Isaac Dixon

Osgood · Tuesday at 20:12

I think I'd go with Nigel's take on it.
And put that tank on a diet.

spikey faz · Tuesday at 20:25

Osgood said:
I think I'd go with Nigel's take on it.
And put that tank on a diet.

The tank has enrolled in a weight-loss programme. I'll report back in due course.

Mike

spikey faz · Wednesday at 18:14

I've taken about 2.5mm off each side of the tanks. What do you reckon?

I'm not going to round the top edges over, as the sister locomotive sports a squared off tank.

Mike

James Spooner · Wednesday at 18:20

To my untutored eye it looks more in proportion. Is it a trick of the camera or are the two sides uneven (as in one sticks out further than the other)?

Nigel

Dangerous Davies · Wednesday at 22:14

Mike
the tank now looks truly svelte!
Dave

Overseer · Wednesday at 23:05

spikey faz said:
I've taken about 2.5mm off each side of the tanks. What do you reckon?

View attachment 231934 View attachment 231935 View attachment 231936

I'm not going to round the top edges over, as the sister locomotive sports a squared off tank.

Mike

The revised width looks good. My reading of the Nantmawr drawing is that it shows a large radius curved top on the tank. The handrails are mounted near the edge of the curved top. The photograph used by AR Bennett when producing his drawing may not have shown the tank top clearly so it too could have had a segmental arched top to the tank. Curved steel needs less support than flat and it would look a bit more elegant than a Neilson or Barclay box tank.

spikey faz · Thursday at 06:56

James Spooner said:
To my untutored eye it looks more in proportion. Is it a trick of the camera or are the two sides uneven (as in one sticks out further than the other)?

Nigel

The 'adjustments' I made to the tank mock-up yesterday were carried out quite quickly just before dinner. My rumbly tummy may have diverted my attention from accurate Plastikard pruning! :))

Mike

spikey faz · Thursday at 07:49

Overseer said:
The revised width looks good. My reading of the Nantmawr drawing is that it shows a large radius curved top on the tank. The handrails are mounted near the edge of the curved top. The photograph used by AR Bennett when producing his drawing may not have shown the tank top clearly so it too could have had a segmental arched top to the tank. Curved steel needs less support than flat and it would look a bit more elegant than a Neilson or Barclay box tank.

I'm 50/50 on the shape of the tank. Sister locomotive 'Liverpool' sports a very squared off tank, but I agree that 'Nantmawr' has a slightly curved edge to the top. The Plastikard mock-ups will continue!

I do note that the drawing of 'Isaac Dixon' has a vertical row of rivets towards the front of the tank. I wonder if this was to do with some sort of internal reinforcement that was deemed necessary due to the square/box-like construction of the tank?

Mike

Osgood · Thursday at 09:03

The drawing on which you have based the loco shows a tank with rivets right at the top of the side so presumably flat top, but the height of tank over boiler looks smaller than your mock-up.

Is the consensus from the above discussion that the producer of the drawings did not capture the true shape / proportions of the tank?
Boulton’s creations / adaptations were in the main one-offs.

spikey faz · Thursday at 09:54

Osgood said:
The drawing on which you have based the loco shows a tank with rivets right at the top of the side so presumably flat top, but the height of tank over boiler looks smaller than your mock-up.

Is the consensus from the above discussion that the producer of the drawings did not capture the true shape / proportions of the tank?
Boulton’s creations / adaptations were in the main one-offs.

The drawing is based on a photo which sadly I've not been able to track down. So yes, it's quite likely the producer of said drawing may have not got it quite right.

There's some sort of pipe that seems to run along the top of the tank which may be also obscuring a rounded top.

Mike

spikey faz · Thursday at 19:44

Still experimenting....

Mike

Overseer · Thursday at 22:55

I was thinking the Nantmawr drawing shows something more like this-

The round corner looks a bit modern, although maybe I am just thinking of Manning Wardle with their similar shaped tanks which started with sharp arris between top and sides, then later the designed was modernised to rolled top into sides.

spikey faz · Friday at 07:16

Overseer said:
I was thinking the Nantmawr drawing shows something more like this-
View attachment 232053
The round corner looks a bit modern, although maybe I am just thinking of Manning Wardle with their similar shaped tanks which started with sharp arris between top and sides, then later the designed was modernised to rolled top into sides.

This is one of the great things about being able to tap into the minds of Western Thunderers: A different perspective! :cool:

That looks far better than my interpretation. I shall mock something similar up and see how it looks. Thank you @Overseer :thumbs:

Mike

Osgood · Friday at 07:41

On the other hand - if you were Isaac Watt Boulton would you want your men to spend extra time creating a tank with a hint of finesse when a basic square tank would suffice?

Edit: On the other hand, a classic Boulton engine was a Bitsa - so any suitable tank (from an even earlier engine) might be re-purposed.

Overseer · Friday at 08:02

Osgood said:
On the other hand - if you were Isaac Watt Boulton would you want your men to spend extra time creating a tank with a hint of finesse when a basic square tank would suffice?

Boulton is known to have been happy to have his bookkeeper spend hours lining out locos in ornate schemes so running a thin iron sheet through some rollers would not have been a problem. Not actually relevant in this case as Isaac Dixon (and Nantmawr) were built by Hughes & Co. Boulton bought Isaac Dixon secondhand and hired it out.

Osgood · Friday at 08:10

Happy to stand corrected, Fraser - the engine seems to lack the inherent elegance of other Hughes locos so I assumed it had been got at by Boulton.

spikey faz · Friday at 09:17

I think I may well stick with plan A. The tank depicted on sister loco 'Liverpool' has very much square proportions. Whilst I agree the curved version as per @Overseer has far better aesthetic properties, I have always (rightly or wrongly) pictured this locomotive in my mind with a squared off tank.

But..... I do have a second set of the same size driving wheels, which could end up in a model of Nantmawr! :eek:

Mike

spikey faz · Saturday at 19:17

I've spent the last few days applying rivets with varying degrees of success. They do seem to like wandering off course when my back is turned!

I've lobbed everything together to just get a feel for how it's going (yes, I know the coupling rods are missing and con-rods not aligned

).

I'm just hoping a coat of paint will hide all of my mistakes! :))

Mike

john lewsey · Saturday at 21:07

I think it looks fabulous

spikey faz · Saturday at 22:17

john lewsey said:
I think it looks fabulous

Very kind of you John. I think if you could see it close up and personal, you might have a bit of laugh about some of my dubious construction methods. I wonder if in a previous life I could have been working at Boulton's Sidings! :))

I've still got a lot to do - especially get it running! The weather looks a bit rubbish tomorrow, so might be a good time to stay indoors and progress the build.

Mike