Now that I've made the decision in favour of battery electric rather than steam (not an easy decision but I won't bore you with the details), the question arises - what motor should I use? It's a 4-4-0, the prototype ran with trains of up to 8 bogie coaches but I will be very happy with half that number. I'm just looking for a motor because I will make my own gearbox. What do people use, or recommend?
In addition to straight forward dc motors, I see lots of geared motors of Chinese origin (i.e. cheap!) available with low shaft speeds and the right sort of power rating that would only require a simple bevel gear to the axle. I've used similar motors in small and very light duty applications, but does anyone have experience of them for the purpose of loco drive?
Nick
Nick,
If you consult the G3WIKI then there are several articles on motors, wheel diameters and gear boxes. The main problem is matching the torque from the motor to the size of the driving wheel. The tractive factor of your loco is roughly 1/4.3 or for each kilo downforce you get about 200grammes of traction. The next problem is the rolling resistence of your axles. I use ball races and thus it is very low: ONCE IT IS MOVING!!!
Have a good luck at the MFA/Como drills spec sheets, no they are not that cheap, but they are exact. Technobots will provide MOD1 plastic (nylon or hostaform) gears to make your gearbox from. MOD1 may look clunky but think of the bearing surfaces and you will soon love them.
My standard motors are; 90p, £1.20 and £2.
The £2 motor is rediculous and can propel "Maude", (2-D0-2), plus four LMS coaches at over 100mph (scale). Aim for 12V to 14.4V working with around 4Ah of supply.
Regards
Ralph
Hello Nick,
Re motor choice, I'm guessing that you are in favour of a single motor and gearbox to drive one of the axles, which seems pretty normal for steam outline, so taking the advice from the Wiki that Ralph mentions you are going to need a fairly robust and powerful motor. I think the one that Ralph mentions for £2 is probably a 540 size (please correct me if I'm wrong Ralph, memory for numbers is not too great!), which is also the size mentioned in the Wiki article as typically used in car tyre pumps. If you get stuck I'm very happy to send you one from my "come in handy box" for the price of postage, and I will also give you data on free running speed and currents at stall. You would then need to make up a suitable gearbox once you have determined the approximate gear ratio needed, using the method outlined in the Wiki.
Re using a cheaply available Chinese motor-gearbox assembly, I have no direct experience but it should be interesting to try, providing you choose sensibly and have the patience to wait 5-6 weeks! By sensible, I mean that you shouldn't choose a tiny unit aimed at toy use; as a useful yardstick your motor diameter should not be smaller than about 30mm to put you in the right ball-park for power. The output shaft revs will be quoted as free running without a load, so ensure that about half of that speed (ie under heavy load) will give you enough scale speed for your wheel diameter.
Any help needed then just ask!
Have fun,
Tim
Thank you both for your replies. I can do the speed calculation (easy) but the torque calculation suffers from huge uncertainties in the final weight of the loco, the weight of the train, rolling resistance, gradients, curves ... you get the idea. That's why I was asking for others' experience. Unfortunately they all seem very shy, or maybe they have better things to do than read web forums :-)
Anyway, here's my solution. A 37mm Pololu gear motor with a ratio such that the speed at maximum efficiency is just a bit above the intended running speed of the loco. Better too big than too small. Then a 1:1 bevel gear to the axle.
The motor packages very nicely in the lower regions of the firebox, leaving plenty of room above for the batteries and control gubbins.
Nick
(https://i.ibb.co/L0s5rJv/T3-E-001-motor-and-gearbox.png) (https://ibb.co/L0s5rJv)
Yes Nick, judging by the physical diameter, and cited current limitation of 5A at 12V on one seller site, I would say that unit has adequate power for your purpose.
It is an interesting academic exercise to predict the torque needed to drive your train, and as you say there are a lot of variables, some difficult to quantify. Instead one can use the experience of others with Gauge 3 models to obtain a ball-park estimate of the electrical power needed to run a typical train. I have tried to gather some data over the last few years and my conclusion is that for mainline speeds and loads, and assuming the efficiency of spur gearing, we require something in the region of 50-80We. Your unit is clearly in this power bracket so that's why I say it is likely to be adequate for pulling your short train.
Don't forget that maximum power is developed at close to half of the free running speed, whilst max efficiency is at around 80%.
Regards,
Tim
My solution being lazy... My favourite ESC is the Dimension Electronics "Syren" series. These can take an external processor card called "X2 kangaroo". This can be programmed for various functions when linked to a Syren ESC.
Regards
Ralph
Nick
I have used these motor /gearbox combinations available from several suppliers in China
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DC-12V-2-1000RPM-High-Torque-Electric-Gear-Box-Motor-Speed-Reduction-Gearbox/302399971800?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&var=601236559876&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649
Some have Uk suppliers depending on speed required, they have bags of torque and fit nicely between the frames.
Mike
Quote from: Nick on Nov 21 2019 20:52
That's why I was asking for others' experience. Unfortunately they all seem very shy, or maybe they have better things to do than read web forums :-)
Or perhaps in the past, they've just looked through their 'spare motor' box and used the one that looked like it might fit. In which case 'they' (obviously not thinking of myself) probably wouldn't be able to give you too much expert advice Nick... :-[
Regards,
IanT
PS Very nice CAD by the way...
Nick, I also suspect that many take the easy but well tried route of using an off the shelf motor and gearbox which is tried and proven, albeit at greater cost. I am thinking about the excellent Slaters units.
Mike
And after a long delay, here it is in the metal. On a rolling road (i.e. no load conditions) the maximum speed is a scale 70-80 mph, which is what I expected and probably all the prototype ever managed. There seems to be plenty of torque (I know, a very unscientific measurement). I suppose I could measure the drawbar pull, but if I did, what would I do with it? It is what it is.
The cylinders and rods are done, next up will be the valve gear. Most of the components are ready, so hopefully it won't be too long.
Nick
(https://i.ibb.co/SKCVF02/T3-chassis-202004.jpg) (https://ibb.co/SKCVF02)
(https://i.ibb.co/gT3gqhr/T3-powertrain.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gT3gqhr)
Very nice Nick - look forward to seeing more.
Regards,
IanT
It's beautifully sculpted Nick, proper engineering! As for drawbar pull, this does depend on the weight on the driving wheels, naturally, so I'd encourage you to build it heavy. As a spot example I have a loco that exerts 1.9kg static, with the wheels just slipping, and that pulls nine Mk1 BR coaches at scale speeds with no bother.
Regards,
Tim
Beautiful workmanship on the chassis Nick. Exactly what loco is it?
Michael
It's an LSWR T3 class.
Valve gear is now done. That completes all the moving parts, unless I decide to make the reverser work just for the heck of it. :) The next job is the brake gear. With a large project like this, I like to divide it into smaller tasks so that I get a sense of progress when each one is complete. Helps to keep me motivated.
By the way, did anyone notice that the conn rod was assembled the wrong way up? Neither did I, but it's fixed now.
(https://i.ibb.co/R9zSykH/IMG-20200501-165243442.jpg) (https://ibb.co/R9zSykH)
Nick
Nick has his own website which is most interesting Michael.
[urlhttps://www.nickbaines.me.uk/index.html][/url]
Btw - that's a very nice CAD drawing Nick - what software do you use?
Regards,
IanT
I bow to the work of a master craftsman, maybe one day I can emulate this standard of work, but wonderful to observe.
Mike
Quote from: IanT on May 03 2020 09:41
Btw - that's a very nice CAD drawing Nick - what software do you use?
Ian - the answer is on the website to which you pointed us... !
Andy
OK - it was there in plan view Andy. It's been a few weeks since I first looked at the site... :-(
Regards,
IanT
Thank you for your Answer Nick, and thank you for the link to Nick's website Ian. Nick I sent you an email from your website, regarding Ron Spiers.
Michael
Digressing slightly. This little chap is hand driven but I'd like to fit a motor, trouble is, which RPM? The link that Mike has provided has motors that start at 2 RPM and finish at 1000 RPM. If I was after a gentle up and down arm movement, which RPM would suit?
Jon
The reason for this motor choice is because the mounting is offset as is the spindle of the motor.
Jon
Jon, a gentle flap would be at approx one per second, ie 60 rpm, but if you wanted take-off he might need to double that! 8)
Tim
Tim
Thank you for that and the motor has been ordered. I won't hold my breath waiting for delivery but, I'll keep you updated over progress.
Jon
Jon
If you add a speed controller such as this
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DC-Motor-1-8V-3V-5V-6V-12V-PWM-Speed-Controller-Potentiometer-Knob-Switch-Module/312514661235?_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item48c3534b73:g:BtoAAOSwDX
you can get what speed you require.
Mike
Mike
I've now ordered one of those as well, thank you.
Jon
I had the brake shoes and blocks printed in a hard nylon. They are a good candidate for 3DP because they are an awkward shape that would need, I reckoned, at least three setups to machine. As received the surface is a bit rough (the photo makes it look worse than it is) but it is easily filed smooth. I chose nylon for its durability and because it is low friction in case it came into contact with the wheels. Which, when you think about it, is the exact opposite of the needs of the real thing.
(https://i.ibb.co/7Q6S8JK/T3-brakes-as-received.jpg) (https://ibb.co/7Q6S8JK)
(https://i.ibb.co/gSFvtfj/T3-brakes-and-hangers.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gSFvtfj)
I also tried to get the connectors between the brake bars and the pull rods printed, but they were too fine for the process. (The feedback from the printer suggested that I "scale them up". Evidently they don't get many requests for exact scale components.) I ended up machining them like everything else.
(https://i.ibb.co/X5KXcST/T3-brake-linkage.jpg) (https://ibb.co/X5KXcST)
In addition to the brake equipment, all the detail of the front buffer beam is done.
(https://i.ibb.co/F6Khc6K/T3-buffer-beam.jpg) (https://ibb.co/F6Khc6K)
The smokebox wrapper is 0.5 mm nickel silver, which I prefer to brass because it conducts heat less well, so you can use a smaller iron with less chance of burnt fingers. Also NS takes paint better.
The South Western clearly preferred to use flush rivets, giving a very smooth appearance to their locos, not to mention making it easier for the modeller. An exception was the rivets inside the angles securing that part of the footplate between the frames to the frames themselves. I represented them using etymological pins that I bought years ago on the recommendation of a modeller in smaller scales. They proved to be much too large for O Gauge rivets, but work well in Gauge 3.
(https://i.ibb.co/WD57c8w/T3-smokebox.jpg) (https://ibb.co/WD57c8w)
Oops! Should, of course, be entomological pins.
Nick
Regarding soldering, have you tried using resistance soldering as it gives complete control of heat where you want it. I can recommend the process.
Mike
Very neat.
My first thought was this would help me with a project where the dressmaker pins I'd considered looked far too small. Unfortunately a quick search for the entomological pins showed that most now have some sort of plastic or resin ball spherical head. I assume your old stock were all metal with a traditional domed rivet like head. Maybe others can recommend current suppliers?
https://www.watdon.co.uk/acatalog/insect-pins-accessories.html
IanT
Chris,
Yes, I see the problem! Mine are indeed old stock, so old that I have no idea where they came from. I can find all-metal pins with heads that appear to be about the right shape at waldon.co.uk and at spentex.co.uk. It's difficult to be sure from the web site photos, but they are cheap enough to be worth a punt (IMO).
Nick
I have just received the pins ordered via IanT's link. The nickel plated brass sounded ideal and they are nicely shaped with a heads of approximately 1.5 mm diameter and around 0.8 mm height. Inevitably there is a degree of variation of about + or - 0.1 mm in these dimensions as I suspect their intended users don't need great accuracy. :)
I'll leave the experts to debate whether this is a scale size for whatever they are modelling.
You know those projects where everything that can go wrong, does go wrong? You think three times, measure twice, cut once and still put the hole in the wrong place? This turned out to be one of those. I expected the rear beam to be no more than a plate across the back ends of the frames with a slot for the drawbar, but when I examined the drawings and photos it was apparent that the ejectors, feedwater pipes and cab steps were all hung off the beam and provisions for them were necessary.
With hindsight I probably made it over-complicated, and that may have been the root of the problem. I broke my rule of making things with the fewest number of parts. I see now that with a bit more machining I could have reduced the parts count by half with fewer opportunities for things not to fit and have to be re-made.
Still, it is done now and the rear ends of the running plates are secured. Next up will be the aforementioned bits and pieces. The ejectors look to be a particular challenge.
Nick
(https://i.ibb.co/82HM9dt/IMG-20200820-143746628.jpg) (https://ibb.co/82HM9dt)
(https://i.ibb.co/XzPqJKk/IMG-20200820-180126684.jpg) (https://ibb.co/XzPqJKk)
I had Shapeways 3D print the injectors in brass from my solid model. That was a lot easier than machining, and the photo shows them as received. Actually the layering looks a lot worse in the photo than in reality (to my eye, at least). It depends very much on how the light catches them. A little polish on the visible surfaces brought them up really well. I should have thought to include a scale in the photo - they are about 20 mm end to end.
I thought the cost at about £30 the pair was reasonable and competitive with casting for such a small number. Dimensionally they are dead accurate, no messing about with drilling out holes for the pipework. And they had to be brass because the prototype was unpainted, and nothing looks like brass so much as, well, brass.
I will be back to Shapeways for more fittings. Unlike plastics, I don't think we will be 3D printing metals at home any time soon. Apart from the cost of the machine, it requires a high power laser, high temperatures, coolant supply and goodness knows what else. Not something to run in the spare bedroom.
Nick
(https://i.ibb.co/dc877cB/IMG-20200915-160310109.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dc877cB)
richard toplis did some injectors, as fitted to my J39, not sure how much he'd charge but could be another source.
Some more fittings, 3D printed in brass. For the one with the three handwheels, the handwheels and stems were too thin to be printed (I'm learning the limitations of the process as I go on), so I had the body printed, turned the handwheels and soldered them in place.
By the way, does anyone know what it is for? I can identify most fittings but that one has defeated me. It is attached to the side of the smokebox and presumably communicates with the smokebox interior - otherwise why put it there? There are two narrow pipes that disappear behind the smokebox, but unfortunately none of my photos show where they go. Just curious.
Nick
(https://i.ibb.co/PMtRn0R/IMG-20201030-155244958.jpg) (https://ibb.co/PMtRn0R)
(https://i.ibb.co/5GZGMZC/IMG-20201101-120918360.jpg) (https://ibb.co/5GZGMZC)
Very nicely made!
It is a lubricator, most likely feeding the cylinders via the steam chest. It is a common fitting on many early LSWR locos (e.g. Beattie 0298 class 2-4-0 well tanks, the Adams 0415 4-4-2 tanks and 0395 class 0-6-0.... to mention just a few) as well as other locos from other companies (e.g. the LNWR Coal Tank).
Regards,
John.
I haven't posted any photos for some time. The bodywork has taken quite a long time because of the way the splashers, firebox, boiler and cab front all intersect each other in complicated shapes, all in the best traditions of Victorian railway engineering.
Clever me thought that because I had made a CAD model of the loco, I could use that to develop the curved surfaces on to plane ones, cut out the parts, bend them up and everything would fit together nicely. In theory, yes, but in practice, any time you curve and assemble metal sheets, they are not going to be exactly as the drawing unless you do the curves precisely with specially prepared press and forming tools. For a one-off, that wasn't a good use of my time. My curving wasn't at all bad, but the curve only needs to be fractionally in the wrong place or slightly the wrong radius and things don't fit together as they should.
So I resorted to the traditional cut-and-try, offering up each part, marking out as best I could material to be sawn and filed away, and just kept going until eventually things fitted together well enough for assembly.
(https://i.ibb.co/n6qqdTP/IMG-20201108-160347520.jpg) (https://ibb.co/n6qqdTP)
Holding everything together with squares, packing. clamps and sticky tape to ensure it was straight (where it should be) and square, I tacked it, and then moved the assembly to a cradle for soldering up. Moving it away from the chassis means keeping the chassis clear of the flux and filings that can get everywhere and do no good.
(https://i.ibb.co/F0HtTR1/IMG-20201205-151318922.jpg) (https://ibb.co/F0HtTR1)
All done then? Err, no. The join between the splashers and the firebox was strengthened with angle iron bent to shape (that must have kept the Nine Elms blacksmiths busy), and then there is decorative brass beading along the top edges of the splashers. I didn't try to make the angles in one piece. The two parts of the angle were cut separately, soldered in place, and any remaining gaps were small enough to fill with solder.
(https://i.ibb.co/28wbnQg/IMG-20201217-144242859.jpg) (https://ibb.co/28wbnQg)
There are more photos at http://www.nickbaines.me.uk/T3.html (http://www.nickbaines.me.uk/T3.html). Till next time.
Nick
All looking very neat and tidy .... definitely been worth the effort.
John.
Really nice work Nick - very well done.
Regards,
IanT
Nick
After going through the same exercise and on reflection I think I would make a sacrificial boiler tube, do all the fitting and then un roll it and wrap it around the real boiler and mark out. There would still be some fettling but should cut down the amount of work.
Your loco body is looking excellent, keep up the good work.
Mike
Mike,
I think I did something not totally dissimilar to that. Here's an example where I wrapped a sheet of tracing paper around the boilerand marked the splasher outline with a very sharp pencil. That then gave me a template to cut to. I used that method a few times on different surfaces, both to get the component shapes and also the shapes of the overlaid angles.
(https://i.ibb.co/RY1cSjp/IMG-20201109-122326907.jpg) (https://ibb.co/RY1cSjp)
Maybe the ideal would be to CNC mill the splashers on each side from solid as a single part, and the firebox from solid as another part. That way one could get all the bends and curves exactly to drawing and the parts should fit together nicely. The boiler is a plain cylinder and could stay as a fabrication. Large enough chunks of brass would be horrendously expensive at today's prices, maybe I'd have to use aluminium instead and ask John Candy to weld it up for me. No, I'm not entirely serious. How one's thoughts wander during lockdown ...
Nick
I think Nick that the result you have achieved on the model has proved that your method works well. In real life these things didn't always fit perfectly. I have seen engines in the '60s with gouges out of their frames where the wheels have been rubbing. When making a tender I crawled all over a preserved example at the NRM to check how the plates lapped inside the horseshoe tank, only to find that it was so badly bashed about from use and the joins obscured by 1/4in of paint, rust and dirt that I still wasn't sure. Your model is superb.
Mike
(https://i.ibb.co/t4BFjKd/IMG-20210117-162726312.jpg) (https://ibb.co/t4BFjKd)
I machined the chimney, dome and safety valve cover. As always, the tricky bit was the flare where it seats on the boiler. I've done a lot of these in O gauge so I had the procedures and tooling pretty well sorted out, but in the larger scale there is a lot more material to remove. G3 is nearly twice the size of O gauge, so eight times as much (in case you are interested).
If I ever do any more of them, it will be by CNC or 3DP.
Nick
Lovely work Nick.
Regards,
IanT
Nick
Your engine is looking superb, could you describe in more detail your methods of creating the curve of domes and safety valve covers to sit on the boiler.
I turn up a large thin over size flange at the base of a dome, then anneal and dress down the flange over a round former the same dia as the boiler, then return to the lathe and turn to size.
Mike
Thank you both for your kind words.
To create the flare, I first flycut the base of the workpiece to the correct diameter for the boiler or smokebox, and drill and tap it for an arbour. It then goes on to the gizmo you can see in the photo. As it is rotated, the base runs on a peg that is hidden between the vice jaws, so that the cutter path follows the profile of the base. I gradually take off as much material as I can with a ballnose cutter. The finish is terrible because it is impossible to stop the workpiece chattering. I strengthened the spring shown in the photo considerably and pushed on the end of the dome with my thumb but still couldn't hold it completely steady. But that doesn't matter because the final task is to file it by hand to the final shape - checking the profiles frequently.
(https://i.ibb.co/9vV9HGs/IMG-20210111-110319878.jpg) (https://ibb.co/9vV9HGs)
(https://i.ibb.co/0Mdwtn1/IMG-20210111-121910699.jpg) (https://ibb.co/0Mdwtn1)
I've heard about people using Mike's method, or some variant of it, but I'm not sure it would work for me because I'm not that confident about my abilities with a hammer. I would have to practice on a few pieces to start with. For me, modern technology will be the way to go. I enjoy using traditional methods but not to the point of making a fetish of them.
Nick
Very ingenious Nick - thank you for sharing the idea.
Regards,
IanT
Nick
Thank you for the explanation, I agree with Ian's comment. I note you are using steel which is harder than brass, maybe that might machine better.
The method I described in my post the brass is annealed thus easier to work. I have a piece of square copper with rounded end that I dress the flare over the form thus not damaging the surface of the metal.
I find it fascinating how we find different solutions to overcome problems that come up building engines.
Mike
QuoteI note you are using steel
Only because it is what was to hand, and because it will be painted. The South Western, unlike some railways, didn't go in for polished brass or copper bonnets (thankfully). I agree, brass might cut down the machining time.
QuoteI find it fascinating how we find different solutions to overcome problems that come up building engines.
I couldn't agree more! It's what a forum is (or should be) all about.
Nick
The backhead is another component with interesting curves. Previously I had cut them from plate and filed the radius. This time I thought I would try a corner radius cutter. The workpiece was clamped to a plate drilled at the centres of three arcs: the top section of the backplate and the two fillets between that and the parallel section downwards. Each arc was cut in turn on using a rotary table, the fillets first and then the top to join them.
The finish left by the cutter wasn't bad, good enough that it was only a few minutes work with a file to smooth it all off. Result: a very consistent corner radius and a considerable time saving.
Nick
(https://i.ibb.co/fX73NBp/IMG-20210219-152028741.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fX73NBp)
(https://i.ibb.co/ZggszYB/IMG-20210220-170006362.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ZggszYB)
I'm waiting for the next batch of fittings to finish the cab and backhead.
(https://i.ibb.co/yg3SxpZ/IMG-20210330-125837573.jpg) (https://ibb.co/yg3SxpZ)
In the meantime I started drawing the tender and turning the tender wheels.
(https://i.ibb.co/syLMmjc/Tender-frames.png) (https://ibb.co/syLMmjc)
The drawing isn't just for fun, I'm getting a lot of the parts made and so I had to draw them anyway. After that assembling them is not a whole lot more effort, and I find it helps me to work out the assembly.
The well tank is prototypical and by including it I figured that I could get a pack of 10 C-cells in the tender if I decided or discovered I needed the battery capacity. My original idea was to put them in the loco but I found I could only get a pack of AA batteries in there. It means a more weight in the tender for the loco to pull around, but with the motor between the frames, I can fill the firebox with scrap iron and get a lot of tractive weight on the driving wheels.
(https://i.ibb.co/zX65mvt/IMG-20210330-125557115.jpg) (https://ibb.co/zX65mvt)
The tender wheels, like the loco wheels, are Mark Wood castings (only had a year to wait for them!) and very nice they are too. Fine grain cast iron, no hard skin or inclusions, they turn up very well with only the inevitable graphite dust to contend with.
Nick
I have finished the backhead and cab. The awkward bits (vacuum brake, water gauge bases and caps, reverser frame, etc) are 3D printed and/or cast, the rest is done the hard way. The most fiddly parts were the water gauge glasses, which are pieces of square perspex rod with tiny brass angles glued to each corner. Obviously once they were done I did not let the soldering iron anywhere near them. The reverser called for a square LH thread. It doesn't work because I couldn't face doing a matching internal thread.
And that completes the loco, apart from a few parts like the spectacle frames, handrails and oil pots that will go on after painting. Elapsed time so far is 4.5 years. I lost count of the CAD and workshop time so I really don't know, but who cares? It's supposed to be a hobby.
(https://i.ibb.co/BKRQv5t/IMG-20210519-185312749.jpg) (https://ibb.co/BKRQv5t)
(https://i.ibb.co/18rqT9L/IMG-20210519-185234962.jpg) (https://ibb.co/18rqT9L)
(https://i.ibb.co/GRtgGNs/IMG-20210519-185531543.jpg) (https://ibb.co/GRtgGNs)
2014 mdx 0 60 (https://statewideinventory.org/acura-0-60-times)
Onwards with the tender.
Nick
Beautiful. I was about to say what nice wheels and rods, but that would imply the rest is less nice, and that's not what I mean!
Mike
Thanks Mike. The wheels do look superb, but credit for that must go to Mark Wood who did the castings. Well worth the money and the wait for them!
Nick
Nick
Good things come to he who waits, an excellent piece of craftsmanship the backhead is beautiful. I wish I had your patience.
Mike
After a long delay, the tender is finished. The axleboxes, springs and the brake column are 3D printed and the rest of it is quite conventional, although those flares were a nuisance to get right. At least they are mitred at the corners rather than round.
That's all the construction done and it's ready for the paintshop. But it will have to wait a bit longer because that is currently occupied by a certain LNWR coach.
Nick
IMG_20220301_155640172_s.jpg
IMG_20220301_161359616_s.jpg
Very nice .... well worth the effort!
John.
I have seen Nicks exquisite work on this engine, the attention to detail has to be seen to appreciate it. I look forward to seeing the engine painted.
Mike
Quote from: 753 on Mar 03 2022 09:58I have seen Nicks exquisite work on this engine, the attention to detail has to be seen to appreciate it. I look forward to seeing the engine painted.
Mike
Absolutely 100%. We are lucky having really talented people active in Gauge 3. Nick is one but some of those commenting are pretty good too!
Mike
After an absurdly long time in the paintshop, No. 563 finally gets signed off. Hope you enjoyed the journey.
Nick
T3_completed_1.png
T3_completed_2.png
T3_completed_3.png
T3_completed_4.png