Andy Vincent

Very true - which I suppose suggests that the swivel version was the safest of them all since it generally only had a safety latch at one end. That said, I am not sure whether it really would allow operation from one end in practice, especially when closing, once the end door had moved away from being perfectly flat.

As an alternative to squinting, Hudson volume 3, plate 100 clearly shows this arrangement on another (presumed) Hurst Nelson wagon for Nash & Co. of Royston, Herts. No safety catches are visible.

Having stared (squinted?) further at it enlarged to level beyond reasonable for the resolution, I think the horizontal bar is likely to wrap around the side sheeting (a bit like a staple) to contain a vaguely triangular hooped catch which slides up to clear the end bar. As you note, this bar seems to be bolted to the end door. On that basis the horizontal piece on the side is likely to be thicker than a washer plate given the forces at play. You can just about make out the joggle in the end knee washer plate which suggests it had some strength. As you note, with separate catches each side, it would take two people to free the door (or one with some faith that the other catch was fully engaged as they ducked under the buffers to change sides). Presumably the sliding part had some locking mechanism although maybe the weight of coal pressing on the door plus gravity was enough at that time (it worked for side doors but they would not be subjected to the same forces when braking). An interesting prototype feature for Rapido and @Skinnylinny to pick anyway . . .

Unusually, the catches for the swivel bar end door closure are on the outside of the wagon rather than being rebated on the inside. This would also mean that the bar must have extended significantly beyond the sides and been quite a hazard to shunters. Definitely not in conformance to RCH standards of any era!

Whilst this thread is not the most active(!), it is worth noting that the LMS Society has now posted their set of 1907 RCH drawings here: https://www.lmssociety.co.uk/rchDrawings.php

I did these a while back for a fellow modeller at South Hants MRC. After a parallel discussion with the LNWRS, I am now a membership fee poorer but do have some additional drawings to add 3 hole buffers to this and complete a detailing pack. This is one of a number of such packs (axleboxes with springs plus buffer guides for your choice of fixed or sprung heads) that will be available by ExpoEM (and probably a bit before) with several others to follow - and, yes, there will be a MR pack (10A) for ExpoEM!

A little before the time span of the work being undertaken at Portsmouth University to document all railway worker accidents in Britain and Ireland from the late 1880s to 1939. This is a collaboration between very many groups including the NRM and HMRS. Details at https://www.railwayaccidents.port.ac.uk/ for anyone not familiar with the project.

Time to reach for the MRS back numbers service then as someone quite late to the cause!

At the risk of pre-empting @Compound2632's next instalment in MRS Journal, is there any pattern to whether a D299 (or D351 and perhaps others) had a long brake lever (with lever guard outside of right-hand axle) or a short brake lever (with guard inside right-hand axle) - and did they keep whichever they were allocated until they were scrapped?

Is this for 4mm or something larger?

Crecy told me that there are ten volumes in total (all are written so just need production work) but they didn't elaborate on what volumes 7 to 10 will cover.

Maybe the period is a little late for @Compound2632 but overall good news for many of us coming next month https://www.crecy.co.uk/the-acquired-wagons-of-british-railways-volume-6

As an aside, at least for HMRS members, the internal LMS document that seems to have been the source for these drawings has surfaced from Bob's material. Whilst the drawings are still line drawings, the original drawings are much larger and the document also includes other related material of interest from the constituent companies. It is currently being scanned.

Often referred to as the 'dust shield'. You can see the way it slots in at the rear on this RCH 1907 drawing: [embedded link to LMS Society web site - RCH drawing 9]

I have a recollection (possibly faulty!) that canvas and the bedding compound underneath also provide a degree of protection from cinders. Having cinders landing directly on bare wood sounds like a recipe for disaster!