Garden Railway Forum

Outside frames have now been printed and fitted so I thought I'd giver her a test run to make sure they didn't bind on the fly cranks. I think I got away with it



Rik

ge_rik wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:10 pm I think I got away with it

It looks like it, well done, she runs beautifully!

It may not be possible, or indeed desirable to you, but I wonder whether curving the rear of the frame up and over the pony truck and continuing it as far as the rear buffer beam might balance the back of the loco visually? I think it would mirror prototype practice too. Just a thought - it'll look lovely just as it is!

Andrew.

PS Isn't "Skylark" a lovely name for a class of locomotive??

Lovely little loco Rick, superbly built and runs sweetly too! A little time spent on the surface finish will be time well spent.

Very nice end result from a fast drawing and print job. Just shows the value ofa 3D printer.

I'm in agreement with Andrew though, it does look very empty under the cab, around the trailing axle.

If the frames cannot be extended, perhaps steps would do the trick?

You're right, the back end is a bit sparse. Now I've tested that the trailing bogie behaves itself, I can figure out how to fill some of the space.

The buffer beams have now been extended downwards. I'd like to try lowering the body somehow but that would require major surgery on the motor block so I might have to live with it as is.

Apparently, it's not really a Skylark but this design was based on or inspired by the class.

Rik

ge_rik wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 9:07 pm I'd like to try lowering the body somehow but that would require major surgery on the motor block so I might have to live with it as is.

The fundamental problem is that the driving wheels are too large. It's not possible to replace them - there wouldn't be enough clearance under the motor block (and the Bachmann wheels are moulded on to axle stubs) but I think I can lower the running board by hacking a few lumps off it. However. This would leave insufficient room above the cylinders for the Walschaerts valve gear which was used on the actual locos.

The drawing of the proposed MWB loco on which this is partly based shows Joys valve gear which is a bit simpler so I might try squeezing some sort of representation of that in instead.

I can use a fair bit of modellers' licence as, to my knowledge, Kerr Stuart never produced a three foot gauge loco derived from the Skylark design - that's my story and I'm sticking to it .....

Rik

Just had a comment on YouTube from one of the team building a full size replica of the original loco ...... He says he'd like to see my model for real when its finished No pressure then .......

Rik

ge_rik wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 10:14 am Just had a comment on YouTube from one of the team building a full size replica of the original loco ...... He says he'd like to see my model for real when its finished No pressure then .......

Thats what happens when you stick your head above the parapet....!

Decided I didn't like the "sit-up and beg" look of the loco and so took razor-saw in hand and attacked the motor block and the body. I've dropped the body by 7mm. It needed to be 8.5mm to match the drawings but that's as far as I can safely go. I think it now looks a lot better.
Rik
PS - Now noticed the boiler seems to be slanted up towards the front. Looks like another tweak needed.

I didn't think it'd make that much of a difference - but it does! Looks great!

ge_rik wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 9:07 pm You're right, the back end is a bit sparse.

Rik

I must work on my speed reading - you'll never guess what I thought that said...

It was only 2mm, but isn't it amazing what a difference that makes. Still plenty to do, but feeling a lot happier with it now.
Rik

Looking much better after all of today's tweaking, well done.

Rather attractive that, a "low-slung powerhouse" kind of look.

How many locos does that make for the PLR fleet, now?

Old Man Aaron wrote: ↑Thu Oct 21, 2021 8:10 am Rather attractive that, a "low-slung powerhouse" kind of look.
How many locos does that make for the PLR fleet, now?

Yes. That's what attracted me too it. I was looking for drawings and photos of Skylatks when this one popped up. Not really a Skylark but I think it owes its origins to the design.

This will be #23 in the fleet. I don't really need any more locos but, sometimes, I just can't resist this sort of loco porn ......

Rik
PS now almost finished her off. Just fitting couplings and a few of the finer details. Hoping to take another video later if the weather holds .....

ge_rik wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:49 am I can use a fair bit of modellers' licence as, to my knowledge, Kerr Stuart never produced a three foot gauge loco derived from the Skylark design - that's my story and I'm sticking to it .....

Perhaps.......

The attached photo is Kerr-Stuart builders no. 685 built in 1900. It's basically an enlarged Sirdar, so unlike Sunbury it's pure K-S and has design features in common with the smaller Skylarks and Sirdars that aren't on Sunbury. It ran on the 3' gauge Beaconsfield Tramway in Northern Tasmania and the remains are now on display in the local museum.

Certainly K-S don't appear to have built a larger 0-4-2T based on the Skylark, although the Skylark itself was designed to be built in gauges up to at least 3'. A larger 0-4-2T had to wait until the very utilitarian Tattoo/Thames, Darwin/Tagus, Brazil/Tamar range of off the shelf designs. A Thames was about the same size as a Skylark and a Tagus would have been about the size of a Sunbury, but the later locos are an acquired taste when it comes to aesthetics.......


Regards,
Graeme

GTB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 21, 2021 12:31 pm

ge_rik wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:49 am I can use a fair bit of modellers' licence as, to my knowledge, Kerr Stuart never produced a three foot gauge loco derived from the Skylark design - that's my story and I'm sticking to it .....

Perhaps.......

The attached photo is Kerr-Stuart builders no. 685 built in 1900. It's basically an enlarged Sirdar, so unlike Sunbury it's pure K-S and has design features in common with the smaller Skylarks and Sirdars that aren't on Sunbury. It ran on the 3' gauge Beaconsfield Tramway in Northern Tasmania and the remains are now on display in the local museum.

Certainly K-S don't appear to have built a larger 0-4-2T based on the Skylark, although the Skylark itself was designed to be built in gauges up to at least 3'. A larger 0-4-2T had to wait until the very utilitarian Tattoo/Thames, Darwin/Tagus, Brazil/Tamar range of off the shelf designs. A Thames was about the same size as a Skylark and a Tagus would have been about the size of a Sunbury, but the later locos are an acquired taste when it comes to aesthetics.......

Regards,
Graeme

That is a mighty fine looking loco, Graeme. I wish I'd seen it before creating this one. The wheel size looks much better matched to the Lyn motor block than the MWB locos.

I think mine has turned out OK - as long as no one looks too closely .......

Rik

Loco nearly finished but I decided to give her a test run with some stock. Not entirely happy with the sound which uses the chuff cam built into the Lyn motor block. I might go back to using the motor voltage to regulate the chuffs.




Rik

Lovely job Rik, she looks a solidly built loco and capable of hauling your stock. A useful addition to the stable.