Caledonian 264 class

[hatfielddoc]

Dear All,
As part of an attempt to discipline myself and finish half begun projects I have been assembling the last required bits and bobs for a bash of a Hornby body onto a P4 chassis. As part of research on the SLS photo catalogue I have come across a photo of my intended loco 56011 at Inverness post ww2 still in LMS with 12 spoke wheels rear and 10 spoke front . Ho Hum an example of cannibalism in Inverness?
Alan Gibson do both but different throws!
Would a degree of dare I say it "slop" take the difference up ?
Any advice welcome.
Ian

 

[AJC]

For a four coupled loco that ought to work, I think? The proper job - and what I'd do - is to follow Chris Pendlenton and redrill the crankpin holes so that throws match. How he does it is in a couple of his articles in MRJ (nos 219 and 221). Much to recommend in there.

Adam

 

[hatfielddoc]

For a four coupled loco that ought to work, I think? The proper job - and what I'd do - is to follow Chris Pendlenton and redrill the crankpin holes so that throws match. How he does it is in a couple of his articles in MRJ (nos 219 and 221). Much to recommend in there.

Adam

Thanks so much , I shall read up the correct way.That's a trip to the attic then to find those 2 issues.
Ian

 

[Daddyman]

Depends how fussy you are. That amount of slop will result in coupling rods which never sit horizontal - the driven wheel will pull ahead of the other wheel and the rod will go skew whiff. I would go with Adam and redrill à la Pendlenton.

 

[simond]

not going to work well at all, unless you want it to run "crankily".

Crank throws want to match to a fine degree of accuracy.

 

[40057]

Dear All,
As part of an attempt to discipline myself and finish half begun projects I have been assembling the last required bits and bobs for a bash of a Hornby body onto a P4 chassis. As part of research on the SLS photo catalogue I have come across a photo of my intended loco 56011 at Inverness post ww2 still in LMS with 12 spoke wheels rear and 10 spoke front . Ho Hum an example of cannibalism in Inverness?
Alan Gibson do both but different throws!
Would a degree of dare I say it "slop" take the difference up ?
Any advice welcome.
Ian

Personally, I would be looking for a photo of a different loco with matching wheels, unless there is a reason why it must be 56011?

 

[hatfielddoc]

Thanks everyone, Reasoning was , Inverness shedded, lots of good detail photographs, early version so no above footplate springs . If after reading above articles I decide it is beyond my skills then fall back will be 56010 ( matching wheels) not so many photographs. Thank you all again, zIan

 

[Daddyman]

How much of the Hornby body is actually useable? The Hornby tank was certainly a fair way out for the NBR version and looking at photos of 56035 at St Mag's in the 1950s, seeing it head-on and side-by-side with the ex-NBR locos, the tank on the ex-Caley ones seems to be a different shape (more "humped" - or perhaps just positioned higher?), but I don't think it's the Hornby shape. This is the end profile of the NBR one compared to Hornby:

 

[JimG]

Here's a profile of the Caledonian saddle tank, actually from a drawing of the Caledonian Killin pug drawn by J.N.Maskelyne in a pre-war MRN. The Killin pug was a development by Drummond of his 0-4-0 pug basically by extending it to add a bunker and a trailing carrying axle. So the tank dimensions will be the same.



Jim.

 

[Overseer]

How much of the Hornby body is actually useable? The Hornby tank was certainly a fair way out

This got me looking at photos and books. It looks to me as though the LMS made new saddle tanks for the ex Caledonian locos which were a different shape to the original tanks (which look to be about the same profile as the ex North British locos). The LMS tanks meet the boiler at the bottom with a horizontal section while the NB tanks have no horizontal section and the curve meets the boiler. The LMS tank profile is a bit 'fuller', if that makes sense. The Hornby tank shape is probably not exactly right but some good looking models have been made from it, removing the vertical motor hiding skirts and fitting a boiler under the tank would help a lot.

I have a Slaters 7mm kit to build at some stage, bought to be built as one of the predecessor industrial locos but it might end up in BR condition so I will need to look at the tank shape more closely.

 

[Daddyman]

Here's a profile of the Caledonian saddle tank, actually from a drawing of the Caledonian Killin pug drawn by J.N.Maskelyne in a pre-war MRN. The Killin pug was a development by Drummond of his 0-4-0 pug basically by extending it to add a bunker and a trailing carrying axle. So the tank dimensions will be the same.
Jim.

Very useful, thanks.

This got me looking at photos and books. It looks to me as though the LMS made new saddle tanks for the ex Caledonian locos which were a different shape to the original tanks (which look to be about the same profile as the ex North British locos). The LMS tanks meet the boiler at the bottom with a horizontal section while the NB tanks have no horizontal section and the curve meets the boiler. The LMS tank profile is a bit 'fuller', if that makes sense.

Again, very useful, thanks.

The Hornby tank shape is probably not exactly right but some good looking models have been made from it

They have?

 

[AJC]

They have?

Well Ted Polet has done a couple of quite nice locos from the moulding in 009, but that's probably not what you mean! Here's one more along the lines we're talking about:

Neilson 0-4-0ST in EM gauge

I have a couple of lovely etched kits in the drawer but Corbs has led me astray! Over on the Modified RTR section he has a terrific thread for modified Pugs of various kinds, and it was halfway through reading it that I realised I had a few of my own. I've had this old Hornby Caley Pug since the ...

www.rmweb.co.uk

There is not a lot of Margate in there... I think @Dave has done one as well.

Adam

 

[Paul Tomlinson]

Well Ted Polet has done a couple of quite nice locos from the moulding in 009, but that's probably not what you mean! Here's one more along the lines we're talking about:

Neilson 0-4-0ST in EM gauge

I have a couple of lovely etched kits in the drawer but Corbs has led me astray! Over on the Modified RTR section he has a terrific thread for modified Pugs of various kinds, and it was halfway through reading it that I realised I had a few of my own. I've had this old Hornby Caley Pug since the ...

www.rmweb.co.uk

There is not a lot of Margate in there... I think @Dave has done one as well.

Adam

Adam, Thanks very much for finding and posting that link - Stuart also described the conversion in an EMGS Newsletter, and I thought it a very appealing little model. Cheers,

 

[AJC]

Adam, Thanks very much for finding and posting that link - Stuart also described the conversion in an EMGS Newsletter, and I thought it a very appealing little model. Cheers,

Of course he did - I've been tempted to emulate it, but 1. I'm not sure any ever ventured further south than Northants, and 2. I have too many projects...

Adam

 

[Daddyman]

It is nice, yes.

I think I win for having less Margate though (smokebox door and a couple of gauge glasses)...

North British models - Scalefour Forum

 

[AJC]

It is nice, yes.

I think I win for having less Margate though (smokebox door and a couple of gauge glasses)...

North British models - Scalefour Forum

That is *extremely* good.

Adam

 

[Daddyman]

That is *extremely* good.

Adam

Oh, thank you Adam! I do think I've captured the little swine's soul.

 

[hatfielddoc]

Very useful, thanks.

Again, very useful, thanks.

They have?

Thank you for all the information . I have the 1938 mrn and a sixties Skinley drawing and it was the section of the tank front and its multiple radii as well as a comment on scaleforum as to the fact that saddle tanks were a devil of a job to get right that has made me go down the Hornby tank mutilation road. I can live with a degree of compromise and if it offends me in the end I may very well try to fabricate the saddle tank.
Thanks again Ian

 

[JimG]

Thank you for all the information . I have the 1938 mrn and a sixties Skinley drawing and it was the section of the tank front and its multiple radii as well as a comment on scaleforum as to the fact that saddle tanks were a devil of a job to get right that has made me go down the Hornby tank mutilation road. I can live with a degree of compromise and if it offends me in the end I may very well try to fabricate the saddle tank.
Thanks again Ian

With Maskelyne's dimensioned drawing in the 1938 MRN, you could draw up the end profile of the tank in 3D CAD and extrude it to the length required, then 3D print to get the correct basic tank body. You might add the tank details in the 3D drawing, or you could add them to the 3D printed body after printing.

Jim.

 

[Daddyman]

With Maskelyne's dimensioned drawing in the 1938 MRN, you could draw up the end profile of the tank in 3D CAD and extrude it to the length required, then 3D print to get the correct basic tank body. You might add the tank details in the 3D drawing, or you could add them to the 3D printed body after printing.

Jim.

Or get someone like Justin at Rumney Models to do the CAD and printing work. I've used him for some fiddly details and he's very good and very fast.