Good Heavens! I'll stick with my other Renault (a Kangoo – just as daft a name!). At least Renault has the benefit of a vast accumulation of expertise, experience, facilities and Francs – sorry, Euros..
.
Please don't mis-read me, Dave; but I take your point about the problem of long breaks. Especially in trying to learn something so difficult before you can even draw the simplest part, let alone the entirety, of an antique machine.
It's two different problems anyway, one CAD (just drawing it) the other Design (working out how to make it).
.
I had started transferring from TurboCAD to Alibre because I thought the latter easier, as a trial revealed. However, all of the drawings I had made for the project are still in TurboCAD so I need keep that alive even if I make all new drawings in Alibre.
Or revert to manual draughting… having dismantled my drawing-board beyond restoring, in a fit of digital over-optimism!
I can usually use TC orthographically to a basic but adequate level, but find its 3D mode impossible; hence deciding to move to the simpler Alibre whose 3D modelling will generate the orthographic elevations for workshop use, from the model. TC will too, of course, but in a far more obscure manner.
Whichever package I use though, I could never draw the whole lorry in 3D CAD. Simple parts, maybe, but that's all.
.
That's the CAD answered, but it only adds horrendous extra difficulty between designing and making the thing.
Now the Design – a skill different again from "just" drawing the items.
.
Yes, I should have designed the lorry from the outset, but the first obstacle was big discrepancies between the assorted scraps of archive material I have collected – over several years – due to the makers varying the vehicles, and sometimes giving trade-magazine reviewers specifications for models other than the physical review sample. (That alone held me up for some three or four years.)
Then I had to learn how to replicate an ancient wagon from a few old advertisements, early 20C general-engineering text-books, and modern model-engineering literature.
Quite a few people said I was brave to take on a project like that when plenty of successful alternatives exist, designed in miniature form by professional model-engineers having access to original works drawings and surviving prototypes. (Drawings made by hand, using loose squares on elm boards…) .
I soon realised I was going nowhere until I started cutting steel, but could not have foreseen future problems. Narrowing the front of the chassis too far back, cramps the machinery space; worsened by the driving-chain being a bit too far inboard. I had the boiler built commercially but not realised the implications of its peculiar shape and being under-scale for the chassis width and smokebox diameter. I machined the cylinder, passage and ports from a solid block, but failed to consider the battle for space by all the studs, starting-valve, external inlets and outlets, etc.
All mistakes I have to live with and work around. I never claimed accuracy to the last nth rivet!
'
When I started the project it would have been unique. Since then I know of one other model of similar scale and a full-size replica having been completed in a fraction of the time I have spent so far, and now fear never finishing it – and don't know if it will work if I do.
Yes, the Cardboard Aided Draughting would certainly have helped but I did not realise that until far too late!.