Castle Aching

[Nearholmer]

If you're using an iPad, the software isn't supported, whether because of security concerns, incompatibilities, or to protect Apple's ability to push their own software, I know not.

[Shadow]

If you click on the Adobe flash icon, it should start ok! Using chrome here.

[corneliuslundie]

Opening at of the HMRS Museum & Study Centre at Butterley is only on certain days as it relies on a few volunteers.

The best time to go it probably when Midland Railex is on as there is then also a lot more to see: http://www.midlandrailway-butterley.co.uk/midland-railex/

Jonathan

[uax6]

EOL is an enigma that has interested me off and on for years. Living in Lynn and now south of Downham Market I pass the site frequently, and it seems strange that it even existed really. The opencast parts are flooded, but are still there, as is the engine shed just off the A10...

 

Shame that the records were burnt in '66 when the company finally closed....

 

Andy G

[runs as required]

The highpoint of that fascinating shale oil paper is surely the bio of Forbes-Leslie at the end:

Posted Today, 12:52

Found this article about English Oilfields Limited.

 

 2012 RG EOL.pdf   7.53MB   4 downloads

 

[Forbes-Leslie] was, however, clearly a complex character. Born William Paterson in Banchory, Scotland in 1865, he graduated in medicine at Aberdeen University in 1891.
He changed his name to William Paterson Forbes-Leslie in 1892 and to William Forbes-Leslie in 1894. He published two papers on malaria (Forbes-Leslie, 1897; 1899), was employed as a Civil Surgeon with the South African Field Force in 1900 to 1902, and published an epic romantic poem (1915) set in the times of the Crusades in which the hero, Leslie, was a aristocratic Scottish knight from Aberdeenshire.

 

Could you have him taking over as lord of the manor? The epic poem seems a clue to his aspirations.

dh

[Nearholmer]

You missed out the really intriguing bit, about him being barred from the RGS and jailed for fraud.

 

Reading it, he struck me as one of those people who so thoroughly deludes themselves that they delude others almost accidentally ..... anyone except the very hard-headed, cynical almost, can get swept along by such people.

 

K

 

PS: I just found this https://www.scottishshale.co.uk/GazBeyond/BSEngineers/BSEN_People/ForbesLeslieWilliam.html He should have been a character in one of Edwardian's favoured sensational novels, and his wife seems to have been cast in the same mould!

Edited July 2, 2017 by Nearholmer

[runs as required]

PS: I just found this https://www.scottishshale.co.uk/GazBeyond/BSEngineers/BSEN_People/ForbesLeslieWilliam.html He should have been a character in one of Edwardian's favoured sensational novels, and his wife seems to have been cast in the same mould!

Gosh Kevin!

You really do seem to have hit the jackpot with that piece of trawling wiithin the last hour or so.

I'm very envious

 

dh

[Donw]

Kilve is quite near to us. One of our local mrc members Darren was inspired by his finding of some remains of the Oil company at Kilve to build an exhibition layout of the never built Kilve Station

 

Don

[Shadow]

Also came across this on a really obscure web site.  

 

[Edwardian]

Edwardian my apology was tongue in check we wander so far and wide it seems more appropriate to apologise for being  back on topic.

 

I love the comment on the pictures in Shadow's link . 'I do not want thanks for any research I am able to help out with. I just love doing it.'  This seems a most admirable attitude and rather fitting for this thread.

 

Regarding the Waggons the major manufacturers were improving their products all the time so Charles Roberts for example was building waggons from the turn of the century to designs very close to what became the RCH 1907 standard. So it may well be that waggons appearing to be to a later design were around.

 

 

Don

 

Thanks, Don.

 

Yes, I think the Cambrian Kits POs are RCH 1907, so I am relying on the idea that RCH 1907 was a 'best practice' codification and that manufacturers had been building essentially similar wagons from the turn of the century.

 

I am notionally 1905 with CA, and I don't want to stray too far from that as most stock will be in early Edwardian condition, which is noticeably different from late Edwardian - pre-Great War Georgian. So we generally have small wagons, with only company-built examples having steel u/fs in amongst their wooden u/f stock, generally 15' over headstocks and most railway companies still using small lettering for their initials. 

 

I might stray into 1906 when that Bachmann Midland tank is released!

 

 

Found this article about English Oilfields Limited.

 

2012 RG EOL.pdf

 

found here :- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251730073_The_Norfolk_oil-shale_rush_1916-1921

 

The highpoint of that fascinating shale oil paper is surely the bio of Forbes-Leslie at the end:

 

Could you have him taking over as lord of the manor? The epic poem seems a clue to his aspirations.

dh

 

You missed out the really intriguing bit, about him being barred from the RGS and jailed for fraud.

 

Reading it, he struck me as one of those people who so thoroughly deludes themselves that they delude others almost accidentally ..... anyone except the very hard-headed, cynical almost, can get swept along by such people.

 

K

 

PS: I just found this https://www.scottishshale.co.uk/GazBeyond/BSEngineers/BSEN_People/ForbesLeslieWilliam.html He should have been a character in one of Edwardian's favoured sensational novels, and his wife seems to have been cast in the same mould!

 

Brilliant finds, thanks, Chaps.  I am behind in my reading, but I look forward to catching up, not least getting to grips with this slippery Forbes Leslie character.

 

Your posts give a certain impression of him, judging from which I would say that in my line of work I have come across several such.  They are not necessarily bad or malicious, and some you would happily have to dinner, but they are b00dy dangerous!

 

 

 

Also came across this on a really obscure web site.  

 

eol tanker.png

 

 Well, I can't not model this wagon, so, I can't not advance the production of Norfolk Shale Oil forward, say, 15 years.

 

Brilliant find, thank you.

 

EDIT: Not sure of the history of this wagon/date/builder etc, but, with its little tank barrel and wooden u/f it would certainly not look out of place with a supposed build-date sometime pre-1905.

Edited July 3, 2017 by Edwardian

[Shadow]

Thanks, Don.

 

Yes, I think the Cambrian Kits POs are RCH 1907, so I am relying on the idea that RCH 1907 was a 'best practice' codification and that manufacturers had been building essentially similar wagons from the turn of the century.

 

I am notionally 1905 with CA, and I don't want to stray too far from that as most stock will be in early Edwardian condition, which is noticeably different from late Edwardian - pre-Great War Georgian. So we generally have small wagons, with only company-built examples having steel u/fs in amongst their wooden u/f stock, generally 15' over headstocks and most railway companies still using small lettering for their initials. 

 

I might stray into 1906 when that Bachmann Midland tank is released!

 

 

 

 

 

Brilliant finds, thanks, Chaps.  I am behind in my reading, but I look forward to catching up, not least getting to grips with this slippery Forbes Leslie character.

 

Your posts give a certain impression of him, judging from which I would say that in my line of work I have come across several such.  They are not necessarily bad or malicious, and some you would happily have to dinner, but they are b00dy dangerous!

 

 

 

 

 Well, I can't not model this wagon, so, I can't not advance the production of Norfolk Shale Oil forward, say, 15 years.

 

Brilliant find, thank you.

 

EDIT: Not sure of the history of this wagon/date/builder etc, but, with its little tank barrel and wooden u/f it would certainly not look out of place with a supposed build-date sometime pre-1905.

 

 

Just to put the record straight about that "Brilliant find" see here :- Young's Oil 

 

[Edwardian]

Just to put the record straight about that "Brilliant find" see here :- Young's Oil

 

 

Ah, that is why it is familiar, because I/we came across this a while back when musing upon Scottish shale oil and Pintsch gas!

 

However, it is the perfect 'fake', because it is the type and period of wagon that would have been run by EOL had it and Norfolk shale exploitation, happened earlier enough to provide an established source of traffic for CA. 

 

I was puzzled by its relatively old-fashioned appearance but, now, alles kar!

[Compound2632]

Yes, I think the Cambrian Kits POs are RCH 1907, so I am relying on the idea that RCH 1907 was a 'best practice' codification and that manufacturers had been building essentially similar wagons from the turn of the century.

 

I am notionally 1905 with CA, and I don't want to stray too far from that as most stock will be in early Edwardian condition, which is noticeably different from late Edwardian - pre-Great War Georgian. So we generally have small wagons, with only company-built examples having steel u/fs in amongst their wooden u/f stock, generally 15' over headstocks and most railway companies still using small lettering for their initials. 

 

As far as Gloucester C&W Co. wagons go, we are on safe ground. The Cambrian 15' RCH 1907 Gloucester 7-plan and 5-plank wagons (kits C30 and C44) are indistinguishable in dimensions and details (except in some cases axleboxes) from Gloucester wagons as far back as 1892, going by the photos in Keith Montague's book (Private Owner Wagons from the Gloucester Carriage and Wagon Company Ltd., OPC 1981). The Slater's Gloucester kits (POWSIdes) also represent these and with greater variety: 6-plank wagons (mostly 1890s builds) and end-door versions. The Slater's waqons have round-bottomed grease axlexboxes, which seems to be the earlier pattern, in contrast to the square-bottomed boxes on the Cambrian kits - MJT (Dart Castings) do whitemetal versions of these too.

 

The more one looks into it, the more one comes to appreciate that 'Edwardian Image' is as useless a descriptor as 'Modern Image'. I do like your 'late Edwardian - pre Great War Georgian'; I'm definitely 'Early Edwardian' but more 1903 than your 1905... For the Midland modeller, 1907 is of course the 'great divide' in terms not just of livery and the great renumbering but also the Deeleyfication of front ends. As I've said, for me the rot set in when they moved the lamp-irons in 1903; I'm at the end of the Johnson/Clayton period trying to eschew anything of Deeley/Bain - but just able to squeeze in those magnificent first Smith-Johnson compounds - on their introduction the most powerful and swiftest express passenger engines in the country.

 

Sorry, I'm getting carried away. My point is that many of the pre-grouping companies did indeed undergo a sea-change in the mid-Edwardian years. Perhaps it was Lloyd-George's 1906 budget that did it?      

[Shadow]

Ah, that is why it is familiar, because I/we came across this a while back when musing upon Scottish shale oil and Pintsch gas!

 

However, it is the perfect 'fake', because it is the type and period of wagon that would have been run by EOL had it and Norfolk shale exploitation, happened earlier enough to provide an established source of traffic for CA. 

 

I was puzzled by its relatively old-fashioned appearance but, now, alles kar!

 

 

Looks like this one here on the NRM site from 1889

 

http://www.nrm.org.uk/ourcollection/locomotivesandrollingstock/CollectionItem?objid=1975-7045&pageNo=24

 

Rectangular types as well from 1901

 

http://www.nrm.org.uk/ourcollection/locomotivesandrollingstock/CollectionItem?objid=1981-7003&ipp=96

[Donw]

It may be that the rise of the trade unions and the Labour party in the Edwardian period was a contributory factor at first the the Taff Vale case seemed to set things in favour of the companies but the numbers of union members rose significantly and Labour MP were being elected by 1911 matters had led to the National Rail Strike.  Reductions in working hours and increased pay  were encouraging changes which reduced the labour required.

 

Don

[Edwardian]

Looks like this one here on the NRM site from 1889

 

http://www.nrm.org.uk/ourcollection/locomotivesandrollingstock/CollectionItem?objid=1975-7045&pageNo=24

 

Rectangular types as well from 1901

 

http://www.nrm.org.uk/ourcollection/locomotivesandrollingstock/CollectionItem?objid=1981-7003&ipp=96

 

Ideal.

 

I really like the Young's tank, and think that I could adapt a Cambrian Kits Gloucester u/f to produce something similar.  Never enough wheel sets, bearings and couplings to produce everything!

 

I have downloaded, but not yet read, the various content on EOL, but I gather that the company dates from 1918.

 

If we suppose that shale extraction takes place earlier - perhaps from a non-sulphurous bed that is small, and exhausted by the time EOL gets going - we do not necessarily have to replicate the history of EOL's venture, include the egregious Forbes-Leslie or the name EOL.

 

If we were to repeat the, dare we say 'fraudulent' nature of the scheme, perhaps we could involve a young Arthur Norris, he who changed trains in Berlin in the '30s, as the timescale might well be right to catch him before he commences his Continental career.  Having said that, perhaps it is best to suppose a successful operation of limited scope and duration, which, perhaps, had the unfortunate effect of lending credence to the EOL scheme in due course, when WW1 and the need for fresh deposits gave this scheme its impetus? 

 

Norfolk Shale Oil Co. Ltd.?

 

Perhaps they should have a rectangular tank, too?  This could be a straight build of a Slaters's tank, if I can find one!

 

Then, with the Norfolk Guano & Fish Oil tank, which I really must get round to finishing, we have a nice selection of early tank designs.

 

As far as Gloucester C&W Co. wagons go, we are on safe ground. The Cambrian 15' RCH 1907 Gloucester 7-plan and 5-plank wagons (kits C30 and C44) are indistinguishable in dimensions and details (except in some cases axleboxes) from Gloucester wagons as far back as 1892, going by the photos in Keith Montague's book (Private Owner Wagons from the Gloucester Carriage and Wagon Company Ltd., OPC 1981). The Slater's Gloucester kits (POWSIdes) also represent these and with greater variety: 6-plank wagons (mostly 1890s builds) and end-door versions. The Slater's waqons have round-bottomed grease axlexboxes, which seems to be the earlier pattern, in contrast to the square-bottomed boxes on the Cambrian kits - MJT (Dart Castings) do whitemetal versions of these too.

 

The more one looks into it, the more one comes to appreciate that 'Edwardian Image' is as useless a descriptor as 'Modern Image'. I do like your 'late Edwardian - pre Great War Georgian'; I'm definitely 'Early Edwardian' but more 1903 than your 1905... For the Midland modeller, 1907 is of course the 'great divide' in terms not just of livery and the great renumbering but also the Deeleyfication of front ends. As I've said, for me the rot set in when they moved the lamp-irons in 1903; I'm at the end of the Johnson/Clayton period trying to eschew anything of Deeley/Bain - but just able to squeeze in those magnificent first Smith-Johnson compounds - on their introduction the most powerful and swiftest express passenger engines in the country.

 

Sorry, I'm getting carried away. My point is that many of the pre-grouping companies did indeed undergo a sea-change in the mid-Edwardian years. Perhaps it was Lloyd-George's 1906 budget that did it?      

 

I agree.  Were I to model the Midland, it would be pre-1907 for preference, for the reasons you give.  Buckingham Great Central was pre-1907, because Rev. Denny, in my view, rightly, preferred the two-tone livery that the GC applied to coaches before that date. 

 

1905 was slightly arbitrary, but it is redolent for me as the last year of Indian Red frames on the Great Western, and the subsequent livery changes of coaching stock to brown and crimson lake.

 

I am trying to build a collection of pre-Grouping stock centred on two periods, c.1904-1906 and c.1912-1914.  This way I can exploit overlap and use many items on more than one layout.  GE is intended to be consistent with the earlier period.  Thus, if I do ever model Wolferton, I can use all the GE stock I might run on CA there too (except the tramway equipment, of course!).   

 

We are in pre-pool days, but there are always specific reasons why the rolling stock of neighbouring or even further flung companies may appear on CA from time to time when a need for such traffic is identified.  Thus, for example, inter alia I intend to have a Cambrian Rys drop-side for slate traffic, a GW pre-diagram open (in red), a Midland D299, and a LNWR 5-plank from the Ratio set (diamond marks only), which can visit CA from time to time.  When I recover and restore my second-hand ex-exhibition layout, I will run these there, too, as the layout will be set in the Welsh Marches. 

 

Also on the list is a kit of parts from our very own London Tram, which will, again, be finished as a LNWR van to conform with the 1904-1906 period.

 

Looking at what is in the stash and on the stocks, I reckon that GWR, GER, LNWR and Midland will be represented in the 1904-1906 period, while GWR, LB&SC, LSWR and, probably SE&CR will be represented in the 1912-1914 period.  

 

I anticipate that I will perceive quite a contrast between the typical stock seen in the early and late periods.

 

 

It may be that the rise of the trade unions and the Labour party in the Edwardian period was a contributory factor at first the the Taff Vale case seemed to set things in favour of the companies but the numbers of union members rose significantly and Labour MP were being elected by 1911 matters had led to the National Rail Strike.  Reductions in working hours and increased pay  were encouraging changes which reduced the labour required.

 

Don

 

The strange death of liberal England has not yet occurred in CA.

[corneliuslundie]

It seems appropriate at this point to give another plug for Alan Coppin's book "Oil on the rails" (HMRS, 1999). As well as a history of the oil industry in the UK it has various photographs and drawings of cylindrical and rectangular tank wagons of various ages.

However, it does not have any reference in the index to either our notorious friend or the oil companies we have been discussing. Even so at the present reduced price of  just £6 plus £3 p&p it may be worth investing in.

Plug over.

A fascinating character. You couldn't invent him.

And yes, there does seem to be a sea change in many things in the late Edwardian period, even though of course the War would change things much more.

Jonathan

PS If I have a complaint about this thread it is that it keeps me from modelling. But please don't let that stop you.

[Edwardian]

Found this article about English Oilfields Limited.

 

2012 RG EOL.pdf

 

found here :- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251730073_The_Norfolk_oil-shale_rush_1916-1921

 

"Accounts of rural Dorset by Victorian gentlemen travellers describe evil- smelling peasants ...."

 

What's that got to do with the Norfolk shale industry?

 

Well, apparently it's the sulphur in the clay deposits that contain the shale.  This caused, or at least contributed to, the stench of the peasantry as they burnt this stuff in their fires.

 

I learn that the Jurassic Kimmeridge Clay Formation sweeps in a band up from Dorset to Norfolk, under the Wash and into Lincolnshire.  From what I read it is uniformly sulphurous and the technology simply did not exist to rid the oil of its sulphur content on a commercial basis. 

 

Now, we have played fast and loose with Norfolk geography, inserting swathes of country into the County for our lines to run through.

 

So far, however, we have tended to respect the County's geology.  We have respected the location of carstone and coprolite, for instance, and we have resisted calls to sink a coal mine (EOL obtained the first mining permit ever granted in the County).

 

Alas, geology is against us here.  Not only is the shale oil too sulphurous, but the seams were thin and the article shows that Forbes Leslie's crew would have had to dig their open cast pit all the five miles to Lynn before producing enough oil to fill a train.

 

What do we think?  Can our prospectors have hit the one place where "free oil" flowed?  Will the geology support such a claim?  If so, how deep do we need to go?  In anticipation of EOL's two shafts, are we to expect the future viewers of CA to accept a pit head?  In Norfolk.

[Poggy1165]

I think it's arguable that the real golden age of the railways was circa 1900. After that, for a variety of reasons, the shoe began to pinch. I wish I could remember my source or even the exact date, but round about 1905 the LNWR and Midland stopped their outright fierce competition in the Buxton area and started to co-operate, presumably because they figured that the game wasn't worth the candle. I doubt such changes were limited to that area or those two companies.

 

We've already touched on the gradual simplification of coach liveries. A few examples, the GCR, GWR, Cambrian and Furness all simplified their coach liveries in the early 1900s. I suspect there were other examples. I think somewhere on here we've also touched on the abortive GC/GN/GE merger of 1909, but we could equally cite the SE&CR merger of 1899. Again, former fierce rivals going for cooperation instead. It's probably no coincidence that the GC/GN/GE allies were the first to go in for wagon pooling (1915) and it appears they had already gone some way towards standardised wagon sizes. For example, 19' vans.

 

Perhaps if there'd been no First World War and no Parliamentary compulsion, there'd still have been some form of Grouping anyway, given time. WW1 was a catalyst and among other things greatly brought on the internal combustion engine which really cooked the traditional railways' goose in the medium term.

[Edwardian]

I think it's arguable that the real golden age of the railways was circa 1900. After that, for a variety of reasons, the shoe began to pinch. I wish I could remember my source or even the exact date, but round about 1905 the LNWR and Midland stopped their outright fierce competition in the Buxton area and started to co-operate, presumably because they figured that the game wasn't worth the candle. I doubt such changes were limited to that area or those two companies.

 

We've already touched on the gradual simplification of coach liveries. A few examples, the GCR, GWR, Cambrian and Furness all simplified their coach liveries in the early 1900s. I suspect there were other examples. I think somewhere on here we've also touched on the abortive GC/GN/GE merger of 1909, but we could equally cite the SE&CR merger of 1899. Again, former fierce rivals going for cooperation instead. It's probably no coincidence that the GC/GN/GE allies were the first to go in for wagon pooling (1915) and it appears they had already gone some way towards standardised wagon sizes. For example, 19' vans.

 

Perhaps if there'd been no First World War and no Parliamentary compulsion, there'd still have been some form of Grouping anyway, given time. WW1 was a catalyst and among other things greatly brought on the internal combustion engine which really cooked the traditional railways' goose in the medium term.

 

Custom was booming in the Edwardian period.  I suspect the outbreak of co-operation between some companies was a reflection of the system reaching near saturation point in terms of the lines constructed.  There was no longer much 'low hanging fruit' in terms of desirable locations as yet unconnected to the system.  It made sense to rationalise, de-conflict, and to share the costs of new lines where possible. 

 

Another example might be the very fruitful co-operative relationship between the GW and GC at the turn of the Century, leading to the new joint line.  An earlier example stems from the 1880s, when the hitherto hostile GNR collaborated in a joint line that gave GE its link to the North.

 

That said, the GW built quite a lot of route miles in the Edwardian period.  Aimed at gaining or retaining competitive advantage, these were doublings of existing mainlines and the building of faster and more direct routes to existing important destinations (Westbury cut-off, direct routes for S Wales and Birmingham). The GW was not chasing after new locations, and additional communities served en route were by the by.

 

I agree that further amalgamations might well have occurred in due course even had that berk of a Kaiser not caused WW1.

[Northroader]

I've been off on holidays for a week, so three pages of CA to catch up, as I left my iPad at home. So may I add a couple of catching up bits:

Firstly Elmwell village depot seen at the Southampton Eurotrack of 1999. A photo of the whole assembly showing how it went together, with some notes and a sketch.

Next the shale rock processing plant, I went past the remains of the Kilve plant a few years ago. The main feature was the oven, with the rather strange looking collection gear sticking out of the top. Rock was shoved in and cooked to extract the oil. It looks like the amount of energy used in the cooking equalled the amount of energy in the rock oil, it never broke even anyhow.

One place I saw last week had the neatest piece of brick built buildings, which would look nice on CA, given James skill, even if it isn't Norfolk, but reworked oast houses in Sussex.

[Compound2632]

I think it's arguable that the real golden age of the railways was circa 1900. After that, for a variety of reasons, the shoe began to pinch. I wish I could remember my source or even the exact date, but round about 1905 the LNWR and Midland stopped their outright fierce competition in the Buxton area and started to co-operate, presumably because they figured that the game wasn't worth the candle. I doubt such changes were limited to that area or those two companies.

 

We've already touched on the gradual simplification of coach liveries. A few examples, the GCR, GWR, Cambrian and Furness all simplified their coach liveries in the early 1900s. I suspect there were other examples. I think somewhere on here we've also touched on the abortive GC/GN/GE merger of 1909, but we could equally cite the SE&CR merger of 1899. Again, former fierce rivals going for cooperation instead. It's probably no coincidence that the GC/GN/GE allies were the first to go in for wagon pooling (1915) and it appears they had already gone some way towards standardised wagon sizes. For example, 19' vans.

 

Perhaps if there'd been no First World War and no Parliamentary compulsion, there'd still have been some form of Grouping anyway, given time. WW1 was a catalyst and among other things greatly brought on the internal combustion engine which really cooked the traditional railways' goose in the medium term.

 

The LNWR, LYR and Midland were increasingly co-operating with traffic/receipt pooling and shared working arrangements across their networks from the mid-Edwardian watershed onwards. Likewise as Poggy says, the triumvirate of the 'Monopoly board lines' were moving towards a working union - the LMS and LNER were well on the way to coming into being a decade before the grouping. One could argue that the Great War slowed the process down rather than speeding it up!

 

As far as Gloucester C&W Co. wagons go, we are on safe ground. The Cambrian 15' RCH 1907 Gloucester 7-plan and 5-plank wagons (kits C30 and C44) are indistinguishable in dimensions and details (except in some cases axleboxes) from Gloucester wagons as far back as 1892, going by the photos in Keith Montague's book (Private Owner Wagons from the Gloucester Carriage and Wagon Company Ltd., OPC 1981). The Slater's Gloucester kits (POWSIdes) also represent these and with greater variety: 6-plank wagons (mostly 1890s builds) and end-door versions. The Slater's waqons have round-bottomed grease axlexboxes, which seems to be the earlier pattern, in contrast to the square-bottomed boxes on the Cambrian kits - MJT (Dart Castings) do whitemetal versions of these too.  

 

Please excuse me for being so narcissistic as to comment on my own post: I just wanted to point out that in Gloucester C&W Co official photos such as this, the dimensions given on the board on the left are the internal dimensions (giving the cubic capacity of the wagon). For the external dimensions (over sheeting), add six inches to both length and width. Thus the Cambrian 15' Gloucester kit covers wagons 14'5" long internally. (The 15' is nominal or perhaps over the external ironwork?)

[Edwardian]

 the LMS and LNER were well on the way to coming into being a decade before the grouping. One could argue that the Great War slowed the process down rather than speeding it up!

 

 

 

Grouping and Votes for Women by 1915 if the Kaiser hadn't intervened!

 

Then again, full scale mutiny and rebellion in Ireland?

[wagonman]

Did English Oilfields ever actually produce any oil? It might have some influence on the need for tank wagons in 'real life'.

 

 

Richard

[Edwardian]

Did English Oilfields ever actually produce any oil? It might have some influence on the need for tank wagons in 'real life'.

 

 

Richard

 

Not so far as I can tell, though there is a reference to it having had railway wagons.  It seems to have had an engine shed at the processing plant, too.  Did it have an engine?