A Kab for a Konrad

[SimonWood]

I have somewhat suddenly bought a Konrad.

Its slow running is as delightful as I hoped (gears and flywheels FTW) but I plan to give it a cab with spectacles and side doors, to anglicise (or cymrify) it a little bit. This will be my first modelling effort in brass, but I will be calling on the help and advice of fellow Cardiff MES garden railers who have considerable skill in this.

First step is trying out some ideas, in (at Tony Bird's suggestion, 300gsm) card.

Draft 1 is largely inspired by Konrad konversions I have seen elsewhere.












The colour has attracted much comment(!) but I cannot guarantee it will be chosen for the final model

I removed the displacement lubricator for convenience but I will probably put it back in its original position, i.e. in front of the cab front sheet on the starboard side. The gas tank will be re-orientated to sit inside the coal bunker.

My own observation was the cab is too high - when I set the height I didn't account for the low footplate. The driver (a scale 5'6") cannot see through the spectacles. This means the chimney is too tall too.

Tony suggested moving the cab sides in so the cab footplate protrudes a few scale inches. Then midwalesstokie suggested an all-over cab would look good...

Draft 2 takes this into account, photos in the next post.

[LNR]

I think the relationship between chimney and cab height is spot on, but a lot depends on the scale in the back of your mind. Could there be a timber floor in the cab not visible from outside, that would raise drivers eye view?? (I notice the driver appears to be female and shortish) It's certainly done on the real thing. Just a suggestion.
Grant.
PS would oval spectacles a la O&K achieve the same end. All down to personal preference I guess.

[Keith S]

I think it looks lovely, you've done a nice job with the cab style- the proportions are quite attractive. Personally I would keep the spectacles circular if you want it to look British (or Welsh- "o gymru"?)

I guess oval spectacles would allow your lass there to see better, but at the expense of the fine proportions you've given that cab. I think you've got it perfect the way it is. Except the colour, perhaps.

Possibly the roof itself could extend a bit further back, to shelter the driver, but certainly not the cab sides themselves.

[SimonWood]

I think the relationship between chimney and cab height is spot on, but a lot depends on the scale in the back of your mind. Could there be a timber floor in the cab not visible from outside, that would raise drivers eye view??

I matched the cab height to the chimney, but besides the driver not being able to see through them, the spectacles look to high to me even from the front - that's just in aesthetic terms. So if I lower the cab roof, the chimney will look to tall, but then I could lower the chimney... If the issue was just the driver height, a raised timber floor is a great idea, I hadn't thought of that.

(I notice the driver appears to be female and shortish)

She's 5'6" so not especially short. I'm over 6' so I'd probably be ok -but it would seem presumptuous to expect a loco to only accommodate those of my build!

PS would oval spectacles a la O&K achieve the same end. All down to personal preference I guess.

That would certainly solve the issue, but unfortunately I'm quite irrationally wedded to round spectacles!

I think it looks lovely, you've done a nice job with the cab style- the proportions are quite attractive.

Thanks!

Possibly the roof itself could extend a bit further back, to shelter the driver, but certainly not the cab sides themselves.

Yes, I think if I go for a half cab, a deeper roof would be an improvement.

[SimonWood]

Draft 2: full cab (inspired by a r/h Bertie), lower roof, and sides brought in from the edge of the cab footplate.












I quite like the overall cab, although it's not as practical. And to my eye, the lower roof (and lower spectacles) look much better. I also like having the footplate protrude.

I'm having difficulty deciding between the full cab and the half cab, and to properly compare I need to see what the half cab looks like with the other improvements - lower roof and narrower cab - and also a deeper roof. So, out with the card and scalpel again...

[spooner]

I think it would look better with open back cab with the cab roof extend over the coalbunker on pillars.

[LNR]

I agree, the proportions of the second cab are indicating a much larger boiler, heading towards standard gauge size. The rest of the loco clearly indicates something narrow gauge. In the end it all comes down to personal preference, and I hope this is taken as opinion, and not criticism.
Grant.
PS even without pillars that roof could go back some as Ian says.

[tom_tom_go]

Not sure if you have seen what Chris Bird did to his Vincent?

http://www.gardenrailwayclub.com/7-8ths ... er-vincent

I know it is in 7/8ths but it might give you ideas on a final open cab design.

[TonyW]

I put a cab on a Vincent too recently, but for 16mm/foot scale...
http://www.rhoshelyg.me.uk/Pictures/DSC04728.JPG

[Gralyn]

That looks good. Noticed you had to reverse the direction lever on the cylinder. Was it difficult to do?.

[TonyW]

That looks good. Noticed you had to reverse the direction lever on the cylinder. Was it difficult to do?.

Not really. As I recall I just unscrewed it and put it in the other side with a small amount of silver solder to hold it in place.

[Keith S]

I still think the original one is best. It has the nicest proportions. If your wee people can't see out the spectacles, give them elevator shoes or raise the footplate- the roof on your original design matches the chimney better than your subsequent variation.

My vote is for the original version in the first picture.

[SimonWood]

Thanks for the pics, I'd seen Chris Bird's 7/8ths cab, and like it very much, but not the right scale for me! I hadn't seen the one you did, TonyW, and I like that a lot.

Here's my draft 3. Half cab, deeper roof, same height as the full cab. I've also stuck a very crude shortened chimney on - it was never my intention that it should remain at the original height if the cab is lowered. I've also shifted the boiler more towards the centre.












I definitely like the deeper roof for the half cab. The lower cab still pleases my eye better than the original, although it could perhaps be just a few mm higher using the planked floor trick to raise the driver.

[TonyW]

... I hadn't seen the one you did, TonyW, and I like that a lot.

Thanks ... the brief was to do a Penrhyn Quarry "what if", hence the Hunslet-inspired shape and the livery.

Your latest incantation is looking good too!

[dougrail]

Go for version 3. It's a nicer large cab but one that isnt overimposing like v2 was. V1 was too skimpy.

[Keith S]

I liked the chimney and the cab roof curvature better on version #1, but the deeper roof on the latest incarnation is good. I do think the roof is now too flat.

The first version has a jaunty look that I think is important for this little engine.

[Chris Cairns]

I have the factory roof on my Lumber Jack, and a 3rd hand hinged roof on my Vincent. I find the Lumber Jack is very awkward to finely set the regulator under the roof, and on the Vincent I moved the regulator handle on the shaft so it operates over a range that is more readily accessible under the roof.

Putting a driver figure in the Vincent's cab I also found that interfered with the regulator operation.

Chris Cairns

[ferrysteam]

I got this Regner spec' plate for mine, it's easy to get at the controls but looks pretty good I think.....

[SimonWood]

Yes - the spec plate already makes a huge difference to the appearance - an excellent enhancement in my view.

[Sir Clothem Cap]

I'm not sure your driver is tall enough to see ahead but it looks great.