lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 18, 2021 0:15:48 GMT
Hi all at MECH. I have just registered as a new member, from Australia. I am considering committing to my first model steam loco build. I am favouring a Super Simplex (5in gauge). I have a suitable workshop with machine tools and most kit. Just need 2000 hours or so and I'm good.
|
|
dscott
Elder Statesman
Posts: 2,437
|
Post by dscott on May 18, 2021 0:48:58 GMT
Here is my version of the smaller Simplex which is returning as a narrow gauge Fowler Complex. Simplexes have one problem solved above by moving the rear axle out of under the ash pan. Yes I have had lots of drives of them and the Super was Martins try and sort out the problems!!! They cant get enough air into the fire. I am also doing a Jinty which has a straight out ash pan . Same size boiler but smaller cylinders. 1 1/2" down to 1 3/8" Being freelance Simplexes can be dressed as anyone. Welcome to our on line Club. Several of us know each other in real life and up to met up at Exhibitions. David and Assistant Lily.
|
|
lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 18, 2021 1:09:29 GMT
Thanks for your reply David! Super Simplex appealed to me due to the claimed simplicity of the build, and perhaps more power than an 0-4-0. Also, I would be happy enough if the thing works -- I'm not fussed if it looks like a miniature of any real life loco. The idea that it can be modified as desired is a plus. I'd be more in the utilitarian camp on that score. Mind you, if you're saying here's not enough draft -- well, yikes. I've had a read at supersimplex.yolasite.com of another chap named David who built a Super Simplex in the US. He had a few suggestions on other aspects of the design. One problem for me is that I am in Australia, and it still seems to be the case, 54 years after the original Martin Evans boiler design, that the local boiler code still insists on a more complicated crownstay arrangement. All that said, it seems for me, being in the 'market' for a simple loco build, that it's either Super Simplex or Blowfly. Unless there's other worthy *simple* candidates?
|
|
lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 18, 2021 1:15:04 GMT
By the way, when you say Simplexes have one problem solved above by moving the rear axle out of under the ash pan. do you mean that there is an established modification of Evans' design, which some builders have tried, that solves this problem? If so, I'm curious -- can you point me to some old discussion or photos or something about this?
|
|
dscott
Elder Statesman
Posts: 2,437
|
Post by dscott on May 18, 2021 1:58:32 GMT
Well mostly my observations and from work done by Jim Ewins who compared a table of firebox sizes. Martin himself by introducing a Super version! If he had built an ordinary Simplex and run it for several years then tried various improvements Then done one version, all would be fine. But the boiler had to be bigger as the cylinders are too big. The valve gear is superb as this was an area Martin Evans was a master at. I am doing mine at an angle to make it look better. You can see it from his point of view looking back through Model Engineer leading up to its introduction. SO MUCH PRESSURE to start a new locomotive to keep the readership. Yes I have the original articles.
I also hung out at Keith Wilson's Workshop as a Keen Teenager during the Bulldog years. He did various Locomotive designs and had deadlines to keep to. Also 2 Castles and 5 Kings to complete in 7 1/4" For Customers. Plus much information passed on. Plus a family of 3 children a lovely dog and of course a Wife. Long suffering.
I visited Friend Alan Wilson in 2019 and viewed his collection and his own built Locomotives. We were at School together.
David and Lily.
|
|
lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 18, 2021 2:34:07 GMT
Thanks again for your replies, David! About the insufficient air for combustion, it seems from what you say that perhaps the larger cylinder volume on the Super Simplex is the underlying culprit? That fellow David on his SuperSimplex.yolasite.com site reduced the bore of his cylinders to better match the firegrate area. Maybe that solves the problem? This is what he said about it: Also, please, do tell me more about the rear axle under the ash-pan problem -- it's good to know about design improvements. I do recall Keith Wilson's column in ME, back in the 1970s, when reading my dad's ME back as a teenager. As to M. Evans, what a prodigious output -- unparalleled today. I still have all our ME back issues from the 60s, 70s and 80s. Seems to me that period was the pinnacle for the hobby. Other than content related to newer materials and better equipped workshops now, I don't admire the recent ME nearly as much. But maybe that opinion is inevitable for a conservative such as myself!
|
|
dscott
Elder Statesman
Posts: 2,437
|
Post by dscott on May 18, 2021 2:37:04 GMT
I moved the boiler up higher and extended the front for the fireman to clear the Smokebox. Being outside motion gave me the chance of boxing in the axles and boxes either side of the ash pan. I then put in opposing axle pumps of smaller bore so at all times there is water being pumped. Great in HOT countries. Here is freezing. Far too much rain and someone the other side of Reading had Hale. For your boiler just check with the tester on bunging in loads of rod Crownstays!
NO. Other Locomotives are more complex. And I am doing several. For a Scale of an actual Prototype A Twin Sisters. Yes another sort out by me currently. Outside motion so no crank axle. Easy livery. Its Black. Quite compact.
Cons. The early drawings are CRAP. it is 1" scale left over from the 1950's. No one will touch the boiler. The drawings came with the warning. Not many have been built. OR Some were started and got to a STAGE!!! Kennions have just apparently dropped the model from their latest list.
My version is in Metric and looks more like the full size. Uses a Jinty Boiler. And there is only one version. The Twin bit was that within the drawings was a simpler version. This tends to confuse builders.
David.
|
|
dscott
Elder Statesman
Posts: 2,437
|
Post by dscott on May 18, 2021 2:46:23 GMT
Saving 3000 words. Just found these. The box hornblocks save on machining castings and provide more stays and some weight. Ours is very heavy. David.
|
|
dscott
Elder Statesman
Posts: 2,437
|
Post by dscott on May 18, 2021 2:53:55 GMT
Fowler 2 F Dock Tank (Twin Sisters) Progress so far. Now to 1 1/16" to the foot which makes her a bit bigger. David. Lily is sleeping.
|
|
lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 18, 2021 2:55:31 GMT
Interesting what you are telling me. It must be late where you are, sometimes its a little cryptic.
If I eliminate other loco design candidates and go with Super Simplex on the basis that it will indeed be simple and reliable, then I perhaps I should invest in a current set of drawings, rather than rely on the ones in the 1967-68 Simplex and 1989 Super Simplex magazine series.
But even then, some of what you are saying gives me concern. I think you are saying the boiler is not the best. And I just checked Kennions website -- Simplex is there but Super Simplex not. Why is that?
So, is the Jinty boiler better? And is it a relatively straightforward proposition to drop that onto the Super Simplex frame?
|
|
|
Post by coniston on May 18, 2021 16:27:14 GMT
Welcome Lex and fear not, although what David says is I am sure true from his experience and knowledge, I own a Super Simplex (bought from the estate of a deceased club member) which I believe to be built exactly to the drawings with no obvious modifications. I have owned and run this loco now for three years and it has no problem steaming, always plenty available with no shortage so I guess the design is not too far away from being ok. Of course there always improvements that can be made to any design but this one works. It has no super heaters but the flues are in the boiler so I am intending to fit some in the near future which will hopefully reduce the water usage and I wont get a nice cooling shower when I drive it Not a bad design to have a go at, as you rightly say it is relatively simple as locos go. Chris D
|
|
lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 18, 2021 21:47:13 GMT
Thanks Chris for your reply! Yes perhaps it is all a matter of degree and how close to ideal one wishes to strive.
If you have found Super Simplex to have no fatal flaws, that is reassuring.
On the other hand, it would be interesting to get opinions on whether swapping out the Simplex boiler for another design is feasible (within 'simple' parameters), given that here in Australia the boiler code asks for the Simplex boiler to be modified at far more effort.
Though that is possibly a question I should ask in the main forum -- rather than the introductions here!
Lex
|
|
peteh
Statesman
Still making mistakes!
Posts: 760
|
Post by peteh on May 19, 2021 0:27:00 GMT
G'day Lex,
Another possibility is the "Blowfly" freelance engine. About as simple as an engine can get. Mugbuilder on here is the designer as I understand it. It is an Australian design so should meet our codes and of course it can be modified in the body to disguise.
At our club here in Perth the main modification is to add a leading or trailing bogie which helps stop the 0-4-0 rocking, and modifying the boiler to 6" copper tube from 5".
|
|
dscott
Elder Statesman
Posts: 2,437
|
Post by dscott on May 19, 2021 1:38:01 GMT
PHOTO BORROWED FROM THE STEAM WORKSHOP. PHOTO BORROWED FROM THE STEAM WORKSHOP. PHOTO BORROWED FROM THE STEAM WORKSHOP. This is roughly what we are turning our Simplex into having purchased a superb boiler and set of wheels from them 2 years ago. The rest went into the scrap. The exhaust hole drilled into the cylinders is far too close to the valve face and should be moved down a bit. In fact most boilers could fit as Super Simplex and Simplex are not based upon any full size design. This is to get round your Local Boiler Regulations. The Jinty has crown stays between the two surfaces. The two being almost the same size. We have both sat in the workshop side by side. Any type of tanks, or even no tanks and fit a tender is also possible. See Simplex-ish on the Steam Workshop Site. Turns into another lovely possibility. Any number or size of rivets, Any shape of cab, Longer frames, Any Colour. Lily has chosen!! Last seen on a V W camper back in the 1960's. Matching The Steam Workshops version above. Makes a change to green. David and Lily.
|
|
lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 19, 2021 4:03:51 GMT
Pete, I really should look more closely again at Blowfly before making a commitment to one design or other. Certainly the bolier should present no regulatory difficulties in Australia, as you say. I'll dig out my ancient AME mags and have another look.
David, thanks again - I like your no-holds-barred 'modding' style! I'll have a look at the Jinty boiler and try to find out what regulatory hurdles it presents (or, hopefully, not) in Australia, and also 'ease of build'. On that last point, ease of build, maybe I'll get good advice here at MECH.
Lex
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2021 9:30:59 GMT
Welcome to the motley crew lex, I'm sure that you'll find answers to your questions here.... good luck with whichever design you chose.
Cheers
Pete
|
|
|
Post by coniston on May 19, 2021 20:57:03 GMT
HI Lex, in the SSME at Southampton we have a Simplex built in the 60's and run for many years as a regular passenger hauler, what sets it apart from the norm is the boiler is a Speedy boiler and has pannier tanks, a very interesting alternative which performs exceptionally to this day.
Chris D
|
|
lex
Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lex on May 19, 2021 22:23:08 GMT
what sets it apart from the norm is the boiler is a Speedy boiler and has pannier tanks, a very interesting alternative which performs exceptionally to this day. This sounds encouraging, and something I ought to look into as well. Do you have any comments as to use of a Speedy vs a Jinty boiler, on the Simplex chassis? For example ease of build (of boiler), ease of fitting to the chassis, match to cylinder size? Lex
|
|
|
Post by coniston on May 20, 2021 20:44:55 GMT
Sorry Lex, without comparing drawings for both I don't know what modifications would be needed to fit the boiler, however I am sure it would be a better match for the cylinders than the original Simplex one. As I said im my earlier post the Super Simplex boiler more than copes with the cylinders which on mine I assume to be made to the Super Simplex drawing.
Chris D
|
|