Concrete beam sets

[jonhall]

I had no idea that the trestrols had been treated like that, please could you re-post that one on its own so that its a bit bigger? did it run with a ridgid coupling to an under runner? Do you know the length of the beams? or failing that where they were used?

 

Thanks,

 

Jon

[adrianbs]

Hi Jon These 3 pictures have been converted using a programme of the internet and should be much

better definition at nearly 600Kb. Regards Adrian

[adrianbs]

Hi Jon Hope the photos came through. There were a number of chopped off trestrols in the trains of different types but all with

6 wheel bogies. I presume some were BR built and others of the standard LMS/LNER common design. The beams were 85' long

(see earlier post for dimensions ) You can see the coupling in one photo which probably pivots on the bogie somewhere,

certainly not fixed to the "Deck" Assuming the numbers I have in my notes are all for trestrols then in the 4 trains

Numbers 909650-7/9 and 909600-7/9 were all in use although one train did not use trestrols. Some were numerically paired

ie 909600 and 909650 but not all, making a total of 18 carriers ( none were sequential as one might have expected ) but

of course only originally 9 trestrols.

 

Somehow I missed getting the brake van but the cranes and lorries appear as does the Cl O7 shunter that was positioning

the wagons for offloading. Because that was moving about the staff were none to keen to have me close to the trains for

obvious reasons. Must do some work now Regards adrianbs

[jonhall]

This at last provides a home for those bits of Triang Trestrol made redundant when the rest of the wagon is used to stretch another to its (near) scale length.

 

Presumably the trestrol was cut more or less where I've put the red line?

 

 

 

 

Jon

[hmrspaul]

This at last provides a home for those bits of Triang Trestrol made redundant when the rest of the wagon is used to stretch another to its (near) scale length.

 

Presumably the trestrol was cut more or less where I've put the red line?

 

 

 

Jon

Yes looks about right on my photos

 

Paul

[adrianbs]

   Hi  Jon     They appear to have been cut straight across, not as you have shown but there is a transverse member shown which is on the rivetted version to hold

       things together but is absent on the Triang moulding.  The photos shown are not all the same batch as the Triang model.  The outer end of the

       well unit is not "VEEd" either on the earlier rivetted version.  I am not sure if I have a photo of the inside end of the "Welded version" showing the cut line.  Aha 

        yes I do !!  and they are cut straight across also but do not have the transverse member.  I can see the inner Vee end. The cut is on the end of the top

       reinforcing plate that you can see in your photos.   I am not sure how accurate you need to be as I think the bogies had a shortened wheelbase which you

       cannot do much about.  If only these BIG BOYS had decent designers they could have made the bogie scale  and the well but just left off a couple of sections

       or even made it in two equal halves, snapping together like the old grey Triang track with an additional  bit for scale length.  That would have been far too clever of

       course !!.      Regards  Adrian

[jonhall]

Adrian, If you have more photos I'd like to see them please. Only the welded version is ex-trestrol, and I believe these have a pair of bearing pads mounted on the diagonal girders, which I would expect to remain on the conversion, hence the way i've drawn the red line.

 

The rivited body (presumably ex-Weltrol EP) seems to be fairly easy to knock up from I beam and sheet material, and has the correct w/b bogies, i guess some archers transfers could detail up the bogies.

 

I need to do a second streched trestrol to release the two short ends for improvised girder conversions without feeling I've wasted a useful bit!

 

Jon

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi Jon, Don't have photoshop or much else of that sort, tell me more about how to resize images without and I will post a few more

of the really interesting ones.

The concrete beams were labelled "ANOTHER ANGLIAN CONCRETE PRODUCT" but I am not sure where they came from although as Fat C

says Norwich, that would tie in with east ANGLIA !!

Regards Adrian

Hi Adrian and all

 

The beams could well have come from the concrete works at Lenwade, Norfolk. There is photo in Dr Allen’s "Diesels in East Anglia" of a concrete beam train from Lenwade, not the same wagons or beams as in Adrian's photos.

 

I can recall in an early 1960s Modern Railways a photo of concrete train with class 31s on the front with a headboard. I will see if I can find it this weekend when I time to sit down and browse through them.

 

Please keep the photos coming they are really interesting.

 

edit http://www.nrm.org.uk/ourcollection/photo?group=Liverpool%20Street&objid=1995-7233_LIVST_TFD_85 not the photo I was thinking of but one showing a Lenwade concrete train with a headboard.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Clive Mortimore

[adrianbs]

Hi all The "welded" trolleys are not BR built I don't think, but are the 2 off Trestrol AG built in 1938 for the LMS

by the LNER with 5'6" axle centres. The "rivetted" ones are either Weltrol MR of which 5 were built again by the

LNER with 5'0" axle centres and another 5 for the LNER coded Weltrol P. The Trestrol AF of which 3 were built by

the LNER with 5'0" axles centres but slightly different well shape had similar bogies. Since the wells have gone

it is difficult to know which were which as the bogies, which are also rivetted, unlike the Triang ones appear to

be the same. The LNER Flatrol AA also uses similar bogies at the outer ends.

 

I also started the same conversion but I think I found the bogies were the wrong wheelbase for the Welded version

being 5' axle centres. Perhaps Jon could check this as I am not sure where mine is now. The beam bearers do not

appear to be the same as those before rebuilding for concrete beam use. I am not sure you can even get the well

accurate by lengthening the Triang model as I think they shrank all of the model, silly idiots !!

 

I will try to upload a few more images when I have a bit of spare time but as I said earlier there are nearly 100 !

Beauty sleep time again adrianbs

!

[adrianbs]

Hi Now you have separated off the Concrete beam part of Gunsets I think this forum should be amalgamated with it.

The Fat Controller's ref to the Diagram book is really essential to the discussion and I will endeavour to upload

a) the vehicle numbers of the 4 train formations I recorded

B) the diagrams which all the vehicles belonged to ( except 1 where I may have misrecorded it !! )

Unfortunately the lists are in excel not word and from past experience Excel does not upload but I can print it out,

Scan it to a BMP and then change that to a JPG to upload. What a palaver!!

Regards adrianbs

[Andy Y]

Hi Now you have separated off the Concrete beam part of Gunsets I think this forum should be amalgamated with it.

 

 

Duly merged.

[jonhall]

Unfortunately the lists are in excel not word and from past experience Excel does not upload but I can print it out,

Scan it to a BMP and then change that to a JPG to upload. What a palaver!!

 

 

Or you get what you want on screen, press your 'prtScn' (Print Screen) button, and paste into 'paint' (Start>programs>accessories>paint) from where you can crop it and then save as a .jpg.

or

you get what you want on screen, open 'snipping tool' (windows button>all programs>accessories>snipping tool, then draw a box around what you want and it can then be pasted into another program, or saved as a jpg.

 

 

I also started the same conversion but I think I found the bogies were the wrong wheelbase for the Welded version

being 5' axle centres. Perhaps Jon could check this as I am not sure where mine is now. The beam bearers do not

appear to be the same as those before rebuilding for concrete beam use. I am not sure you can even get the well

accurate by lengthening the Triang model as I think they shrank all of the model, silly idiots !!

 

I will try to upload a few more images when I have a bit of spare time but as I said earlier there are nearly 100 !

 

 

The Triang Trestrol is 5ft wheelbases, it has be compromised here and there, but can make an adequate stretch if you can overlook the minor inconsistencies. I do wonder why BR went to such trouble to chop the ends off the trestrol, it would seem suitable to use as a wagon in its own right, with a lowmac under each end as a runner if it needed it.

 

Yes, please continue to scan when you have time, I'm certain there are a number of people watching this thread with interest.

 

 

Duly merged.

 

Thanks Andy, I think a single comprehensive thread is best, and separate from gunsets (which wasn't entirely about those either!! )

 

 I've also deleted a few of my earlier posts that concern how to upload files, now we seem to be past that problem, so that the topic is a bit more concise.

 

Jon

Edited November 7, 2013 by jonhall

[adrianbs]

  Hi  all  A few more Trestrol pics. you can see the inner end of the welded version and where it is cut on the side image. The problem with

   the distorted Triang model is that the width is probably  correct but this means if you cut where the Vee ends it will be too long for the

   shortened bogie.  If only the fools had made the rivetted version the bogies and overall length could probably been correct. The real

   wagons are 8 foot shorter overall  ie not as long as a BR Mk 1 coach which I think was already available at that time !!!

    Not only that,  the LMS and LNER both had 5 whereas there were only 2 LMS welded ones I think. ( Paul B will  know as Tatlow's last

   volume is not yet in print )   I expect they were worried about all the rivets and I wonder if they started making that version, ie 5' axle

   centres as the model, and then changed their minds and left off the rivets on the bogies and put in holes instead ??

   

   Perhaps jon can work out what was the original length over headstocks on the Triang model, the shorter ones were 59' 6".  I don't

   remember if Triang actually added the Trestles on this model but the timber baulks on the others would have been  easier to 

   produce and I am sure they could have come up with an interesting load rather than all the Space related options that appeared

   later.    As always, spoiled for a ha'porth of tar      Regards  adrianbs

[jonhall]

As my Trestrols are now rather modified, I can only give an approximate - combined length of the lengthened model, and the two pieces left over are about 530mm over buffers (no couplings) - so 66'3" over buffers or thereabouts, the BR diagram is 71ft over buffers, and the EB Trotter drawing in MRC Sept '58 is 73' over buffers (with the bogie centres being 55' not the 53' of the BR diagram.

 

Worth noting that the battlespace trestrol casting was different from the normal one, as it had changes for electric pickup and lighting.

 

I've never seen a triang tressle so assume that it never had one.

 

Jon

[adrianbs]

Hi Jon, Essery gives 71' over buffers for the "welded" dia Page 134A with 53' bogie centres. Might be worth

checking Trotter as it looks right and may be a misprint. If the original Triang model was indeed only about

66' over buffers then they could easily have made the "Rivetted" version to scale as that was only 62' 6"

 

Once again we see a mass production manufacturer ruin a really useful model for no good reason !! For years

I have held to the notion that Triang/Hornby have a back room Boffin/Gremlin whose task was to redesign

or choose alternative models with the sole object of making models inaccurate, in such a way as to make it

impossible to modify them easily into scale models. If he did not do that then he would duplicate a perfectly

satisfactory kit rather than come up with something not easily available if at all.

 

Time and time again this has happened especially with wagons and coaches. I thought he had moved on recently

(perhaps to Dapol ??) but it appears he, or one of his descendents is still there. I have just had it confirmed

that the 2013 LMS CCT van as illustrated in their catalogue is not actually the one they are making, which is

a great pity as Parkside don't do that one but the later O/F version. Guess which one Hornby are actually doing!!

The same applies to the new Blue Spot fish van apparently. I suppose they are sending Parkside kits out to

China to save the cost of reseach and design. No wonder it is so difficult for us kit manufacturers to become

millionaires !! Glad I got in early making kits, I would have no chance now Regards adrianbs

[Fat Controller]

As my Trestrols are now rather modified, I can only give an approximate - combined length of the lengthened model, and the two pieces left over are about 530mm over buffers (no couplings) - so 66'3" over buffers or thereabouts, the BR diagram is 71ft over buffers, and the EB Trotter drawing in MRC Sept '58 is 73' over buffers (with the bogie centres being 55' not the 53' of the BR diagram.

 

Worth noting that the battlespace trestrol casting was different from the normal one, as it had changes for electric pickup and lighting.

 

I've never seen a triang tressle so assume that it never had one.

 

Jon

I've never seen one either, Jon, and I've a few years on you.. It would have been too protoypical for Triang.

[AberdeenBill]

  Hi  all  A few more Trestrol pics. you can see the inner end of the welded version and where it is cut on the side image. The problem with

   the distorted Triang model is that the width is probably  correct but this means if you cut where the Vee ends it will be too long for the

   shortened bogie.  If only the fools had made the rivetted version the bogies and overall length could probably been correct. The real

   wagons are 8 foot shorter overall  ie not as long as a BR Mk 1 coach which I think was already available at that time !!!

    Not only that,  the LMS and LNER both had 5 whereas there were only 2 LMS welded ones I think. ( Paul B will  know as Tatlow's last

   volume is not yet in print )   I expect they were worried about all the rivets and I wonder if they started making that version, ie 5' axle

   centres as the model, and then changed their minds and left off the rivets on the bogies and put in holes instead ??

   

   Perhaps jon can work out what was the original length over headstocks on the Triang model, the shorter ones were 59' 6".  I don't

   remember if Triang actually added the Trestles on this model but the timber baulks on the others would have been  easier to 

   produce and I am sure they could have come up with an interesting load rather than all the Space related options that appeared

   later.    As always, spoiled for a ha'porth of tar      Regards  adrianbs

 

Hi Adrian,

 

Thanks for posting these fascinating pictures.  I'm still not clear on how the "chopped" Trestrols were linked to the adjacent wagon (as per the middle picture of post 38): what does the bar from the Trestrol link to?  And what wagon type is involved?

 

Many thanks,

Bill

[Fat Controller]

Hi Adrian,

 

Thanks for posting these fascinating pictures.  I'm still not clear on how the "chopped" Trestrols were linked to the adjacent wagon (as per the middle picture of post 38): what does the bar from the Trestrol link to?  And what wagon type is involved?

 

Many thanks,

Bill

Given it's height, it looks as though it links to the drawhook on the 'spacer' wagon; the spacer wagon is different in the two shots. The first one has large-head Oleo buffers, and is a bogie wagon, I suspect; the second has heavy-duty Self-Contained buffers and is definitely a four-wheel underframe. At a guess, I'd suggest a bodyless Boplate, or one of the container-carrying derivatives, for the first, and something like a Demountable tank for the second. I would imagine that they would use whatever wagons which would give the correct spacing for the (variable) length of the beams, and which had the requisite clearance under the beam. On other occasions, I've seen Lowmacs, Rectanks and other similar vehicles used.

[jonhall]

Another question that comes to mind - how did these travel 'empty' back to Lenwade? The traditional Girdwag/Conger seem to have travelled on the deck of a suitable wagon, presumably because the were not very stable and very speed limited, I assume the same is true of these? Adrian, did you ever see this?

 

Thanks,

 

Jonathan

[Fat Controller]

Another question that comes to mind - how did these travel 'empty' back to Lenwade? The traditional Girdwag/Conger seem to have travelled on the deck of a suitable wagon, presumably because the were not very stable and very speed limited, I assume the same is true of these? Adrian, did you ever see this?

 

Thanks,

 

Jonathan

No need for them to do so; the end wagons, which had carried the load, were joined by a rake of other wagons. The Girdwag/Conger relied on the load to connect the two extremities; the Concrete-Beam sets seem to have had a rake of wagons, so that the load didn't bear any of the stresses. Presumably, this would have been because a pre-stressed concrete beam is designed to be stress-bearing in only one plane.

[cctransuk]

Inspired by this thread, I am in the process of cutting & shutting two Tri-ang TRESTROLs to match the BR 2/681 diagram, in as-built condition.

 

The two bodies were cut 12.5 mm. off-centre and the two longer sections were combined.

 

The bogies were cut into three parts, 1 mm. off-centre of the two transverse bracing bars, and the longer outer sections were combined with the longer central pivot section.

 

This gives a model that matches the BR diagram and is much more impressive than the original Tri-ang shortie wagon.

 

I also fitted brass pin-point bearings; in my case spaced 0.5 mm. off the sideframes with plastic card to match the axle length of the wheels that I am using.

 

When the buffers arrive, these will be fitted along with cosmetic coupling hooks and HD / Peco functional couplers.

 

Trialled on my test track, the wagon glides through Peco medium radius crossovers even without additional ballast, and without undue overhang.

 

In the meantime, I'll get on with the painting and lettering - photos here when completed.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited November 11, 2013 by cctransuk

[adrianbs]

Hi All In reply to some of the above qusetions I will post my now complete Excel file giving the wagon types<br />and full formations of the 4 trains as soon as I can transfer it to a print and then from BMP to JPG to a 1mb<br />image for the forum. You will then see all the arrangments of the sets and spacers used. The coupling links<br />did fit to the hooks and I presume that the formations were adjusted to suit the weights and lengths required<br />for each delivery. Lenwade closed in about 1984 so my photos predate this but for the life of me I can't find<br />a date for the building of the Poole flyover.<br /><br />As stated above the sets were fully linked and returned as they had arrived. I suspect that Lenwade had an<br />allocation of these wagons on a permanent basis and that even though other types of wagons could carry shorter<br />beams etc they just used what was in the sidings. Whether these sets were used for other suppliers of Concrete<br />beams etc I have no idea but I presume, since such a large proportion of the wagon types were in use in the 4<br />trains to Poole, that they may have had to be used elsewhere when needed. Paul B may be able to translate the<br />B9xxxx numbers into the pre BR LMS and LNER fleet numbers on an individual basis or know which wagons such as<br />Trestrols had not been chopped up.<br /><br />I wonder if Triang could have made the wagon to scale bearing in mind there is no real end throw and the centre<br />section would have been the problem. The body width is not as much as a BR Mk 1 coach. The bogie centres were<br />probably the stumbling block but had they offset the pivot that could have been reduced. Mk l Bogie centres<br />are 46'6" and by offsetting the Trestrol the centres could have been reduced to 47'6" ie 53' less half the<br />axle centre spacing at both ends which is 5'6". This increase of only 4mm should have made little difference<br />and the Trestrols are only 7'6" wide over the well, much less than the 9' of a Mk 1<br /><br />The same solution could have been applied to the LMS 6 wheel dining car, ex Dapol, and might have avoided the<br />awful look of the solebar with a chunk missing. One wheelset could have been dummy to give a very short<br />wheelbase bogie which might not have fouled the solebar at all if the dummy wheels had been cut off just above<br />the bogie sides. But then that would have been far too clever to occur to the designers of TOY TRAINS !!<br />Hope to get the post of the formations in a day or so Regards adrianbs<br />

[adrianbs]

[Fat Controller]

Concrete beam numbers scan2.JPG

That must have been a goodly proportion of the 'Specials' fleet at the time..I do wonder what the 4-wheel chassis without a floor was in the second photo in Post 38; in your list of numbers, there doesn't seem to be anything listed that fits the bill, unless you haven't listed any spacers between the sets. The 12-axle 'Warflat B' were more usually known as Flatrol MLL (for those on the LMR, those on the Western and Eastern being WLL and ELL)

[hmrspaul]

LThat must have been a goodly proportion of the 'Specials' fleet at the time..I do wonder what the 4-wheel chassis without a floor was in the second photo in Post 38; in your list of numbers, there doesn't seem to be anything listed that fits the bill, unless you haven't listed any spacers between the sets. The 12-axle 'Warflat B' were more usually known as Flatrol MLL (for those on the LMR, those on the Western and Eastern being WLL and ELL)

With the wheel so close to the headstock I would suggest it is one of the  8 GLASS MD. That was how they were used in these sets.

 

Adrian - wonderful table. Sorry, I don't have original numbers for the converted wagons in the B909xxx series.

 

Others, don't overlook that the BR diagrams give the original diagram numbers.

B909651 had GWR bogies

909603 & 605 909655 had LNER axle boxes

909606 & 909657 had BRS axle boxes

 

Paul