drduncan

Its why its on my list of stock to CAD and 3d print - especially as my new MonoX2 will allow stock up to c60ft in length to be printed as a single piece body shell...so reasons not to get busy with the CAD are rapidly diminishing (apart from the all BG stuff to do and a load of rash promises made to Mark Tatlow in exchange for a slotted post signal...) 🙂 D

Many thanks to Phil P for resurrecting the thread from the archival pit of doom so I can post some new info. I have been slowly going through the information in the NRM GWR wagon Stock Book 3/3 Broad Gauge which includes information about the Bristol and Exeter and South Devon Railway rolling stock (and others). I had hoped I might be able to locate NG wagon 25637 - the subject of the photo @MikeOxon found and used for his NG Tilt wagon - unfortunately, I have drawn a blank so far, but I did turn up information on SDR tilt wagons that were converted to standard gauge before the end of the broad gauge. The SDR seems to have had 75 iron bodied and iron underframed BG tilt wagons. Of these, the following were recorded as converted to narrow/standard gauge (BG number given first): 10088 Converted to NG 29559 24/3/1877 10090 Converted to NG 29602 3/11/1877 10091 Converted to NG 29604 15/12/1877 10111 Converted to NG 55508 1/7/1893 10113 Converted to NG 55507 1/7/1893 10115 converted to NG 55506 1/7/1893 10119 converted to NG 55505 1/7/1893 10120 Converted to NG 29605 23/2/1878 10124 converted to NG 29482 10/3?/1877 10132 converted to NG 29579 8/12/1877 10139 converted to NG 55504 1/7/1893 10140 converted to NG 55503 1/7/1893 10148 converted to NG 29500 8/5/1880 10149 converted to NG 55502 1/7/1893 10150 converted to NG 55501 1/7/1893 This means that that to pursue this further we need: More info on GWR built tilt wagons to examine the standard gauge wagon stock books covering nos 29001-30000 and 55001-56000. If anyone has images of these do share! Regards, Duncan

I seem to recall that there is an error with one or more of the centre panels. I’m sure there was an MRJ article (by Martin Goodall perhaps) on bashing the k’s kit. D

WSB for 31534: lot 211, wood underframe with iron cover plates, grease axle boxes, spring buffers, double shoe brakes, 9 tons (downrated to 8 no date), tare 4-17-0 (build?), 4-8-0 (ND possibly when downrated to 8 tons), built Swindon 11 Dec 1880, condemned Swindon 29 Nov 1913. D

The WSB record for 6117 lot 249, Iron underframe, rod buffers, double shoe brakes, grease axle boxes, 9 tons downgraded to 8 (undated), tare 4-17-0, 4-18-0 (ND, possibly at same time load downrated), 4-10-0 dated 13/12/19, built Swindon 10 Dec 1881, Tx to Engineering departmental list no 80256 on 27 Feb 1924.

@Mikkel Yes its a 3 plank and looking at the angle the number should be visible unless its weathered away - the G.W.R is quite indistinct. D

And the round ended number looks like ?1534. D

A fitched example https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrms1211.htm https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrms1213.htm Feel free to add more links to images of GWR 3 plank wagons! D

Why oh why is it always the wagons you are interested in whose numbers are obscured. It must be the wrath of the Derby gods at work... or maybe Euston is the font of all evil?

In revenge for Stephen’s comments about things godly and wonderful on another thread @Mikkel do you have any more images of GWR round ended 3 plank wagons you can share? 😁 Duncan

😡 You are just jealous! D

Typo: …is that is… probably should be - …is that it… Otherwise reads well. D

Have you considered the currently experimental templot plug track? See @hayfield ‘s track building thread. It looks extremely promising and should remove almost all the dark arts associated with point construction. Duncan

Hi Rich @wagonman, Thanks for the reply. I'm a member of the BGS, but its the standard gauge conversions/rebuilds that interest me. I seem to recall someone (Russel ??) mentioning in one of their books that the GWR goods department had a book of sketches of wagons to allow staff to order the correct one for the load they had which helpfully showed the position of doors. I was wondering if you knew what it was called and where a copy might be found so that I could see if the S8s and the plank sided S7s were illustrated. Regards, Duncan

Today’s offerings are all GWR (I know, much a surprise) standard gauge 3 planks. All have use same add ons as the BG versions except the w irons are EMGS (ex D&S) rather than MJT. First up is a round ended version with wooden under frame. Next is a round ended one with iron under frame. And last is a square ended version with iron under frames. Thanks for looking. Duncan

If the whole thing is getting a repaint to GER colours drop the tender in a tub of B & Q paint stripper and put the lid of the tub on, leave for a few days. It’s very good at dissolving Araldite or uhu type glues as well as taking the paint off. Duncan

I recall from Ian Rice’ book on finescale track construction that he felt it was the combination of pva with real stone ballast that was the problem. He advocated using ground foam and wood ash, I think. There are also natural (often nut based) ballasts that may help avoid the pva/granite concrete. For glue I’m intending to use copydex (rubber based) neat for track to track base and then diluted for the ballast - when I have summoned up the courage to stick down the track panels! Duncan

Not a scooby at the moment. The discussion on GWR modelling has been more red oxide than red but I think the BG boys and girls are in favour of a proper red - a bit like you painted yours. The contemporary description is along the lines of a cheerful red, so I’m warming (sorry) to a brighter red like yours. D

Strange you should ask… I’ve been collating information about the ex South Devon Railway iron bodied tilt wagons from the BG absorbed wagon stock book (to be found at the NRM - I photographed it a while ago) and there are a number that were converted to narrow gauge well before the end of BG in ‘92. Whether these tilt wagons are the same as the one I’ve got drawings for is another matter… There was a discussion involving @MikeOxon a few years ago about narrow gauge tilts including a photo of possible SG/narrowed tilt, but the great server meltdown probably did it in. However Mike might still have the photo somewhere. D

At the undercoat/primer stage now are a pair of GWR broad gauge 3 plank convertible wagons. The first is to lot osL345. The w irons are MJT bg ones, the buffer heads are MJT too, with the non reversible brake gear and lever from ABS (Modelstock). The body and buffer housings are 3D printed. The horse hook loop at the left hand end of the solebar is bent up from 0.3mm brass wire. The second one is to osL 369 - the only difference is instead of a horse hook loop the solebars have a series of rectangular holes with rounded corners. Again, as with the first wagon, w irons and buffers heads are MJT, brake gear ABS (Modelstock) and the body and buffer housings my own 3D prints. Incidentally, the tapered buffers have round bases not the later rectangular ones. The big question now is how red to make the red livery and is BG red different from GWR narrow gauge red? Regards Duncan

As the great server meltdown destroyed a lot of the photos early on in this thread, I though to reinstate some, but also enhance the back story for Nampara which has led me to post this new introduction (a blend of fact and fiction) - even though it is nowhere near the introduction to the thread! The origins of the line In the early 1850s, inspired by the onrushing (sic) progress of the Cornwall Railway, Sir Henry Poldark, son of the late Sir Ross, decided that his mining and associated ventures in the vicinity of the family seat at Nampara would benefit from connection to the national rail network, especially as hopes in the area that the Treffry tramways might reach the area had been dashed. The building of a railway from Nampara south towards Truro and both the West Cornwall Railway and Cornwall Railway was not just vanity - the continued success of the extensive mining ventures depended on reducing their costs - especially that of coal. Therefore a line from the harbour at Nampara to the various tin (to the southwest around St Annes), copper and lead mines running to the south east and east. Poldark agitated and pestered until he had sufficient interest in a scheme for a branch line from the Cornwall Railway just east of Truro to reach his land at Nampara, where he undertook to develop more suitable quays for the exporting of tin, copper and china clay that across an open beach. Work started on the line in 1858 and by 1862 was open for goods and passengers, with the Cornwall Railway undertaking to work the line. The stations at Idless and then at Callestick & Marazanvose - a station that the locals joked had a name as long as the railway that served it - could pass passenger and goods trains, while there was a smaller station at Chynoweth. Relations with neighbouring lines When the line was proposed it was opposed by the Treffey tramway (from Par to Newquay) who could recognize competition when it saw it (and later took an equally dim view of a another broad gauge intrusion, this time in the shape of the Newquay and Cornwall Junction Railway which was built from Burngallow towards St Dennis but only got as far as Napean before running out of money). Happily, the Treffey trustees were unsuccessful in the face of Sir Henry's determination and his railway to Nampara went ahead as he intended. When the Treffey tramway was rebuilt as the Cornwall Mineral Railway between 1873 and 1874 a branch was authorised from St Dennis junction to meet the Newquay and Cornwall Junction Railway (now part of the Cornwall Railway and the Associated Companies = GWR) and as part of the authorization it was agreed that not only would the line be mixed to St Dennis and even Newquay, but that the Treamble branch would be extended a couple of miles from the area of Shepherds to meet the Nampara Railway at a junction at Perranwell. From this point the Nampara railway would lay a narrow line to its harbour at Nampara and give the CMR running powers over the mixed portion only of the line. It was a nice bit of quid pro quo, but the CMR saw little value in actually doing their broad gauge bit of the agreement and after a salvo of lawyers had been unleashed on them in 1875 in order to get them to do something towards laying the broad gauge rail could only frustrate plans for mixed gauge from St Dennis to Newquay by laying the rail in such a way that it couldn't be used! Unfortunately for the Nampara Railway Sir Henry was a decent chap and had laid the narrow rail, making the line from Perranwell Junction to Nampara a mixed gauge line The line was, much to its promoters' relief a moderate success, and this helped it weather the county's banking crash in 1866. Indeed, in the mid 1870s the line was extended a short distance to serve an additional new quay. To get his own back on the CMR Sir Henry did not lay a narrow rail on all parts of the new quay extension, limiting the utility of the facilities for the CMR. With the collapse of the mineral trade shortly after the new quays were completed the CMR was leased to the GWR in 1877. With lower harbour duties than at Par and Newuqay, the link to the CMR actually allowed the Nampara line to poach traffic (especially China clay) from the CMR - much to that line's intense annoyance, but with no break of gauge to complain about opportunities for CMR petty revenge were limited. From the outset the line was worked by arrangement with the Associated Companies (ie GWR). Industry and Traffic on and along the line. However, the Nampara line fulfilled its promise of lower costs for the mines. More importantly, the mines remained an important source of traffic for the line - not just coal in, but also timber and machinery, while ore went out. The lower costs helped the copper mines in the area survive the collapse in copper mining in the late 1860s and early 1870s. Lead mining was also very important in the area by the mid nineteenth century - in fact in the area had the two most productive lead mines in the country - West Chiverton and East Wheal Rose. To consider East Wheal Rose (up the mixed gauge branch to the CMR0 between 1845 and 1885 it produced 48,200 tons of 62% lead ore, 212,700 ounces of silver and 280 tons of zinc ore and the savings in costs allowed to keep working despite an increasingly unfavourable economic climate in the 1880s and 1890s. Between 1859-1886, West Chiverton produced around 45,800 tons of lead ore, containing over 33,000 tons of lead and over 1.24 million ounces of silver, not to mention 22,676 tons of zinc ore and 15 tons of copper ore. Between 1863-1874 the mine paid £157,000 in dividends for a purchase price of £30,000. The line also allowed the development of lead smelting close to the mines, maximising the profits that could be realised - the unrefined ore commanding a much lower price than lead ingots. China clay, although not a product of the area, is a significant sourced of traffic on the line thanks to the lower harbour dues making it a more attarctive exporting point than Newuqay for traffic on the CMR lines, but with its broad gauge, it provided a handy outlet via Truro for the traffic from the china clay workings on the former Newquay and Cornwall Junction Railway. Fish was another stable of the line. Like St Ives further west, Nampara was saw considerable landing of fish, not just Pilchards, but others - most of which headed south as perishable traffic to Truro to join the express workings to the east and ultimately London. The line and its route. The terminus of the line at Nampara is constrained by the high ground inland and the sea. The result was a long thin set of facilities in three groups. At the farthest point of the line is the 1870s new quay extension. This consists of a pair of BG sidings and a pair of narrow (standard) gauge sidings as well as a loop. However, due to the poor relations with the CMR, a clause was inserted that only standard gauge engines owned by the harbour company (a separate concern to the Nampara line) were allowed onto the new quays extension. This clause has persisted into GWR leasing/ownership of the CMR with the result that the exCMR 1392 class engines (and others) cannot pass onto the new quay lines, while the board gauge engines can. The next group of facilities are centred on the station proper and the old harbour. The goods and loco facilitates for the station are a few yards further inland along the line. Fortunately, gentle curvature of the line as it approaches the station gives Nampara signal box a good sight line of the goods loop and engine shed and the outer home and ain to loop points are within the prescribed distance by the BoT so a second box is, at the moment, unnecessary. Nampara station signal diagram. Once out of Nampara the line heads south and about 1/2 a mile along the line is a set of sidings to serve the Lesiure groups of mines, before continuing to Perranwell Junction, where the mixed gauge line ends and standard gauge to the CMR diverges from broad and heads east. A couple of chains west of the junction there is a siding serving the New Chiverton Mine, and a few chains east of the junction on the standard gauge is a siding for North Chiverton. Heading south the now broad gauge line continues for about a mile before a lengthy siding serving West Chiverton and Wentworth Consols mine diverges. Another half a mile sees the first passing station, Callestick and Marazanvose. This station is not only a block post on the line and generating agricultural traffic for the line, but it has several sidings devoted for mines lying to the west of the valley. It is also the summit of the line. The line now falls towards Truro. About 1/4 of a mile south of Callestick, the line crosses the A30 at a level crossing, before arriving at the small station of Chynoweth. This station has a loop and siding for general merchandise - but a few chains further south along the line lies yet another siding serving the Garras mine. A mile further south of Chynoweth station is the station at Idless - the lines second passing point and again serving mines in the close area as well as the agricultural trade. And now The date is now 1891, and within a year the line will be converted to the Stephenson's narrower gauge.

But then for me, I find BR standard classes fall into the ‘oh no, not another one’ category - it’s all a matter of personal interest. 😀

I suppose it strange that Bachmann have not produced either a GWR Duke (they have the basic body already from the Earl) or a Bulldog (they have the chassis from the Earl). I imagine it is because scanning is a lot easier/cheaper than CADing from drawings and photos. Or perhaps the Earl was not a commercial success and has put them off. Mind you the City seemed to do well enough to emerge in several variants. Duncan

As you point out the body length is clear, but my question was whether anyone knew what the wheelbase was - which doesn’t appear on the panel with the other information. Happily skinnylinny’s thread may have the answer. D

Thank you. Most helpful. Duncan