| home |
|
| news |
|
| discussions |
|
| content |
|
| site |
|
|
| technical support | Need Help? Lodge a support ticket!
Note: This is for technical support only. General questions about railways should be posted to the Forums.donation 
Please Donate!photo comp Have YOU voted yet on Photo of the Month?
Click Here!
Voting Closes 31/12search |
| |
| Author |
Message |
Aussielgb
Station Staff
Joined: Jul 13, 2005
Last Visited: Aug 26, 2008
Location: Gulmarrad Station
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:02 am
|
Hi A6et
The whistle was not refering to the whistle cord, it was refering to the location. To pull a whistle cord would be right through the Safety valves.
the whistle on our green 35 is postioned 90% to the centre line of the boiler, ie you would need to have a cord on the running board to pull it.
The whistle is in the position of the 3rd safety valve, where as the whistle should be beside and slightly forward of the ramsbottom columns.
I actually did a test of the tender through most of our pointwork, shinohara 4s and -6s by hand and by pulling it with a 36 with no problems.
As I said the leading tender bogie wheel was actually raised off the rails and this was found to be the cause of any derailments encounted particularly working tender first.
Greg
|
|
 |
a6et
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:03 am
|
| Aussielgb wrote: | Hi A6et
The whistle was not refering to the whistle cord, it was refering to the location. To pull a whistle cord would be right through the Safety valves.
the whistle on our green 35 is postioned 90% to the centre line of the boiler, ie you would need to have a cord on the running board to pull it.
The whistle is in the position of the 3rd safety valve, where as the whistle should be beside and slightly forward of the ramsbottom columns.
I actually did a test of the tender through most of our pointwork, shinohara 4s and -6s by hand and by pulling it with a 36 with no problems.
As I said the leading tender bogie wheel was actually raised off the rails and this was found to be the cause of any derailments encounted particularly working tender first.
Greg |
Ramsbottom safety valves equipped engines did not have any back up safety valve except in the dome. The plan in the back of the 35cl is wrong in that & a couple of other areas as well.
What can be seen in checking photos of the ramsbottom days, it would seem that some engines had the dynamo to the front, where the whistle is on my black 35, & whistle where the dynamo is on otheres, in other words a swapped position.
I will try my 35 running tender first. How did you couple a 36 to it, owing to them having a different coupling method, or did you do what I have done on many occassions, hit the wrong key?
As I say the coupling on mine is very free & smooth.
|
|
|
nadnerb_2000
Chief Commissioner
Joined: May 07, 2004
Last Visited: Nov 20, 2008
Location: between my hat and my shoe soles
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:40 am
|
| a6et wrote: | I personally consider the exhaust sound overall is a bit too sharp & more akin to a 36cl as the 35cl was a particuarly soft engine.
|
With the QSI chip thats a fairly easy fix.
It is possible to adjust each sound effect's volume separately.
For instance with the AD60, I turned the whistle volume up to maximum. Made a world of difference.
The chuff could very easily be turned down. If you reduced the chuff volumes from, say, 11 to 7, you'd make it much softer, whilst still retaining the volume of the whistle, compressor etc etc etc. Something to have a fiddle around with and fix to your taste.
Pays to read the manual. I don't have the C35 but I suspect the manual will be similar to the one found on the QSI website. But check yours before doing this if you don't want to do a reset.
| QSI DCC reference Manual wrote: | • To change the volume level of an individual sound, do the following:
1) Set CV 49 to the identifier for the individual sound (see table next page).
2) Set data in Bits 0-3 of CV 52 as follows:
“0” = No sound
“1 – 15” = Sets volume level from the lowest level at “1” to the highest level at “15”
• 4 bits of volume level are used, providing 16 volume levels. The volume levels correspond to 2db increments.
• All other bits are reserved. Data in bits 4-7 are not used. Any data entered in these bits will be ignored.
Example: Set the chuff volume to the 6th volume level and then set the Horn/Whistle volume to 10th
level (i.e. set CV 52.8 to 6 followed by setting CV 52.0 to 11)
1. Set CV 49 to 10 to select the Chuff sound.
2. Set CV 52 to 6 to select the 6th volume level for the Chuff.
3. Set CV 49 to 0 to select the Horn/Whistle sound.
4. Set CV 52 to 10 to select the 10th volume level for the Horn/Whistle.
Example: For dual Air Pump Steam Locomotives, turn the volume off on one pump to create single
pump action.
1. Set CV 49 to 17 to select the second pump sound.
2. CV 52 to zero to select no volume.
Quantum DCC Ref Manual Ver 4.3.0 97/295 17-June-2008
5.5.1 Individual Sound Identifiers
CV 49 Sound Typical Default Levels
0 Horn/Whistle 11
8 Bell 11
10 Chuff/Diesel Motor/Traction Motor 11
11 Chuff 2 (Articulated Only) 11
13 Gas Turbine Whoosh 11
14 Turbo 11
15 Cylinder Cocks or Gas Turbine Whine 11
16 Air Pu mp 1 11
17 Air Pump 2 (Steam Locomotives Only) 11
19 Steam Blower Hiss/ Fans 11
21 Long Air Let-off 11
22 Short Air Let-off 11
24 Squealing Brakes 11
26 Steam Dynamo/Diesel Generator 11
28 Dynamic Brakes Fans 11
29 Boiler Pop-off 11
30 Blow down 11
31 Injector 11
34 Coupler Sounds 11
37 Air Brakes 11
40 Alternate Horn Volume 11
|
It can also apparently be done on DC using the direction switch and such in programming mode. The manual for that (if you've lost yours!) is located at http://www.qsisolutions.com/pdf/q-dcman-31.pdf[/url]
|
|
|
Aaron
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Jan 20, 2004
Last Visited: Dec 1, 2008
Location: University of Adelaide SA
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 1:41 pm
|
Terry,
Your apparent bias is showing.
Two models show better uncertainty than one? Hmmm, yeah, but neither shows much certainty and you conveniently did not mention the model that I have seen that performed flawlessly making it two vs two. I am going to show the great Mr Werner Heisenberg some respect and not make any suggestions of uncertainty.
Anyone that has ever sold anything can tell you that the upset customers complain loudest, yet you are the only one that seems to be saying anything. If things are so bad with the C35 where is everyone else that is so dissatisfied?
As for the heavy tender and pickup thing, I have an ancient SAR brass loco, an Rx. It is driven on one axle of the six couple and has a tender that’s made of real brass, I am sure the model tender has the same draw capacity as the prototype, , it’s heavy and clearly has lousy bearings. Being brass and having the standard smeggy half live pickup arrangement, I have only needed to fit pickups to wheels on one side, but these pickup is not yet connected to the motor.
Collecting current on three loco drivers and from the tender via two bogies and with a 60’s vintage motor it hauled on the flat seven HUB cars, somewhere I have a video of it hauling fourteen 4 wheelers and four bogie brake vans, at the time this was all the rolling stock I had on hand expecting it pull only half that...
The point? I don't think that the bearings or the pickup arrangement on the C35 and the weight and bearings of the C32 tender are going to make much difference.
My Rx with the flaws of both and none of the refinements of the last 10 years (of which I am sure the C35 and C32 each have at least some) and yet seems to do just fine. I am sure the C35 and C32 will to.
|
|
|
a6et
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:50 pm
|
I hope over the next few days try doing a tender first test on my 35 so will report back then.
Yesterday I started to do a mod of the tender hand rail area, to include the outward extended hand rails with the solid metal rear corner plates along with fitting a raised shovelling plate.
Whilst not too hard to do, using some styrene angles the hardest one is doing the drivers side & getting the correct cut away on that side. There is only one decent photo, & even that is hard to fathom of that area, & that is in 35class book, & to try & replicate it, I lost patience owing to the small cut away needed, so just left a hanging piece instead, looks ok to me now that it is painted.
If contemplating doing this, you need to carefully cut the hand rails off, & then add some square styrene to the tender floor outer edges. This does not really get them out far enough as the top step is only narrow, & you need to use that to glue the rail back in place there, unless you want to tryt the correct method of having a curled under hand rail fixture.
For me the width coming out just a short way is more than satisfactory.
As I have no way of being able to post photos here, I cannot show any photo of the mods.
In doing this & checking against my own photos as well as any I could find, revealed a few things especially with time & era changes. EG, the tender supplied with the model is the same as fitted to early NN & 34class loco's. It is also the same as the early rebuilt cab types, until they were fitted with staff exchangers.
The old NN with staff exchangers had them under the drivers seat & cab. The old NN's cab, was narrower than the rebuilt version, & the tender was the same width as the cab, rebuilding & widening of the cab, meant the need for the staff exchanger to be set on the tender & as such had to be further out thus the need for the difference in the tender hand rails.
This also was needed as it provided the correct distance for the fireman to hand exchange the staff in other areas where Auto staff exchangers were not fitted.
The rebuilt engines in the early days, especially with the green painted engines, seemed to have what looked like a 3rd small pop vlave to the front of the firebox, subsequent photo's shows this being removed from around 1953 (the last dated photo I can see). From this period, mostly that front positon was used by the Dynamo, with the Whistle being placed where the dynamo was in front of the Ramsbottom safety valve.
There are photos that show the whistle at the front AKA the model but that is not the most common position. Whilst I have not checked inside the model, I would say that it would not be that hard to swap them around if the fitting of these items is the same as with the 1st run 36.
I have been able to remove the parts in my 1st run 36, by carefully scrapping away the slight bits of glue used on the bottom of their lugs, once that is cleaned away, gently push the lug using the end of a hobby file or drill & they come out fairly easy. Care is the vital essence.
One other point I noticed on my model is that there is no funnel type lense as such, which tends to slightly spoil the front on look. Yet, it actually gives out an almost perfect dim affect of the headlight & when in motion the bright light is also very good. I tried placing a piece of clear round styrene in the barrel, & whilst it made the bright light look better, it made the dim light look too bright, as with every other light I have seen in a steam locomotive.
I have now tried a solid round plug of plastic from a Cornerstone kit, & taper drilled it & painted the inside with silver enamel & will see how it looks with the headlight on. This actually looks better even without the Micro clear which I will then add, if the working headlight looks ok, & the dim setting is not made look too bright.
|
|
|
Aussielgb
Station Staff
Joined: Jul 13, 2005
Last Visited: Aug 26, 2008
Location: Gulmarrad Station
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:42 pm
|
Hi A6et
My tests were conducted as follows
friday morning at Newcastle a Pig has just arrived on the north mail which the Nanny was due to depart with later in the day. I electrical fault in the points prevented the pig entering the loco escape. Approx 2 hours was spent looking for a broken wire. In this delay time the locomotive test engines decided to conduct ride tests on the Nanny tender.
With the Pig able to depart the two loco's were coupled (tender to tender) and worked through to Enfield where the 35 was dived from it tender and the 36 departed pushing the tender to Port Kembla. the test was conducted at an average speeed of 20 mph, the Pig being given green lights all the way.
At Port the Pig was held for a Coal train hauled by a 60 and local passenger train. Once the line was clear the Pig crossed to the up line and ran a 60-70 mph run loco first towing the tender back to Enfield.
Arriving at Enfield the Nanny was coupled back to its tender and the set off on the same run. At Coledale the closest station to the edge it was noted that the front wheelset in the tender was not touching the rails.
Adding a weight to the coal space solve this problem. However several derailments occured prior to this but not serious enough to cause any problems. the tender just ran along off the rails. Hence the problem with the coupling and rigidity it kept the tender heading straight even though the front bogie had 1 wheelset off the rails.
The Nanny was returned to Enfeild where it was placed in the workshop for further attention.
Re Safety valves
I have pulled out my 35 class book and it clearly shows several photo's of 35's with Ramsbottoms and the 3rd safety.
A good shot of NN 3528 page 99,3530 103,3501 109 and several others. Also the whistle location besde the Safeties.
Moving to page 159 3503 with 3 pop valves, the whistle can be seen above the second the generator being placed right on the front edge of the firebox. Page 160 shows 3526 in 1967 again with pops and the 3rd safety is clearly seen behing the turbo and the whistle appears because of the angle between the 2 main safeties.
Tender filler
I have to disagree with you here also. The rivets shown on the top of the filler on the model are the rivet that should rivet the filler to the tank. That is they should be at the bottom of the filler no the top. the hinged lid should be on the top so it opens.
regards
Greg.
|
|
|
a6et
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:45 pm
|
| Aussielgb wrote: | Hi A6et
The Nanny was returned to Enfeild where it was placed in the workshop for further attention. |
Have a check on the radius of the points more than anything, I have been looking at the amount of travel of the bogies & I think that they have trouble negoiating sharp points/track as the bogie frame hits both the couplers at each end.
| Quote: | Re Safety valves
I have pulled out my 35 class book and it clearly shows several photo's of 35's with Ramsbottoms and the 3rd safety.
A good shot of NN 3528 page 99,3530 103,3501 109 and several others. Also the whistle location besde the Safeties. |
3528 p99, is early non rebuilt, 3530 & 01 I mentioned the point re the time frame pre circa 1953 regarding the safety valve on those engines in the earlier period, which the book clearly states the early time.
| Quote: | | Moving to page 159 3503 with 3 pop valves, the whistle can be seen above the second the generator being placed right on the front edge of the firebox. Page 160 shows 3526 in 1967 again with pops and the 3rd safety is clearly seen behing the turbo and the whistle appears because of the angle between the 2 main safeties. |
The issue really is whether they had 2 or 3 pop type valves. The 2 photo's you mention above of 03 & 26, I have compared them with photo's I have of the 2 engines, I was on that Medway - Berrima tour, & the photos are inclunclusive, likewise the one of 26, I have several of her in normal service & on tours & again inclusive.
Having checked the one in th 35cl book with a magnifying glass, only the one of 26, gives any real indication of having what could be 3 pop vlaves.
On page 183, the 2 photos there when viewed under a magnifying glass appear to indicate that there are only 2.
What seems to be happening is the angle of the photo's and the fact that some seem to have the whistle offset whilst some are clear that the whistle is centred to the top of the firebox.
When you pick the post era, of 1953 onwards you can see the difference to the earlier periods. Bear in mind one thing in all of this & that is the attitude of the NSWGR heirachy, which meant that they would not have anything that was not deemed to be not needed, & that included this sort of thing.
If you were to look at the general positioning or amount of steam access points on the top of firebox you will see the amount that are usual for ongoing operation. A Ramsbottom safety valve has 2 steam vents, then one for the whistle & one for the dynamo, a total of 4, so to have 3 pop valves you need 5 steam access ports.
If you check out other engines originally fitted with Ramsottom type safety valves, you will find that they were also replaced with pop type valves as well, & again they only had two, but they also had a safety vent in the dome. Whereas others such as the 36 & 38 plus, 57,58, 59 & 60 all had pop valves with 3 of them. Safety valves of the Pop type were set at intervals of IIRC around 2-5psi.
All that really matters in the end is what you think is right for the model, & period that you are modelling, & this often is the overall issue when we model a specific period & a model that is wanted comes out, that does not fit with that time frame. For me, this engine fits perfectly my time frame.
The only way to to confirm this is to get a photo of 3526 at Thirlmere that clearly shows what is there.
However, even that can or could be inconclusive owing to any modifications made to the engine.
| Quote: | Tender filler
I have to disagree with you here also. The rivets shown on the top of the filler on the model are the rivet that should rivet the filler to the tank. That is they should be at the bottom of the filler no the top. the hinged lid should be on the top so it opens.
regards
Greg. |
You have lost me on this bit.
|
|
|
Aussielgb
Station Staff
Joined: Jul 13, 2005
Last Visited: Aug 26, 2008
Location: Gulmarrad Station
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:17 am
|
Hi A6et
The comments are really interesting.
Firstly re boiler fittings, I can assure you a steam turbo does not have steam supplied direct from the boiler. The turbo steam supply comes from the turret via a valve and about a 1" pipe to the turbo. No steam connection direct to the boiler.
The Whistle could not be fitted to a steam opening for a for a safety valve as again the hole diameter is different and the stud pattern, 4 for a whistle and about 1 1-1/2 hole, 8-10 for a safety and a 21/2 3" hole.
The era we are modelling is the 1950's that is why the station's are Newcastle to Port Kembla because this is where my father spent much of his time filming and photographing steam in the 50-70's with the likes of the late Ron preston and Jim Hampson. Enfield loco was where he was sent after his railway appenticeship was completed as a steam locomotive fitter. His last steam job being the supervision of the restoration of 3801 at the State Dockyard in 1986.
My own steam experience started at about age 4 with a ride on 3813 at Gosford from loco to the race course siding and back. In later life after completing and electrical apprenticeship with the rail with steam in the blood volunteered with 3801 ltd and the RTM climbing all over locomotives etc and I am still an active steam volunteer, live steam and model railroader.
Finally I pulled out of the cupboard my 2 un assembled DJH kits of the 35 and NN. The 35 clearly shows the third pop valve and whistle location asd does the NN clearly show the 'Astone Imperial Pop Valve' mounted in the same location.
Anyway all that aside I'm booked on this morning at the workshop to look at the drawbar coupling problem.
Regards
Greg
|
|
|
a6et
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:38 am
|
| Aussielgb wrote: | Hi A6et
The comments are really interesting.
Firstly re boiler fittings, I can assure you a steam turbo does not have steam supplied direct from the boiler. The turbo steam supply comes from the turret via a valve and about a 1" pipe to the turbo. No steam connection direct to the boiler.
The Whistle could not be fitted to a steam opening for a for a safety valve as again the hole diameter is different and the stud pattern, 4 for a whistle and about 1 1-1/2 hole, 8-10 for a safety and a 21/2 3" hole.
The era we are modelling is the 1950's that is why the station's are Newcastle to Port Kembla because this is where my father spent much of his time filming and photographing steam in the 50-70's with the likes of the late Ron preston and Jim Hampson. Enfield loco was where he was sent after his railway appenticeship was completed as a steam locomotive fitter. His last steam job being the supervision of the restoration of 3801 at the State Dockyard in 1986.
My own steam experience started at about age 4 with a ride on 3813 at Gosford from loco to the race course siding and back. In later life after completing and electrical apprenticeship with the rail with steam in the blood volunteered with 3801 ltd and the RTM climbing all over locomotives etc and I am still an active steam volunteer, live steam and model railroader.
Finally I pulled out of the cupboard my 2 un assembled DJH kits of the 35 and NN. The 35 clearly shows the third pop valve and whistle location asd does the NN clearly show the 'Astone Imperial Pop Valve' mounted in the same location.
Anyway all that aside I'm booked on this morning at the workshop to look at the drawbar coupling problem.
Regards
Greg |
Greg.
WHilst I may have used the wrong terms for the Dynamo & whistle connections, & as such it does show that repositioning is & was easy.
A further point to check is to look at where the normal position on the old engines that had the forward positioned pop valve & you will find that it is in the same position as where the dynamo is located.
I worked as a steam fireman from 64 -73, firing the last steam hauled train hauled by a 59cl from Enfield to BDM, was based primarilly at Enfield in those days, although I did stints at Werris Creek & then Port Waratah, & as such have a working knowledge & not just an off the footplate knowledge.
There is very little foubt in my mind that there was only 2 pop valves on them in later life, & aslo in the period from circa 1953 - 1963 they certainly were not fitted with the 3rd safety/pop valve.
|
|
|
a6et
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:20 pm
|
I did my final test today, running the 35 tender first, as a light engine movement, & I sadly have to say it actually did derail once.
The reason was that I was not quick enough to chang the points as it ran through a set of points that had the road set the wrong way. After the break down crew & crane arrived (me & my arm) I rerailed the engine & reversed to start again.
I then ran it through all points I used in my previous tests, with the exception of the Atlas points which will be replaced & I encountered absolutely no problems.
I have ensured that the bogies do rotate in a smooth & free manner, that the coupling between engine & tender are also free, & I can therefore report that the model provides me with absolutely no problems or trouble of any kind.
As such this finishes me on this topic.
|
|
|
NSWGR1855
Locomotive Driver
Joined: Mar 19, 2007
Last Visited: Nov 13, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:15 pm
|
| a6et wrote: | | NSWGR1855 wrote: | The problem with your testing is you only have one model, which according to your gauge the wheels are in gauge, therefore no problems should be expected. The model of the Austrains 35 I had a loan of , according to my measurements had a check gauge to large for reliable running through some Peco Turnouts, as evidenced by the resultant derailment under limiting conditions. My test results are consistent with this over gage fact. The fact your sample of one shows some are OK, and my and another independent members results shows some are over gauge. A sample of 2 means our results have a better uncertainty compared to your result. The derailment problem is typical of what I have observed for models using NMRA check gauge combined with Peco track.
Terry Flynn
http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html
HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates
DC control circuit diagrams
HO scale track and wheel standards
Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet
|
Terry
The problem seems to be that you seem to have found an excuse to find fault with the 35cl no matter what. Whilst you are possibly part of a team that does checks on models with a certain producer, you also seem to be bias against any others at the same time, not wanting to accept that only others have problems with their models. Tell us on this forum how many models of the garratt were produced & how many have had problems.
I wonder also if part of the problem is because John had the shameful audacity & not heed your advice as you originally suggested.
Are you actually upset that there may be a model of the 35cl that does not fit into your category or what? Will it matter how many tests are carried out to prove you wrong, by myself or others? The sad part really is that you seem to be incapable of accepting the fairly rigorous tests that I carried out, with the potential to actually wreck the tender.
How many others out there in model land have a 35 cl that is the same as mine, with no operating problems, all we need is one more to come forward & it equals your 2. In fact I know of at least 5 others who have the models & have no problems with them.
You also made comment about the metal tender on the forthcomming TOR 32 which may be a hindrance over the extra weight, well I have it on good independant authority that you are going to be in for a rude shock regarding this little P & what it can actually do.
As I said in the very beginning & I got lamblasted by some for daring to comment on problems with the 35cl & not saying what they were, yet you come on late in the bit, & level similar accusations, but then hide behind your pet peeve, regarding wheels, without naming the other items.
That aside not everyone has such a wonderfull view of your AMRA standards & desire to have them pushed onto the modellers here. & tell us also, if the wheels on the 35, are the same as those on the Austrains 36cl, & are an actual improvement on those nasty old wheels on the original Austrains 36cl why are those old nasty original 36 still running around on so many layouts without much of a problem?
Not just that aspect, but also there are a few people out there who went down the alternative route & purchased the DJH kits, & not mentioning the brass models that have had their fair share of problems.
I still give you the offer of purchasing the models off you, based on the percentage value you determine as being the poor value & problems with the model.
Now, seeing that I have such a rare & wonderfull model, that is indeed a rare bird, I will do some hand stands & put up for auction on Ebay, & gee I should get a remarkable price for it as it could be a collectors item.
Now if I can get such a price for it, I may actually be able to 2 or 3 35cl instead of having to make do with one at the moment. |
There are numerous errors on the 35/NN as many have pointed out. I identified the general coarse nature of the model, giving 2 examples as well as the the incorrect relationship of the NN cab and tender widths. At least one width is not accurate, I did not bother to find out which it is. Either way it it difficult to fix. Errors not mentioned myself before or identified by others here that I observed without looking to hard include the large screw holding the split chassis on the NN, a leftover from the 36. Luckily the 35's valance covers it up. Another error not mentioned about this model is on the blue versions of the NN the wrong smoke box door is used. The funnel on the 36's is a poor representation of the prototype, only 3616's exhaust looks right. The 35 and NN chimney's are better but still are coarsely proportioned, and have an excessively thick join to the smoke box. The poor pulling performance is partly due to the Lima style pickup, a measurable fact. Remove these drag adding pickups and observe the improvement in traction. However don't do this If you want reliable running at low speeds. Doing pickup through the pin point bearings is the solution that will no doubt be on future well designed models. So in all it's more than one easily observed feature that rivet counters don't like about the 35/NN models.
Knowing the 35 was to use the 36 mech meant I was never interested in getting one. Considering the level of accuracy of earlier Austrains models, I did not pre-order, and waited to see how many hard to fix errors would be included on the 35/NN. I know one rivet counting friend who has sent his back because of the numerous errors. John once said to me,"I don't care what you think Terry, because you don't buy any of my models". His attitude is reflected perfectly in the 36,35 and NN models. I prefer to buy accurate models, that's why I have the Trainorama 32 on order and a Eureka 38 on order. Both these models will match the earlier brass imports for accuracy and detail. Yes Austrains steam mechanisms run OK, but so do many other coarse inaccurate models. Nothing wrong with the running quality of todays Lionel for example. As for the more accurate fine scale brass alternatives of the 35 and 36, I still see examples running perfectly. It must be about 20 years since they were made, and if a bit of detail breaks off due to abuse, a soldered repair ensures the model is as good as new. And finally those opposed to using the AMRA standards for Australian models are holding back the industry. The AMRA standard is fully compatible with most current RTR track, the NMRA standard is not. A fact not disputed by those in the know.
Terry Flynn
http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html
HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates
DC control circuit diagrams
HO scale track and wheel standards
Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet |
|
|
Byron_Creek
Train Controller
Joined: Nov 17, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 1, 2008
Location: Either in the Apple/Train Room or wishing I was!
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:57 am
|
| NSWGR1855 wrote: | There are numerous errors on the 35/NN as many have pointed out. I identified the general coarse nature of the model, giving 2 examples as well as the the incorrect relationship of the NN cab and tender widths. At least one width is not accurate, I did not bother to find out which it is. Either way it it difficult to fix. Errors not mentioned myself before or identified by others here that I observed without looking to hard include the large screw holding the split chassis on the NN, a leftover from the 36. Luckily the 35's valance covers it up. Another error not mentioned about this model is on the blue versions of the NN the wrong smoke box door is used. The funnel on the 36's is a poor representation of the prototype, only 3616's exhaust looks right. The 35 and NN chimney's are better but still are coarsely proportioned, and have an excessively thick join to the smoke box. The poor pulling performance is partly due to the Lima style pickup, a measurable fact. Remove these drag adding pickups and observe the improvement in traction. However don't do this If you want reliable running at low speeds. Doing pickup through the pin point bearings is the solution that will no doubt be on future well designed models. So in all it's more than one easily observed feature that rivet counters don't like about the 35/NN models.
Knowing the 35 was to use the 36 mech meant I was never interested in getting one. Considering the level of accuracy of earlier Austrains models, I did not pre-order, and waited to see how many hard to fix errors would be included on the 35/NN. I know one rivet counting friend who has sent his back because of the numerous errors. John once said to me,"I don't care what you think Terry, because you don't buy any of my models". His attitude is reflected perfectly in the 36,35 and NN models. I prefer to buy accurate models, that's why I have the Trainorama 32 on order and a Eureka 38 on order. Both these models will match the earlier brass imports for accuracy and detail. Yes Austrains steam mechanisms run OK, but so do many other coarse inaccurate models. Nothing wrong with the running quality of todays Lionel for example. As for the more accurate fine scale brass alternatives of the 35 and 36, I still see examples running perfectly. It must be about 20 years since they were made, and if a bit of detail breaks off due to abuse, a soldered repair ensures the model is as good as new. And finally those opposed to using the AMRA standards for Australian models are holding back the industry. The AMRA standard is fully compatible with most current RTR track, the NMRA standard is not. A fact not disputed by those in the know. |
Well I have to say that I'm very happy with my three NN/35 models, faults and all. I've had no problems whatsoever with derailments or the pulling power of the models and I do enjoy having sound in them as I do with most of my models now.
It is good to have pedantic rivet counters in the hobby, this does bring about more accurate models.
But for me as just a fairly average modeller, the alternatives to the RTR models don't hold much appeal. I don't have the skill or the time or patience to learn the art of soldering white metal locomotive kits.
Nor do I wish to spend a lot of money on brass that might look good but has running qualities only marginally better than a Lima 38!
As for track/wheel standards, mine is a real mixed bag. Peco code 75 on the layout, code 100 in the yards and an assortment of wheels ranging from RP25-88 all the way to Lima pizza cutters with turned down flanges. There's even a few wheels which don't seem to conform to any standard in the known Universe!
All of these run quite well with rarely any derailments because I've taken great care when laying the track.
In the end, model railways is just a hobby for me to enjoy and not take too seriously. I know that I will never earn the title "Master Modeller" but I'm not aiming for that anyway!
Byron Creek-The NSWGR of the 1960's and 70's in HO scale http://www.byroncreek.com
The Official God FAQ
Q. Does God exist?
A. No. |
|
|
a6et
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 11:49 am
|
| NSWGR1855 wrote: |
There are numerous errors on the 35/NN as many have pointed out. I identified the general coarse nature of the model, giving 2 examples as well as the the incorrect relationship of the NN cab and tender widths. At least one width is not accurate, I did not bother to find out which it is. Either way it it difficult to fix. Errors not mentioned myself before or identified by others here that I observed without looking to hard include the large screw holding the split chassis on the NN, a leftover from the 36. Luckily the 35's valance covers it up. |
Now I think we are really getting down to being completly screwy. Come on get real.
| Quote: | | Another error not mentioned about this model is on the blue versions of the NN the wrong smoke box door is used. |
No comment as I do not have one. Nor seen one.
| Quote: | | The funnel on the 36's is a poor representation of the prototype, only 3616's exhaust looks right. |
John Eassie paid for the rerun to have the funnel changed & molded correctly the factory did not do it, & refunded the money.
| Quote: | | The 35 and NN chimney's are better but still are coarsely proportioned, and have an excessively thick join to the smoke box. |
Tend to remember a similar comment in the AMRM review of the Eureka Garratt.
| Quote: | | The poor pulling performance is partly due to the Lima style pickup, a measurable fact. Remove these drag adding pickups and observe the improvement in traction. However don't do this If you want reliable running at low speeds. |
Bit of a catch 22 I would say. Maybe a bit of easilly fitted lead in the engine part will more than compensate.
| Quote: | | Doing pickup through the pin point bearings is the solution that will no doubt be on future well designed models. |
Maybe you could be more constructive & commit to doing an article in the AMRM on how to fix this issue, that would be a help, instead of just a hindrence.
| Quote: | So in all it's more than one easily observed feature that rivet counters don't like about the 35/NN models.
Knowing the 35 was to use the 36 mech meant I was never interested in getting one. Considering the level of accuracy of earlier Austrains models, I did not pre-order, and waited to see how many hard to fix errors would be included on the 35/NN. I know one rivet counting friend who has sent his back because of the numerous errors. John once said to me,"I don't care what you think Terry, because you don't buy any of my models". His attitude is reflected perfectly in the 36,35 and NN models. |
So this shows your prejudice was set even before the model arrived & you really could not wait to get your hands on the model, to get a magnifying glass out & lamblast it.
& personally I can understand John Eassies attitude towards you on it, as I have found he listens to those who are not abrasive in their approach, & demands that it has to be ALL there way.
What amazes me is that I have been labelled a rivet counter by many modelling associates, yet nothing compared to this. & when are you going to get the unprototypical kadees off the front of your steam engines, never saw a 57cl with an auto on the front, & as such you are really on the outer edge of a true rivet counter as a result.
| Quote: | | I prefer to buy accurate models, that's why I have the Trainorama 32 on order and a Eureka 38 on order. Both these models will match the earlier brass imports for accuracy and detail. |
I think you are right with the 32cl. But the jury will not retire with the Eureka 38's until they finally arrive to see if all the issues are resolved. I overheard Ron saying at NCLE that he is waiting on the redone firebox model very soon. & I certainly hope the tender on show there is not what we will be getting as there will be a field day with it.
| Quote: | Yes Austrains steam mechanisms run OK, but so do many other coarse inaccurate models. Nothing wrong with the running quality of todays Lionel for example. As for the more accurate fine scale brass alternatives of the 35 and 36, I still see examples running perfectly.
It must be about 20 years since they were made, and if a bit of detail breaks off due to abuse, a soldered repair ensures the model is as good as new. |
What interesting comments Terry. Yes there are a lot of Brass models running around that are ok, but there are a heck of lot not. & what of the accuracy of many of them? Tend to remember expensive 38's coming out by the same company, that had initially correctly detailed fireboxes, whilst their next run was wrong.
| Quote: | | And finally those opposed to using the AMRA standards for Australian models are holding back the industry. The AMRA standard is fully compatible with most current RTR track, the NMRA standard is not. A fact not disputed by those in the know. |
Never said anything about the AMRA standard holding back the industry, just said that the NMRA is more the normal standard & so far has to be proved unaccepable.
In the end, what I would like to see, is that you & your rivet counting mates, band together & form a company in order to put your money where your mouths are, & produce us the perfect model.
|
|
|
LaidlayM
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Mar 03, 2004
Last Visited: Nov 30, 2008
Location: Research
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 1:10 pm
|
| Byron_Creek wrote: | | It is good to have pedantic rivet counters in the hobby, this does bring about more accurate models. |
Byron.
As a well known person in the hobby wisely said in a different place “everyone who is fussier than me is a rivet counter”. Lot’s of people missed the wisdom by reading it literally.
What I think he meant was that when anyone says “he is a rivet counter” they are saying that everyone who has higher standards than me has overly high standards.
There is no single point at which the term “rivet counter” applies from; it’s all relative and subjective. Maybe some might think of you as a pedantic rivet counter because you use code 75 rail in HO.
Personally I think we should applaud those with higher standards than ourselves, not deride them by calling them names. Name calling suggests fear and jingoism rather than respect.
Mark
Mark Laidlay - One of those not fussed either way about 3801
|
|
|
a6et
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:08 pm
|
| LaidlayM wrote: | | Byron_Creek wrote: | | It is good to have pedantic rivet counters in the hobby, this does bring about more accurate models. |
Byron.
As a well known person in the hobby wisely said in a different place “everyone who is fussier than me is a rivet counter”. Lot’s of people missed the wisdom by reading it literally.
What I think he meant was that when anyone says “he is a rivet counter” they are saying that everyone who has higher standards than me has overly high standards.
There is no single point at which the term “rivet counter” applies from; it’s all relative and subjective. Maybe some might think of you as a pedantic rivet counter because you use code 75 rail in HO.
Personally I think we should applaud those with higher standards than ourselves, not deride them by calling them names. Name calling suggests fear and jingoism rather than respect.
Mark |
Mark
I do not really disagree with you on this, & I think that the application work both ways. The reality is, without rivet counters in hobby, both from the pure modellers side but from the manufacturers side of things, we would not have the quality today in RTR models that we now have, even the 35 & 36.
That to me is the core of this whole thing be it track or a model. As mentioned I have been called a rivet counter, & I for one always want to see models or whatever in either the ACAP or ADAF area. As Close As Possible or Feasable.
Whilst I admitted & raised some points with the 35cl I am still of the opinion that it is not as bad as some make it out to be, could it have been better? As I have said a resounding YES! Should it not have been produced or would we be better off without it? A resounding NO! & that is only my opinion.
I have already modded the tender rails & put a shovelling plate, tossed the plastic coal & replaced with real coal. I notice, (at least on my Eureka Garratt) the plastic coal load is an integral part of the bunker & cannot be replaced. The only model I know of like it.
At the end of the day, many will not like the 35cl & much of it is purelly personal taste, yet the more I check out some of the criticism the more I see the extreme edge in rivet counting. Or maybe nit picking is more apt.
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT + 10 Hours
|
You cannot post new threads in this forum
You cannot reply to threads in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.6 © 2001 phpBB Group
Theme images and concept © 2004 by Michael Greenhill and Railpage, All Rights Reserved.
Version 2.0.6 of PHP-Nuke Port by Tom Nitzschner © 2002 www.toms-home.com
|
|
