Lambton, Hetton and Joicey Colliery (Kitson) No.29 build

[Paul_sterling]

Afternoon Folks,

A trip down to Peters Spares, eyes successfully raked out, and I now have an 8F Pony Truck, and suitable coupling.

On the face of it, the distance front pivot to axle is longer than desirable, and axle to tension lock shorter, so the axle will need to move forward. Might well be a job for the printer, and use some of the Alan Gibson 3'6" wheels I have for the S1.

Cheers, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

20190729 rendered by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

The engine is coming together now. the odd shapes on the wheels are so that I can see easily the dimension impact of 1- the outer wheel dia inc. flange, and the max tyre dia, which is the reference point for generating the axle centre height of the rear pony truck.

The cab detail, such as the reinforcing/rain strip/gutter is overscale, but I do have limits on how fine I can print, but even more so, I have limits on how fine I can bend/shape strip brass!

Cheers, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

Here is No.29 Printed, looking not unlike a scrapyard beside a Tioxide plant

IMG_20190813_222207[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190813_222217[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190813_222225[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190813_222233[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

She was designed and printed differently to the Q1/2, with surface sanding in mind, chiefly becuase there was always surfaces of the Q1 which I could not sensibly reach, and in the case of No.29 it is a considerably more complicated shape to work with. Some things I couldn't avoid without compromising on either finished appearance, or printing strength, such as the cab roof (which I did consider printing separately, and stood on its rear edge, so printing with its arch axis vertical). I may well have a go at printing the cab on its own, as it is going to be a big job getting the profile sanded right. There are two strip roof vents which I added to the CAD, and perhaps should not have, as it is getting in the way, and some 30-40 thou plasticard strips would have sufficed.

Anyway, it has one coat of primer on, purely so its easier to see the areas which require work (i.e. all of it!)

Thanks, Paul.

[Atlantic 3279]

To my eyes, photo on previous page suggests a subtle taper to the sides of the dome.

[Paul_sterling]

To my eyes, photo on previous page suggests a subtle taper to the sides of the dome.

Could be Graeme, when I measured the engine I didn't note any taper (but it was a tape measure around the dome in at 25% height and 50% height), and in some pictures it does look like there is definitely a taper, and in others it looks parallel. My gut feeling is the compound curves at top and bottom (each appears to be made of at least two different radii) and making an optical illusion one way or the other. I've just buzzed through my library of 190 pics, and there are some definite pro taper and pro parallel pictures.

No great challenge to add in a taper, as the dome needs additional filling anyway, and a teet sanding off the top.

Thanks, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

Filling and sanding of No.29 is well underway, the first coat of primer makes all the difference with these printed parts as to the "look" as the homogeneous colour brings out the shape, whereas the raw printed shape, with its glossy surfaces, has an almost dazzle camouflage effect on the look of the parts.

In addition to No.29 a friend of mine expressed an interest in building a loco of his own, and we decided to make use of the now redundant J72 chassis to build another loco, this time a type that never existed, but should look quite at home with No.29. Not letting on anymore than that for now, just to get people guessing as to what we're doing.

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

I've been having a good look at the built-up No.29, and there was something not quite right with it, and comparison with the freelance loco, sort of confirmed my thoughts.

IMG_20190821_180603[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190821_180542[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

No.29 sits too low. This is partly because the 0-6-0 is sitting 1mm too high itself, but even without it in the pics, No.29 looks short on the rails. I couldn't work it out at first, and checking the measurements on the real engine confirmed I had the right measurements. It turns out that the slightly bigger wheels of the 1F chassis tuck further into the body then they do on No.29, and this (compounded with the narrower gauge of 00) make her look wider and low. Some pics of the real No.29 back up this look, and as I say, it is dimension-ally correct, but I've decided to lift it up 1mm. The coupling rods on the real No.29 are more visible at "rods up" than they are on my model at the same position, so the extra height will help.

Conversely, I may also lower the 0-6-0 by 0.5mm to make it look smaller, as its chunky features make it look the bigger stronger machine. It is essentially a shortened version of No.29, with shorter length boiler, tanks, cab, bunker, whilst retaining the same frontal view.

Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

THe modifications to No.29 in ride height are complete.

As suspected, the models dimensions were right, but looked wrong, so I've lifted the chassis mount face to raise the engine up.
IMG_20190828_100135 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr
Old vs New

and work on the newly Christened LHJC No.32
IMG_20190827_222401 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190827_222344 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr
A lot of work done on finishing thus far, and a lot still to go.

IMG_20190824_134010 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr
The two of them in the sidings at Goathland

IMG_20190824_132134 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr
IMG_20190824_132125 by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

There is an awful lot I would like to change to improve the models, but there does come a point where cost of printing and benefits of the reprint swing over.

Thanks, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

I've finally settled on a build method which prints the engine in a reliable and workable form. I've reverted to the method used on the Q1, which is the loco printed in bits, though taken slightly further, as the Q1 had the superstructure printed as one, the boiler, firebox and smokebox as one, and the frames as one, No.29 has the frames, each side tank, the bunker, and cab all separate, and the firebox, boiler, smokebox, smokebox door as an assembly.

The following pics, are a light hearted assembly of the engine.

IMG_20190903_213547[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190903_213552[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190903_213604[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

IMG_20190903_213619[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

From this, I'll be coating with primer-filler as I have done with the 0-6-0, as it works very well with the printed material, and to a degree, fills the print channels nicely. Its not a substitute for sanding, and possibly some filling will still be required, but it is certainly a very amiable surface to work with.

Thanks, Paul.

[Paul_sterling]

Petulance and impatience got the better of me yesterday.

I bought Railmatch Doncaster Green, as well as BR Green (150ml spray in each case). The initial coats on the engine went on well enough, but it was far too dark. Thinking this was wrong resulted in no end of frustration and annoyance on my part. The camera picture shows it much lighter than it appeared in reality.......
FB_IMG_1568358355887[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

By the time I got home though, and compared it to the Bachmann LNER green, which to my mind at least has always captured the Doncaster Green well, it looked somewhat better.

IMG_20190912_200902[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

The finish wasn't great, so a good sand down was done ready for another go today. I've bought some white primer to try which may lift the colour further still, as I was using bog standard grey previously.
IMG_20190912_220116[1] by Paul Sterling, on Flickr

Thanks, Paul.

[Atlantic 3279]

First time I've knowingly seen anything like a shine on a Railmatch paint finish!

[Paul_sterling]

Yep, don't know why either haha.

What's your thoughts on the colour debacle Graeme? Too light, too dark?

Paul.

[john coffin]

many years ago, when I painted frequently, I used read oxide as my primer base, because it made the colours
deeper, and strangely more neutral.

I have not checked with these modern water based paints as to whether a red oxide is still available, but it might
help.

Paul ( another one)

[Atlantic 3279]

Shade of green in photo looks okay to my eyes, on my monitor, 'though that proves absolutely nothing.

[Paul_sterling]

many years ago, when I painted frequently, I used read oxide as my primer base, because it made the colours
deeper, and strangely more neutral.

I have not checked with these modern water based paints as to whether a red oxide is still available, but it might
help.

Paul ( another one)

Hi Paul,

Yes, red oxide is still available as a primer, though sometimes is purely descriptive of the shade rather than as the fantastic primer it once was.

Paul.