By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Member postings for PT

Here is a list of all the postings PT has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.

Thread: Imlec 50
02/11/2016 17:24:22

Neil,

We were never down to hold the event, bristol were, you have got that very wrong.

02/11/2016 17:23:23

Hi Diane,

There was no Official imlec in 2001, there was an efficiency trials held by gmes called 'omlec', we held it a few times. It had no connection with imlec. I don't feel any further comment from me is really needed. It is what it is, the main thing is that imlec keeps on being taken on.

Cheers

Paul

Ps all ...some great replies earlier, made me chuckle!

02/11/2016 10:07:43

 

Hi David,

That is exactly how I read it, as 2001 never took place, so the 50th imlec will be 2019. It will also be the 50th anniversary of the first imlec.

Cheers

Paul

Edited By PT on 02/11/2016 10:10:16

02/11/2016 08:44:39

Hi Diane,

I will have to agree to disagree on this one then, 2018 is neither the 50th anniversary or the 50th imlec, there will only have been 49imlecs in 2018.

I shall still look forward to the next two events.

Cheers

Paul

 

 

Edited By PT on 02/11/2016 09:11:15

02/11/2016 07:35:42

Hi All,

Having seen the 'imlec 50' in model engineer. I think this must be a mistake, the first imlec was in 1969, and has been held every year. Except, 2001 when it was cancelled due to a foot and mouth outbrake. Imlec 2018, must be the 49th and the 50th will be in 2019.

Some one, has got it wrong, might be me!

Cheers

Paul
 

Edited By PT on 02/11/2016 07:52:03

Thread: CE Marking ( again)
08/04/2016 07:31:57

 

 

Edited By PT on 08/04/2016 07:32:28

08/04/2016 07:31:34

Hi Brian,

Appropriate CE marking is required on commercial boilers post 2002, it is not required on privately built boilers. So if the boiler is non commercial, there is no issue with there being no CE mark.

Hope this helps

Paul

Thread: boiler tube removed to get to pipes back of firebox
11/03/2015 17:13:21

image.jpg

The flanged plates can and should be flanged, sharp corners on a pressure vessel is poor joint design. The plates should be flanged to the same width as the wrappers and a seam weld with 'v' prep. This is how bullied designed the merchant navy welded boilers. Note the pic above, a nice radius with the weld meeting the wrapper. The other disadvantage on sharp corners, the stays will have to go further out to make up for the weak spot of losing this radius.

Ron I am sorry but this boiler should go no further, I dont know where this design of jointing has come from but it has no place in miniature boilers. Scrap it, read up on silver soldering and try again. Paul.

Thread: LBSC Minx
24/06/2014 16:32:41

Hi Richard,

i can highly recomend minx, my uncle and I built one in a year. Not only a good passenger hauler, in 3imlec's we finished 3rd twice and 2nd. Go for the joy version. If I did one again the only thing that needs changing is the boiler, the gas to grate ratio is a mile out and she can go dead after sustained running. I would think about a shorter fire box with less protrusion into the cab or larger tubes. But the boiler is still as lively as drawn.

cheers

Paul

Thread: The end of IMLEC
18/05/2011 10:45:42
Hi All,
 
thank you for your comments, I agree with a majority of it. The suggestions for postal applications sounds good to me and is a very close copy of what used to happen pre-internet.
David, I would not expect the draw to be changed this year, far to late in the day, my reason for starting this thread was so that hopefully changes could be made from next year onwards.
 
A Superlec every 4 years? Sounds good to me, the event back in '98 was absolutely superb and a privilige to be a part of. Shame it hasnt been held since.
 
cheers
 
Paul
16/05/2011 18:42:45
Hi David,
 
yes I am aware it was not model engineer who put in these changes.
 
Regarding the draw, yes one year it was advertised by the host club on the internet, most unfairly some didnt get in. My point is, before this it was always done postal as above and no one had a problem with this. Last year the host club chose to restrict the competition to the fewest ever accepted entrants and come up with the draw. Everyone I have spoken to about this doesnt like it, it also leaves no time for arranging travel or accomodation when it can be in popular parts of the country for summertime.
 
cheers
 
Paul
16/05/2011 17:03:56
Hi David,
 
The bulk of those rules have been around for a few years with the exception of my main 2 points.
 
Drivers who have previously won imlec have never before been banned from entering again with a different locomotive. It was only the locomotive with that driver combination that couldn't. A winning loco could also be entered with a different driver.
 
The draw has only been introduced last year and this year. How it is 'fair' is way beyond me. I agree entrants that do not have internet access should never have a disadvantage over those who have hence my comment on first come first serve postal applications after the magazine hits the shops with an entries invited advert. This is the way it was always done apart from very recently.
 
Are the rules as above to be continued as they are from next year onwards as well?
 
cheers
 
Paul
11/05/2011 12:46:05
Hi All,
 
Let me start this thread with a few comments about myself so I can explain these comments come from an unbiased opinion. In fact should they ever be noted and hopefully have some bearing on future competitions they will hamper my prospects of being succesful at imlec. I have entered many imlec's (15) with many different loco's finishing in a variety of positions from last to 2nd. I have enjoyed them all very much.
 
In the early '90s the rules on imlec were changed meaning once a locomotive had won three times it was no longer allowed in. This was made purely as one particular locomotive and driver had won the previous three imlec's and some feared would never be beaten. This loco and driver where beaten at last years imlec!
 
By 2002 at leeds entries where becoming thin on the ground with only 19 competitors at a very popular location. It had become clear that the rule had eventually hampered the competition and affected the ammount of people able to enter.
 
Previously in 2000 Mr Alan Crossfield, a well respected model engineer contributor and imlec supporter had come up with a happy medium to keep all in general happy. A loco/driver could win the tournament, defend the title and if succesful re-enter after 10 years. The driver could re enter with a new loco at any time. I do not remember any negative comments about this and it had the support of the model engineer editorial staff.
 
Over the last 10 years the rules have been continually messed around club to club and we have arrived at the current situation which to my mind (and I know I am not alone) will kill off one of the 'premier' weekends in the model engineer calender. There other new rules I disagree with but my main disputes are these:-
 
1. First come first serve is no longer considered viable, a draw must take place to decide who has entered.
 
I can see no justifiable reason why, the first postal applications recieved after a certian date and the advert in model engineer are not the entrants. Under the new scheme keen imlec entrants may not get in whilst someone who is half hearted will take their place. The draw also leaves little time to arrange hotels, travel ect.
 
2. Any previous winner driver is now no longer allowed in the competition and must enter the 'previous winners competition' The previous winners competition has recieved few entries over the years and de-values the Martin Evans challenge trophy. But to now say no previous winner driver can enter imlec is completely absurd. If the rules now stay as they are you will have more previous winners than imlec entrants.
 
Remember I make this comment as someone who has not won imlec and under these rules would have won in a previous competitions. I have also previously entered locos with little or no chance of winning, purely to support the event.
 
I am aware that there are a few who may not agree with me but I feel a vast majority of people who do have an interest in imlec, both competitors and spectators will.
 
To those who disagree I would say this:- Nothing in life worth having is easy. To win a competition you have to beat the best, not win because they where not allowed in!
 
I would urge model engineer to please consider abolishing the previous winners competition and return to the Leyland 2000 event rules by Alan Crossfield from next year onwards, and that these rules are sent to the future host societies so imlec can get back to being one of the best accolades and events you can be a part of in this hobby.
 
I would also appreciate it if the editor would be kind enough to place this in the next available magazine issue.
 
yours
 
Paul T.
 
Thread: Denford CNC milling
01/03/2010 19:17:19
Hi Mogens,
 
I have got a Denford Easimill. The machine itself is excellent and very strong and sturdy. Unfortunately the orgiginal Denford Electricsa and software didn't last very long. It was a 1986 machine, which rarely was 3 phase. We bought it in 2005. After six months of trying to resurect it we gave up and had it converted to Mach2. We are so pleased with it we are now having it upgraded to Mach3. Try and buy a burnt out carcas and retro fit it. I wouldn't risk an original machine again.
 
cheers
 
Paul
Thread: Is it worth the money
27/01/2010 21:12:22
Hi All,
 
I'll keep this short and to the point.
 
I am the manufacturer of the boiler in this thread.
My name is Paul Tompkins of The Southern Boiler Works which I run with my father Norman,
The boiler was despatched approx 1 year ago by courier.
I informed the customer in early December 2008 that the boiler had passed the 180psi test. I recieved an email querying a bush below the water gauge and the lack of firehole door mounting.
I explained the extra bush was because there is only one feed bush on the bottom of the barrel which I don't feel is a good idea.
I recieved no futher contact until Jan 2009 where the customer said I had not told him the boiler was ready for despatch and he was concerned that the fitting of the water gauge may foul a clack.
To check I installed a Polly 1/4" water gauge and a clack. I felt though that you would need to remove the water gauge and the clack if you wanted to replace the ball. 
With this in mind I then installed a second clack bush the other side of the backhead (in which Tony Wheales M.E. notes say you can) and two blind bronze bushes for mounting a fire hole door. The boiler was then re-tested and a new certificate issued.
Once recieved the customer left a tele message complaining of additional bushes for extra water feed and optional fusible devise. No mention of any Damage was mentioned at all. I still have the message on my answering machine.
I replied with a long  email explaining why I put the bushes in and as the customer had previously indicated he new little about locomotive construction I suggested he take the boiler to his club boiler inspector for independent advise on how to install the boiler. I also said his boiler inspector may contact me with any questions he may have.
I then recieved a short sharp email suggesting I had crushed and stamped on the boiler.
I recieved no pictures of any suggested damage for several weeks.
Once I recieved the pictures I offered to have the boiler couriered at MY EXPENSE for independent inspection by the chairman of the APCBM(m.e.) for assesment of the construction methods and standards. Should the boiler be found to be incorrectly made or sub standard a new boiler would have been made and delivered free of charge. I made this offer 3 Times.
The customer refused to make the boiler ready for collection unless I gave a full refund before the boiler was despatched from him.
The customer has continually hawked pictures taken with  very strong cross flash photography. He has also made allegations of sub standard construction such as:-
1. a 16swg fire hole ring with no internal support.
2. Questioned if an  internal butt strap is legal, after he asked for an internal butt strap during weeks of consultation prior to me starting the boiler.
3. The dome is 10 DEG out of parrallel with the bottom of the foundation ring. He sent pictures of the boiler on a surface table with a wixey angle gauge on the dome reading 0.8deg and 0.9deg. I asked him to confirm the readings where 0.8 and 0.9 deg and not 10 deg, I never recieved an answer.
Please check out my album Ayesha 2 where you will find pictures of the boiler when despatched and the internal construction.
I cannot make a boiler proffesionally to amatuer legislation, it is not possible.
I make boilers where the customer has the option of every safety devise possible as legally I have a duty of care. Should a boiler fall into the wrong hands and something goes wrong, I might have to explain why the customer did not have the option of safety devices in a court of law.
 
yours
 
Paul Tompkins
Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!

Find Model Engineer & Model Engineers' Workshop

Sign up to our Newsletter

Sign up to our newsletter and get a free digital issue.

You can unsubscribe at anytime. View our privacy policy at www.mortons.co.uk/privacy

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
cowells
Sarik
MERIDIENNE EXHIBITIONS LTD
Shopping Partners
Subscription Offer

Latest "For Sale" Ads
Latest "Wanted" Ads
Get In Touch!

Do you want to contact the Model Engineer and Model Engineers' Workshop team?

You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.

Click THIS LINK for full contact details.

For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.

Digital Back Issues

Social Media online

'Like' us on Facebook
Follow us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter
 Twitter Logo

Pin us on Pinterest

 

Donate

donate