (very much a learning process too!) so only the cab roof is detachable, but even that has made a whole lot of other jobs much easier...

And regarding instructions, I find an odd process takes place the more I study them, whereby I start to understand more and more as I re-read and study what appear to be quite simple sequences of fixing bits together. Partly it's because by reading the whole thing like a booklet, you start to realise which tasks that occur much later in the build will be affected by aspects of the early stages. This is something I've learned in my current project, where small errors I thought fine to accept early on caused issues later (moral there: never settle for 'nearly right'!); and where later tasks were made more difficult because I didn't take steps early on to allow for them - a detachable boiler, for instance, would have saved a lot of work!

To avoid re-reading things you've done, I tick off each section in the instructions with a pencil...

This morning's photos look excellent :)
 

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
I must emphasise, the gap with the feeler gauge was of my own doing. It was easier to lift the smokebox than to lower the back of the boiler to get the boiler level.
 

Chas Levin

Western Thunderer
Yep, I realised. That's another thing I've learnt a lot about on the two locos I've built, that because of the variety of shapes involved in a steam loco body and the way they interact - both physically and visually - you sometimes need to compromise on one dimension / clearance / alignment, in order to preserve accuracy on another that is more prominent.

Regarding something else you said, I haven't built anything by Mr McGeown and I don't have any of his kits in my stash, but I've built enough unpowered vehicles by a wide enough variety of kit makers to understand the difference between kits that go together well, ones that require quite a bit of work to achieve wholeness and those that are essentially scratchbuilding aids and clearly, such differences can have an even more pronounced effect where motors and gearing are involved...
 

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
DSC_9911.jpg

The funny thing is, my efforts today have produced the least output since I began the model even though I thought I knew that I was going to do; the pickups. I have been installing four plunger pickups, and really not much else. They have been absolute swines.

To cut a long story short, I eventually realised I could assemble the connecting wire with the solder tag onto the plunger assembly and add the 12 BA nut "in free space" as it were, and then insert the whole caboodle into the chassis. I now have four respectable-looking plunger pickups in the chassis. Two have a gentle and repeatable spring action, and two seem to get stuck.

I am now backed into in a corner with two subjects I just don't get on with, springs and chemistry. Can I smear some Tamiya molybdenum grease onto the two sticky plungers? Or maybe this will dissolve Slater's pickup housings and I should use something else? Not a clue.

I have sprayed the chassis with Halford's RAL 9005 matt black. This is known as 'Jet Black' and apparently it reflects 4% on incident light. I can hardly see what I am doing.
 

Simon

Flying Squad
It looks to me as if the thickness of your wire and the extra insulting sleeves will be impeding the free movements of the plungers, I'd substitute a thinner and flexible (multicore) wire before going any further myself.

You are definitely getting there though!

Simon
 

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
Jim McGeown has prepared some .pdf downloads with helpful tips on fitting motor & gears, preparing Slaters wheels, and most relevant here, one on preparing Slaters plunger pickups, which might address the binding you're experiencing :


Try graphite powder. Comes in a squeezy bottle for squirting into keyholes and locks. Don’t use any oil or grease.

It looks to me as if the thickness of your wire and the extra insulting sleeves will be impeding the free movements of the plungers, I'd substitute a thinner and flexible (multicore) wire before going any further myself.

Thank you Paul, Fraser and Simon. I do like the idea of insulting sleeves, in fact these pickups seem like an insult at the moment but I have got to persevere.

This is where I am at the moment . . .

1) I could not work out how to get the two 12 BA brass nuts to lock onto the solder tag. I solved this by pulling the plunger fully out against its spring, slipping on surgical forceps as a heat shunt and soldering the nuts together and to the tag and the back of the plunger. This assembly is now impossible to undo without destroying the plastic plunger mount.

2) I could not work out whether the first nut is supposed to go on all the way to the end of the thread, or just far enough to get a full thread in the second nut. This alters the pre-load on the spring. I settled for threading on as little as possible so I could get the heat shunt on.

3) The springs seem very weak for the task in hand.

4) The plungers operate freely when I hold them in my hand but not when installed in the chassis - this suggests the electrical wire is too stiff and is interfering with operation. I am using 7/0.2.

5) I have installed and removed the plungers twice. I secured them with Araldite on both occasions (this is advised in the kit instructions), but the Araldite does not stick to the paint on the chassis nor to the plastic housings and really it only creates a sort of a moulded base to stop the plunger base from leaning crooked.

6) I have read the detailed instructions for the Slater's plunger pickups linked by Paul, but too late to be able to inspect the plunger housings and decide whether to clear them out with a drill bit.

7) I have already put some tiny drops of oil on the pickups, this is a lubricant sold for model railway use as safe for use on plastics.

So . . .

As Simon suggests, I think I have got to try some thinner wire. I will have to buy something . . . please, what size of wire do people usually choose for use with these pickups? Perhaps 7/0.1?

Also, do we know whether the first nut has to go all the way down the thread or is its location optional? Then I will know whether I have got to buy another set of plunger pickups. They seem terribly expensive for what they are.

Many thanks!
 

simond

Western Thunderer
I’m not at home, so can’t offer a photo, but ESU and others offer “DCC Decoder installation wire” which is very thin indeed. It’s stranded wire, and I’d guess less than 0.5 diameter over the insulation.

I normally run an independent wire from each pickup to the decoder or motor, or to a common point, then thicker stuff to the motor. It’ll easily handle normal running currents, but is disappointingly like a fuse if you have a frog incorrectly polarised.

found this


0.5mm 36 AWG.
 

Richard Gawler

Western Thunderer
It’ll easily handle normal running currents, but is disappointingly like a fuse if you have a frog incorrectly polarised.

I think I have got to accept, use wire like a fuse. The club layout has Helmsman 5 amp controllers and if I try to build to withstand the fault current from one of these then the plungers will end up locked solid.

If I build for my home controller which folds back its output at 1 amp, I expect decoder wire will survive.

I have some decoder wire left over from projects in a smaller scale. I will give this a try. I have run out of red and black but plenty of green and yellow and some other colours.

I am planning to take independent wires from each pickup to a "terminal area" I made yesterday:

DSC_9912.jpg
The idea is, thick wires go from the top lands to the motor. Thinner wires go from the bottom lands to the pickups. If I want to convert to DCC I will snip the two shorting links and connect a socket or decoder to here.

I will give the decoder wire a try.
 

Rob R

Western Thunderer
Richard,
I have seen the wire from a pc mouse used for plungers, very flexible and usually free (well you could buy a new mouse just to chop the wire off but that is a bit drastic!).
Rob
 
Top