|
|
Post by standardsteam on Nov 23, 2006 17:22:05 GMT
Whilst I am still building my first free-lance design (ie non-scale, not one of mine!) I am doing a scale model also and am interested in how people go about finding out scale detail information. The few "scale" designs have been fine in outline but if you're going for the right number of rivets and brackets in the "right" places how do you go about it?
The three avenues I know about, 1) go and find a preserved version and photograph all the bits you're concerned about replicating, 2) get a reference book(s) on the class if it exists, and 3) is to try and get hold of "works" drawings, presumably from somewhere like the NRM.
The kind of question I'm interested answering is "Do BR3 tenders have the same size spring hangers as the BR1?", so from that you can probably guess I'm interested in the BR standards, does anyone have any pointers to good reference information...?
|
|
|
|
Post by alanstepney on Nov 23, 2006 21:03:50 GMT
The place to start is the National Railway Museum, who are almost certain to have works drawings for BR standard engines.
There will probably be many sheets so finding the right one(s) will be the first task.
However, the staff there are a helpful bunch and quite knowledgeable, which will help.
Then comes the scaling, which is more than just taking 1/12th (for example) of the full size dimension as I am sure you realise. All good fun though.
|
|
JohnP
Hi-poster
Posts: 186
|
Post by JohnP on Nov 23, 2006 22:30:50 GMT
Once you get down to exact detail, it's almost essential to model a particular locomotive, rather than a class. Often a single loco will change its details considerably during its lifetime, so you end up with a particular model during a relatively short range of years. As an example, with GWR locos, there'd be right angle or curved step on the footframing in front of the cylinder, saturated or superheated boiler, position of top feed, outside steam pipes or not, whistle shield or not, top lamp iron on smokebox door or immediately in front of chimney, side windows plated over or not, struts from smokebox to front fooitframing or not, and that's before either the livery changes with BR ownership or finer points like AWS, lubricator changes etc.
I'm sure the same must be true for other companies.
You can see why some owners just paint them just as they like them!
JohnP
And I forgot the range of chimney and safety valve bonnet styles....
|
|
|
|
Post by Laurie_B on Nov 23, 2006 23:18:27 GMT
Regarding researching any particular loco or class of loco,your three avenues of seeking information are about right.The National Railway Museum does hold a very large number of drawings from full G.A's,down to small component pieces.
Many years ago the late Jim Russell,in partnership with OPC,produced several lists of works drawings.Since then the NRM has produced further lists.
Taking the BR Standard locos,there are now comprehensive lists of drawings that were produced by Derby,Doncaster,Swindon etc design offices.However,it would appear that quite a lot of drawings were lost at the end of the steam era.
Visiting preservation centres,as I have found,is a very good way of interpreting what can be very complex drawings-such as G.A's and 'Pipe and Rod' drawings.
Regarding the BR3 tender,I am building one in 5" gauge at the moment.The published design seems a bit vague to me,so I have made reference to a number of BR drawings.
As for the spring hanger brackets,I suspect they were not as deep for the BR3,as they were for the BR1 and BR2 ranges of tenders,due I suspect to the arrangement of angles and tank support plates on the BR3.
Recently I bought some lost wax spring hanger castings from Doug Hewson,and comparing the hole centres with the BR drawing would suggest this is the case.
Doug does provide a range of detailed castings based on works drawings (in addition to those for his Class 4 tank loco design) and I have used these in my BR Class 2 pony truck-discarding the original Don Young design.
|
|
|
|
Post by standardsteam on Nov 24, 2006 16:50:27 GMT
Thanks all for the information, it's interesting that certain locos went through changes in their lifetimes and that this is maintained into preservation. People seem to get upset when a preserved engine is turned out in a combination of features that they never appeared with in their working lives. Scale details can be a minefield like that, so maybe it's best to model a loco that went to scrap otherwise someone will tell you you've got a rivet in the wrong place ;D
laurieb - I'm doing a BR 1 tender and am thinking of the class 2, I was also thinking of getting Doug Hewson's spring hangers but wondering if they fitted the BR3 as the tender is the smallest of the range but have no drawings to confirm. It makes me wonder how "standard" the standards were. I think the class 2 has the same ejector, manifold and boiler clacks, but don't know about the rest of it. I would imagine they worked over the Ivatt design and replaced what they could without too much modification. I suspect that probably more Ivatt 2MTs were made under BR than BR 2MTs! I'm not aware of a reference book solely on the BR 2MTs, there are plenty on the standards as a whole.
|
|
|
|
Post by havoc on Nov 24, 2006 19:03:14 GMT
I'm researching the belgian railways type 53. There are drawings around, but there is so much difference between them that there still is a lot of guesswork. There are changes on the drawings (some dimentions changed 200mm), details etc. Plans are dated 1904, the last changes 1931.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laurie_B on Nov 25, 2006 11:50:59 GMT
StandardSteam,
You are right about the reworking of the Ivatt class 2 locos.A few years ago I had a good look over,and took lots of photos of 46441 at Crewe.As you say,the main changes were (amongst others) items such as the boiler fittings,e.g., the regulator housing which was positioned on the boiler barrel,rather than through the boiler backhead,the chimney,the cabsides etc.
However,the axlebox and spring arrangements for the BR3 tender were noticably different from the LMSR version.
At the moment I'm redrawing the tender frames,making reference to the BR 'slotting' and 'drilling' drawings,and it looks as though the Doug Hewson spring hangers should fit-well,on paper at least!
Something I have noticed is that on the full size drawings,the angle strips which form part of the tank supports,are relieved by 5/16" in way of the tops of the spring hanger brackets.This suggests that the standard spring hanger might have been made to fit.
I have the tender frames cut out now,but not drilled.I'll keep you posted as to whether the D.H. castings actually fit,or if they will have to be modified.
Also I have an idea that the water filter box castings for Doug's Class 4 tank,would also do nicely for the BR3 tender.
|
|
|
|
Post by standardsteam on Nov 30, 2006 9:49:05 GMT
Thanks laurieb, I'd be interested in your class 2 build. It's on my todo list when I get some of the other projects finished, or I might just start it anyway!
|
|
John Lee
Part of the e-furniture
Posts: 375
|
Post by John Lee on Nov 30, 2006 19:21:29 GMT
Thanks laurieb, I'd be interested in your class 2 build. It's on my todo list when I get some of the other projects finished, or I might just start it anyway! I am (in this hobby at least) fortunate enough to live in York, so can go to the NRM easily (and do, it's great). If anyone needs any specific photos, and the loco is still at the NRM, they move around... please ask... John |
|
|
|
Post by standardsteam on Dec 1, 2006 9:42:06 GMT
It's the "unusual" photos that are the ones you never get, who knows what the inside of a standard tender looks like? If you're making up a rear coal bunker bulkhead it would be great to get that kind of reference photo. Models are viewed "top down" which means the cab roof and tender top gets seen a lot whereas most reference photos tend to be taken from a 3 quarter view. Detail photos are really useful, spring hangers, chassis stretchers, pipework. Just the kind of photos most people think you must be mad for taking. Thankfully now in the age of the digital camera there's no waste of film as you get that dark shot of the brackets under the running boards! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Laurie_B on Dec 1, 2006 13:29:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by standardsteam on Dec 1, 2006 16:15:49 GMT
Not got very far! I think you're well advanced. It's great to see build pictures, I follow other peoples work (with some envy of other's skills) with interest. I can see what you mean about the pony truck, looks very good, it would be something you need a drawing to construct I imagine. Your tender stretchers look more prototypical, are they fabricated or solid? Don Young's re-use of tender axlebox horn castings on his drawings don't match with the BR versions that well as far as I could tell. That drag box (?) look much more detailed. Is that a Hewson hook and chain? I'm looking to shortcut where I can as I find it's time that I'm more short of than anything although for scale detailing it's just something that you have to invest time in. I'm sure that when(if) I get an engine on the road some of my impatience will die off and I'll be able to concentrate on making each bit properly. Model Engineering teaches you patience if nothing else.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laurie_B on Dec 1, 2006 21:06:19 GMT
Thanks StandardSteam!
Well sometimes it doesn't look like much progress has been made!
As for the pony truck,well,when I first looked at the Don Young design I couldn't quite work out how it was supposed to go together.Then I noted Doug Hewson's design in EIM for his 5" gauge BR class 4 tank loco.The pony trucks were the basically the same for all the BR 2-something-something locos.They were certainly the same design as for the Ivatt class 2 locos.So I bought some drawings and castings from Doug;the only alteration needed was to the geometry of the 'A' frame.I also made the base plate out of 1/8",rather than 1/16" as specified on D.H.'s drawing.
The tender stretchers are based on full size drawings.I used preformed steel channel which is supposed to be for model wagon underframes-so all I had to do was silver solder on the end and cross plates.
As you mention,the Don Young tender horns aren't quite right-so I have adapted the castings for the 5" gauge Brit/9F,which I bought from the late Norman Spink.
The drag boxes are again based more on the full sized drawings than the published design.All that was required was slightly different shaped plates,a few webs here and there,and a lot of silver solder!
The screw coupling and hook were,I think,from Reeves.
What I find does take a bit of time is doing the research and then producing my own drawings if needed.The actual time to manufacture the various bits and bobs isn't that much greater.It didn't take that much more time to cut out the main frames to a more prototypical profile than to the Don Young design.
|
|
