Miss Prism Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 What is this body? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 (edited) Unless someone shows me a drawing or a photograph, I am still thoroughly confused as to what a 'Dean' 4000g looks like. It is like an intermediate tender but flush rivet sided on thin frames. The 'as built' version just looked like the Kitmaster City of Truro tender from the side, only when you see they are much, much wider can you tell the difference. The tank extended into a well for the extra 500 gallons. The challenge is, like most GWR tenders, they had the top fenders lengthened/changed, put on newer stronger, frames, and under Collett, most had the wells removed making them a lower capacity, to make the frames interchangable. Mike Wiltshire Edit Back in Yorkshire and have access to piccies Here is an original Dean 4000 gallon as attached to a DeGlehn - note width compared to other Dean tenders of the time. They were rebuilt over time. Here is one in 1930's guise with strengthened frames, longer fenders etc You can see the similarity with the intermediate. The usual way to spot the difference is the flush rivets compared to the intermediate. Also the intermediate has a horizontal river line that determines the top of the tank as below. Edited January 18, 2018 by Coach bogie 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 What is this body? 2243-tender-extract.png Collett 3000. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 (edited) Collett 3000. If that is a Collett 3000g, the shape of the front of the fender makes it look unlike any other Collett 3000g. (Edit: that was rubbish.) Edited January 18, 2018 by Miss Prism Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 (edited) If that is a Collett 3000g, the shape of the front of the fender makes it look unlike any other Collett 3000g. How so? Just looks like any other Collett 3000 to me (there were only 50 of them). For example here http://www.semaphoresandsteam.com/p150609566/h420AE4B6#h420ae4b6 or https://locoyard.com/2014/08/26/a-fitting-memorial/ Edited January 17, 2018 by Chris Higgs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 Yes, sorry, Chris, my mistake. It was the line of rivets a third-way up the side that was distracting me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 Yes, sorry, Chris, my mistake. It was the line of rivets a third-way up the side that was distracting me. That line of rivets is one thing that tells us it is a Collett - they mark the top of the well tank. Churchward tenders have them much higher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 That line of rivets is one thing that tells us it is a Collett - they mark the top of the well tank. Churchward tenders have them much higher. Ummm, according to my partner in crime, From 1926 onwards the well tank was abandoned, ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 (edited) Ummm, according to my partner in crime, From 1926 onwards the well tank was abandoned, ... Perhaps I've just called it the wrong thing. On the Colletts the water tank sat low down and also between the frames. On the earlier tenders it extended up either side of the coal space to a higher level. Which is why on the Colletts the coal space can have those nice sloping sides that make the coal slide down automatically. On a Churchward tender the fireman had to periodically climb inside to shovel it forward. Chris Edited January 18, 2018 by Chris Higgs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 (edited) The interior of Collett 3000g tender 3002, lot 159, shows vertical sides and a sloping end to the coal space: https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianews/27306984234/in/album-72157670176255606/ (pic by Brian Daniels - I still haven't got the knack of quoting flickr pics properly) Here is the GA of lot A118, which is a Collett 3500g, and denoted as having a flush-bottom tank, which has slopes on the sides of the coal space as well. Externally, the Collett 3500g was slightly different to the later Collett 3000g, the Collett 3500g having narrow horn plates and shallow gussets, the Collett 3000g having wide horn plates and long gussets. Anyone got coal space pics of the tenders of CoT or 2516? Edited February 28, 2020 by Miss Prism Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 The Collett 3500 is six inches higher than the 3000. Dunno, but doesn't the JLTRT model have sloping sides: https://www.justliketherealthing.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=42&product_id=136 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 (edited) The interior of Collett 3000g tender 3002, lot 159, shows vertical sides and a sloping end to the coal space: https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianews/27306984234/in/album-72157670176255606/ (pic by Brian Daniels - I still haven't got the knack of quoting flickr pics properly) Here is the GA of lot A118, which is a Collett 3500g, and denoted as having a flush-bottom tank, which has slopes on the sides of the coal space as well. Externally, this Collett 3500g seems to look exactly the same as the Collett 3000g. 3500g-tender-a118.jpg Anyone got coal space pics of the tenders of CoT or 2516? The other photos from Brian show the coal space sides sloping, at least at the front. For example 8549 https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianews/27884776436/in/album-72157670176255606/ What a fabulous set of photos for modellers BTW. I am going to have to adapt my 2mm 3D-print based on these. Chris Edited January 18, 2018 by Chris Higgs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 The Collett 3500 is six inches higher than the 3000. Ah yes, thanks. That explains the cab cutout matchup with Halls. Dunno, but doesn't the JLTRT model have sloping sides: https://www.justliketherealthing.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=42&product_id=136 The other photos from Brian show the coal space sides sloping, at least at the front. For example 8549 https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianews/27884776436/in/album-72157670176255606/ Perhaps I was misreading the initial picture I referenced. Or maybe 3002's interior has been rebuilt a bit since preservation. Dunno. In this one, one side of the coal space seems vertical, and the other side sloped at the rear: https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianews/29966311330/in/album-72157670176255606/ What a fabulous set of photos for modellers BTW. I am going to have to adapt my 2mm 3D-print based on these. Yes. His Mogul and Prairie picture sets are also top notch coverage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 (edited) Perhaps I've just called it the wrong thing. On the Colletts the water tank sat low down and also between the frames. The GWR tender drawings index book definitely describes the later tenders (A113 on) as Flush Bottom and the earlier ones as Well Bottom. I had always assumed that meant the well tank was partially between the frames and the flush tank all above, but I haven't looked at enough of the right drawings closely enough to be sure. The GWR did sometimes use terms differently to enthusiasts. My interpretation of the drawings I've made for my book was that the sides of the flush tank tenders were higher than those of the well tank tenders of the same capacity. Its also worth noting that according to RCTS the A113 on 4,000 gallon tenders held 6 tons of coal, whereas the A112 and earlier tenders, 3.500 and 4,000 gallon, were rated for 7 tons, so the coal spaces were clearly rather different, but again I haven't studied the drawings or other sources to see what the precise differences were. Edited January 18, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenrash Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Is this a photograph that Miss Prism is asking for? From Guy Williams book Shows 3000 gal and 3500 gal tenders with a flat deck and a cliff into a well. Richard A 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Excellent. I do know of that one, Richard, but many thanks anyway. Good to have it in usable form. Looking at it again, with hindsight, it's interesting to compare how big the 'tank' bit is compared to the volume available for coal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenrash Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Yes and you are supposed to able to get 7 Ton of coal on the 3500 gal deck! Hard work for the fireman. If the 3500 gal tenders had sloping coal hopper?? back wall later in their lives, when were they changed? or were later lots built with the slope. From when? Richard A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 If the 3500 gal tenders had sloping coal hopper?? back wall later in their lives, when were they changed? or were later lots built with the slope. From when? I don't know yet. The Roche 3500g drawing, with a high shoveling plate and described (somewhat inaccurately in my view) as "formerly fitted to Stars, Castles and 2-8-0 4700 class", shows a sloping coal space on a scalloped-framed underframe. Which places it mid-1920s, say. But there were many 3500g lots, so sloping coal spaces may have been introduced earlier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 When were fire-iron tunnels introduced? 1900?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 Thanks, Mike, for illuminating the Dean 4000g saga. The complexity of some GWR loco class histories pales into insignificance compared to the tenders! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 (edited) sloping coal spaces may have been introduced earlier. For 3,500 gallon tenders the Drawings register shows tank drawing 27459 for lots A65 - A78. 41429 for lots A79 - A112, and 85061 for lot A118. For 4,000 gallon tenders they are 15860 for A46-A60, 76940 for A113 - A117 87554 for A120 on, and 122574 and 121756 for the two widths of Hawksworth tenders. So that should be when changes were made to the tank designs and thus the coal spaces. Edited January 20, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 For 3,500 gallon tenders the Drawings register shows tank drawing 27459 for lots A65 - A78. 41429 for lots A79 - A112, and 85061 for lot A118. For 4,000 gallon tenders they are 15860 for A46-A60, 76940 for A113 - A117 87554 for A120 on, and 122574 and 121756 for the two widths of Hawksworth tenders. So that should be when changes were made to the tank designs and thus the coal spaces. I have a lot of homework to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 For 3,500 gallon tenders the Drawings register shows tank drawing 27459 for lots A65 - A78. 41429 for lots A79 - A112, and 85061 for lot A118. For 4,000 gallon tenders they are 15860 for A46-A60, 76940 for A113 - A117 87554 for A120 on, and 122574 and 121756 for the two widths of Hawksworth tenders. So that should be when changes were made to the tank designs and thus the coal spaces. Need a break from something else, so am looking at a few drawings... The Pannier article shows the top of the tank sloping both fore and aft and laterally in the centre of the coal space on 85060 (3,500 gallon lot A118), 121718 (Hawksworth A180/183 for County) ( and a drawing I take to be 92460 (4,000 gall, A123 on) . It also has 41429 the tank drawing for A79-112 , and that appears to show a sloping end to the tank, but steeper and shorter, in the fore and aft plane only. 72342, the GA for lot A112, also seems to show the same slope, which matches what the drawing register says. I don't seem to have any drawings for lots A65 - A78, but the obvious supposition is that they had the vertical face shown in Wenrush' post above. There are drawings of Dean era tenders in Russell, but I'm not confident in my interpretation of which line is which, other than to say there's no sign of any angled lines, all seem vertical or horizontal. Of course we don't know what might have been done with replacement tanks, and we also need to be aware that the drawings register is not a complete guide to what was built - there's nothing in it, for instance, to inform us about the high sides on at least some if not all of lot A112 and I very strongly suspect some tenders in earlier lots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 If the A79 drawing shows a sloping end, then that dates sloping ends on the Churchward 3500g at least as far back as 1910.5322's tender, on a pre-1925 frame, which I think is what Dapol might be using as a source for its 4mm model, has a sloping end, although unfortunately its original identity is not known. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 Anyone got a side-on shot of SVR's 7325, currently running with an A112 3500g intermediate? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now