Accucraft C-16 notes
Bob, Thanks for the notes about the 268 version of the live steam C-16. I was interested to read that this one has a removable steam dome for access to the safety valve. The No. 42 does not -- the safety is completely inaccessible as far as I can tell! This is not a good thing, since you can't check your safety when you're raising steam. I was alarmed to see that mine finally blew at 70 psig, though the manual says it's set for 55 psi and that I should keep my hands off it. Well, I have to, but I don't like it. I'm a bit concerned by a loco with a safety that can't be tested and may be set 20% off target, and a clock that may be 20% off. I put almost another hour on mine tonight, both on blocks and on track hastily laid on the garage floor. Herewith, some notes from tonight's session: I notice that the owner's manual lists an accessory called an "oil pump". This is NOT an optional tool -- you MUST have one or you can't get any oil into the @!#% tiny filler tube. Steam oil is so thick that the first drop hits the neck and the surface tension keeps it there longer than the half-life of Strontium 90. Meanwhile, the little syringe they give you to suck water out of the lubricator is totally useless, since you can only get it about 2mm into the neck. On the Ruby, the water-sucking situation was even worse, so I took some 3/32" copper tubing I had in the non-ferrous and made a 3-inch-long extension for the syringe. I drilled the tip 3/32" and glued in the tubing and made a great sucker which also works very nicely as an oil pump for filling the C-16' tank. Bob mentioned a loose exhaust tube. Mine was loose, too, but I was able to tighten it from the top of the smokebox, since the top is flattened. I would like to hear your reaction to the chuff with and without the resonator tube. The smokebox arrangement on this engine seems very effective, acoustically, so I think it possible that a secondary tube might actually diminish the chuff. Try it both ways, and let us know, please. On that topic, watch the engine carefully the first few times you run (preferably on blocks). I found several things that started off loose or became loose after some running and heat/cool cycling, including the valve chest and cylinder covers and the body of the blowdown valve, which seeped onto the cab floor. Another thing to look out for is the sander pipes. One of mine was so long that I think it must have been dragging the track. I was blaming the derailments at track joints (esp. when backing) on the hasty tracklaying and the lack of leading wheels in reverse, but it didn't make sense to me that the lead truck would have much effect, since it just swings loose on its pivot. After putting it up on blocks again, I noticed the absurdly long sander pipe, and cut it off. Haven't tried running it again on the track to see if that cleared up the derailment problem, but it would certainly have caused trouble at some point. I wonder about the air hose on the tender, too. It's a great touch for a fine- scale model, but overkill for this one, and probably a source of derailment at some point when it snags a switch frog or a twig between the ties. It would be a good thing to devise a centering mechanism for the lead truck so that it actually did some leading, rather than simply dangling in the breeze. Another small issue is that when the safety weeps, it drops water directly onto the valve motion and, worse, right between the second and third drivers. This can't be good for traction, and will probably require some kind of drip shield or diverter. Since I'm running on my workbench, I put a piece of thin cotton cloth over the stack to keep the oil from getting all over my other projects. This produced a much more visible steam plume, even through the cloth! I am going to experiment some with a turbulator for the spark arrestor in an effort to replicate this effect. The prototypical diamond stacks had one sort of diverter or another, which moved the exhaust stream in a spiral path, giving the cinders time to to lose momentum and drop out of the stream. I hope to be able to cool the exhaust a little with a similar device, and slow it down with the screen a prototypical arrestor would have had, to get some more condensation above the stack. One cool thing I noticed is that, after a couple of runs, there's enough steam oil collected in the smokebox that you get a terrific plume of actual smoke the next time you fire up. Very cool! Almost makes me consider one of those smoke generators like the SteamLines Shay had. Tonight's run was very good -- smooth and trouble-free. I got tired of standing around in an increasingly humid garage after 30 minutes into the second boiler load and shut it down. This is going to be a RUNNING engine, good for some serious hauling and switching, with a minimum of downtime for servicing. Hot dog! regards, -vance- Vance Ba
Re: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models
Mike, You're probably correct in thinking that everything will be much more closely scrutinized from this point on. I can't remember who it was, but someone at Diamondhead (a few years ago) had an old hard shell suitcase that they had picked up at a garage sale and had modified it inside for such a purpose. They had made forms of the general outline of their locomotive and tender, allowing space for open cell foam padding to secure around them, and used expanding foam to fill all areas not taken by the prized contents. It was a really nice looking setup inside. The added benefit of looking like someone's suitcase that might be "less fortunate" in the financial department is a built in tamper deterrent of sorts. Best thing is that it's a suitcase and therefore will not draw attention, and it can be locked. I would suspect that a carry on type case would be much more secure that one being bounced around be airport personnel. It would also probably be handled a little gentler in your presence if it fell within question than it would be by someone out of view doing the x-ray scanning of additional luggage. Hope it helps or provides an idea that will work for you. Later, Trent Mike Eorgoff wrote: > Since I expect carry on of our small engines to become a great headache due > to recent events, can the list expound upon how to build a shipping > container so that engines can be shipped properly?
Re: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models
Mike Eorgoff asked:- > Since I expect carry on of our small engines to become a great headache due > to recent events, can the list expound upon how to build a shipping > container so that engines can be shipped properly? Over the last few years, I've shipped about 70-80 locos across the Atlantic by AirMail. My method is to ensure firstly that no metal to metal rubbing can take place by fitting small pieces of bubble wrap in the spaces. All small detachable parts are wrapped separately. Next, the whole loco is enclosed in bubble wrap with an extra piece front and rear so that end forces are taken on the smokebox door and the rear buffer beam or the bunker. This package is put in a double walled cardboard carton with additional bubble wrap to make it a secure fit. This carton is than put into a second carton (double walled again and about 2" bigger all round) tightly filled with polystyrene chips, sealed with parcel tape (two layers along all joins) and further protected with "FRAGILE" labels on all sides. They're (almost) UPS-proof! Mike Chaney http://www.mikechaney.fsnet.co.uk
Re: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models
In a message dated 09/12/01 9:54:39 AM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << can the list expound upon how to build a shipping container so that engines can be shipped properly? >> I suspect you're right about engines as carry-on (although I've never had a problem on Southwest). When I bring more than one engine I just wrap it in bubble wrap and put it in my suitcase that gets checked. Never had a problem. Jim Crabb
Re: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models
Mike, The best advice I was given on shipping Gauge 1 engines is first, do not build a wooden box for them, because when the box is dropped (which it will be !!) the hard box surface will damage the loco. Instead use a good corrugated cardboard box, wrap the loco tightly in bubble-wrap and plastic parcel-tape., and fill the vacant space with plastic "popcorn". When dropped, the box and popcorn will crush and absorb the shock. I have done this several times, using my local "Mailboxes Etc" store who have all the materials, and it works well. Will cost you $20-30 to have them do it but worth it. Insurance is only useful if the item is lost, because if damaged "Well, since it's damaged, it couldn't have been packed properly, could it ?" Peter. -- > From: Mike Eorgoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models > Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:52 AM > > Since I expect carry on of our small engines to become a great headache due > to recent events, can the list expound upon how to build a shipping > container so that engines can be shipped properly? > > Mike Eorgoff > near Chicago >
Re: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models
> Since I expect carry on of our small engines to become a great headache > due to recent events, can the list expound upon how to build a shipping > container so that engines can be shipped properly? Accucraft seem to have figured it out well. I received my C-16 on Friday, and it came in a large cardboard box lined throughout with high-density foam. Inside, the engine and tender were in separate cardboard boxes with a fitted styrofoam insert (tender) or a wood-and-metal carrying tray to which the loco was securely fastened (wrapped in thin foam, then taped to the bottom). There were a couple of slightly bent steps, but nothing remotely serious. It might be best to send our locos by UPS to meet us at the destination. -vance- Let there be peace on earth, and let it begin with me. Jill Jackson and Sy Miller
Re: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models
Lots of bubblewrap & in a secure outer container - luggage case or photographic case - if stashing in the hold, something that can be opened easily for inspection if taking as carryon. Art Walker, Guildford England. - Original Message - From: Mike Eorgoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Multiple recipients of sslivesteam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 3:52 PM Subject: Shipping containers for Ga 1 models > Since I expect carry on of our small engines to become a great headache due > to recent events, can the list expound upon how to build a shipping > container so that engines can be shipped properly? > > Mike Eorgoff > near Chicago > >
Shipping containers for Ga 1 models
Since I expect carry on of our small engines to become a great headache due to recent events, can the list expound upon how to build a shipping container so that engines can be shipped properly? Mike Eorgoff near Chicago
