|
|
Post by ettingtonliam on Aug 22, 2020 7:51:37 GMT
No, I've never seen it on a locomotive, though I've heard legends of it being done on big mill engines, even to the extent of individually trimming the backs of nuts so the flats lined up when tight. Totally pointless, I agree, from a practical point of view except that, as with those yellow fittings on HGV wheel nuts, it made it easy to see if one was working loose.
The whole thing would be negated anyway, the first time it had to be dismantled for maintenance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2020 10:01:23 GMT
Hi guys
As Roger says it will look wrong and indeed be wrong. My aim is to get her as close to looking like the real thing as possible, not just in looks but in operation too. I want to be able to take a B&W photo from any angle and with the right backdrop to make it hard to tell whether real or not.
That photo can then take pride of place on my lounge wall.
Pete
|
|
timb
Statesman
Posts: 512 
|
Post by timb on Aug 22, 2020 11:00:49 GMT
Remind me, why isn't lining all the screw slots up a good idea? I'm sure I've read that thats how it was done in high class joinery. I would have thought half a turn more on a 6BA screw just to line it up and its head would be off! I am with Roger, that's not how they are in real life!
Tim
|
|
|
|
Post by silverfox on Aug 22, 2020 11:55:58 GMT
Before the split I went on a tour of Rolls-Royce/Bentley at Crewe. ( all owner of any version can go!) They insist on everything being lined up
|
|
mbrown
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,796
|
Post by mbrown on Aug 22, 2020 12:35:19 GMT
Slot heads are pretty rare on locomotives anyway. But hex head fitted bolts would have been put in with the flats in line.
Malcolm
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2020 12:40:41 GMT
Slot heads are pretty rare on locomotives anyway. But hex head fitted bolts would have been put in with the flats in line. Malcolm Prototypical on LNER Pacifics....., of course,...  Don's drawing shows 8BA, I did all of mine at 10BA to be much closer to scale. Pete |
|
|
|
Post by jon38r80 on Aug 24, 2020 18:50:54 GMT
Sorry, didnt mean to start a controversy, It was something Architects asked for and used to drive me nuts.who looks at the screws on the hinges in theitr house? No dont answer that!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2020 19:16:20 GMT
No fear Jon...a bit of banter is good for the soul... Pete |
|
Midland
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,875
|
Post by Midland on Aug 25, 2020 17:18:03 GMT
Pete
I take my hat off to you messing around with a bloody great pacific especially as I am parting company with my BGP and going back a little engines. Just too many wheels and too many parts. At least you are three cylinders, imagine having four. I am going back to my little 0-6-0 with drawings and to work away quietly!
Cheers david
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2020 16:50:21 GMT
A new book for me today, just had a quick browse, lot's of new pictures to me in this one and from what I've read of the description, a lot of new in formation about not only Gresley's loco's but the design team around him, I look forward to learning more. It's a big heavy book and should keep me entertained during the evenings for a while. here's the cover  And a works ticket for 4472, I don't think that I've seen this one before?  I note interesting info on the A4 streamlined testing including small models of the various nose shapes tested and also a lot of info on the W1, including what looks like a model being tested in 5" gauge, could be larger. Pete |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2020 10:32:13 GMT
Hi guys... a change in plan re 'paint' finish...As can be seen, by the two accompanying photos, I have painted the running boards in the 90% gloss finish, well you can see the splashers, everything else had been boxed up to protect from dust and await hardening before I tackled the removal of any blemishes... However, the amount of gloss had been bothering me as it's just too shiny to how I see 4472 during the late '30s, or for that matter at any time in her long career. This morning I have been looking through all of my reference images from the '20s/30's and also during preservation and none look as gloss as the picture shows here. Now I know that yes full gloss is the finish applied but you have to be very careful when applying it to a model or you end up with what looks like a 'toy'. Even the close-up photos that I took of her at York in 2016 show a satin finish, yes I know it began life as a full gloss but it soon dulls down and it's that 'patina' which I believe my model needs to look right. Therefore, in due course when I sand down the parts to remove any dust/debris from under the paint I am going to give them a light coating of satin which is at 70% gloss level. Not an easy decision to make but each time that I look at that gloss I know that in my head it will always look wrong, or should I say, wrong for a model of this scale.   In other news, some of you may have noticed that my blog has been offline for the last 7/10 days, this is due to the server still playing up. Hopefully early this week normal viewing shall return as the blog is migrated over to new hardware, sorry for the inconvenience to those who have been using it as a visual guide to their own builds. Pete Edit: Ah, forgot to add, I'm not counting her high gloss finish as applied for Wembley 1924/25... |
|
barlowworks
Statesman
Now finished my other projects, Britannia here I come
Posts: 878
|
Post by barlowworks on Sept 7, 2020 11:30:08 GMT
HI Pete, I'm not sure how you are varying the mount of gloss but would it be an idea to paint up some sample panels with the various finishes you are considering, both black and green. It may be that two gloss levels complement each other or clash horribly.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2020 11:41:43 GMT
HI Pete, I'm not sure how you are varying the mount of gloss but would it be an idea to paint up some sample panels with the various finishes you are considering, both black and green. It may be that two gloss levels complement each other or clash horribly. Mike Thanks, Mike, Bob kindly sent me some talc some time ago to vary the gloss level although for these parts I'm using an auto chassis paint in aerosol form as it has a professional nozzle and is chip/heat resistant... It just looks wrong to me and I know that it will bug me if not dealt with now. Although most of the images from the early days are B&W it's clear to see that other than when she was prepared for the Wembley exhibition they all show a very dulled down finish, more so than what could be achieved from gloss gaining its own patina after steaming, I'm referring to the model here. It won't take much work to give a coat of satin (70% gloss), I'll just go carefully over them with W&D to give a key and re-spray in a satin finish of the same make of paint. I have no issue with the paint itself, just the level of gloss doesn't work on a model of this size. As for the green coachwork, that's a different matter and will be painted in full gloss, or at least, that's the current plan.. Kind regards Pete |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 15:40:42 GMT
good afternoon all, sorry for lack of content of late, I was away in Cornwall for a while and now in the middle of some DIY. However, I have found time for 4472 and continuing with my recent post, I have now taken care of that paintwork which has bugged me for so long. well bugged me twice, first the bad finish and then recently the too high level of gloss... I think that I've sorted it now, well, sorted in my mind that is, I like the new finish and think it will look just right on the finished model. Here's the latest blog entry to show what I mean.  4472flyingscotsman.co.uk/repaint-of-running-boards-etc/Pete |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2020 9:40:10 GMT
Hi Chaps.. a bit of a question for the collective...I'm currently fabricating the ejector collar around the petticoat, a bit of a challenge due to the different materials/thicknesses involved... anyway I have persevered and got the collar attached and the pipe union which is seen in this earlier photo showing the process for when I post an update in a day or two. now the thing is, silver soldering the support flange to the top of the petticoat for attaching to the chimney. I've tried twice now and still not succeeded, worse still is the collar which had been finished and tested airtight has now sprung a leak, not at all surprising considering the heat involved, I'll chaulk this later with a high melting soft solder. Now I recall from the past of some telling me that a good tight fit is more than good enough to hold the petticoat pipe in place, Don may have said as much in his words and music. With this in mind, I'm thinking of dropping the flange plate and rely purely on the close fit of chimney and petticoat pipe. Now the fit is very good, I have just tried to remove the petticoat again after marking the flange position for the 3rd time and it's still stuck there, this is when I left it to pen these notes. Since it is such a good fit I may well leave the flange off, I can always seal the joint with high temp silicone to ensure it doesn't loosen when heated. I just thought that I'd see how many of you have the petticoat pipe held in place purely by its own tight fit as trying a further high temp heating session may not be a very good idea.?  And yes, I know that I've deviated off my intended next parts to make again, but this became the next stage after I decided to also repaint the smokebox along with the running boards, I'll explain why in my next update. Pete |
|
|
|
Post by simon6200 on Sept 15, 2020 10:13:05 GMT
On my engines the petticoats are held on with a good fit and two grub screws. When I machined the B1 pettycoat, I left a thick collar at the top to provide thickness for the grub screw threads. The Simplex I bought has two lugs brazed on for the same purpose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2020 10:24:33 GMT
On my engines the petticoats are held on with a good fit and two grub screws. When I machined the B1 pettycoat, I left a thick collar at the top to provide thickness for the grub screw threads. The Simplex I bought has two lugs brazed on for the same purpose. That's interesting Simon, do you have a photo to show, I'm trying to visualise how the grub screws work? cheers Pete |
|
stevep
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,073
|
Post by stevep on Sept 15, 2020 12:07:21 GMT
I use countersunk screws through the smokebox to hold the petticoat pipe in place. The flare of the chimney then covers the screw heads.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Sept 15, 2020 12:44:08 GMT
I use countersunk screws through the smokebox to hold the petticoat pipe in place. The flare of the chimney then covers the screw heads. This is the way I've done it because it makes it very easy to get it out of the way when you want to work on something in the smokebox. It's all very well having something that's a tight fit, but that can work against you when it's seized in place and you can't get it out. |
|
|
|
Post by runner42 on Sept 16, 2020 7:52:59 GMT
I use countersunk screws through the smokebox to hold the petticoat pipe in place. The flare of the chimney then covers the screw heads. Agree I did the same, but it requires the support flange to be silver soldered to the Petticoat pipe, unless you have somehow dispensed with the support flange and used the countersunk screws to affix directly to the petticoat pipe. Knowing Pete's skill level I am surprised that he is having difficulty in silver soldering the support flange to the petticoat pipe. Is it positioning, getting it close to the top of the smokebox or getting it square, I know that thin sheet material is sometimes difficult to stay in the correct position? But the judicial use of clamps will overcome any movement. Brian |
|
Don's drawing shows 8BA, I did all of mine at 10BA to be much closer to scale.
