More Pre-Grouping Wagons in 4mm - the D299 appreciation thread.

[Compound2632]

Just re-orienting myself - posting a photo I've shown before (a) to get the hang of doing it (though I'm sticking with the old-fashioned method) and (b) to remind myself how many half-complete projects I have hanging around:

The photos are coming out bigger than before - perhaps I need a smaller screen?

It does seem that all the photos are there - I have my own (private?) gallery of them at "My attachments", which could be useful! I'll trust they do all re-appear in the fullness of time.

Happy modelling!

[Compound2632]

Voting is, I believe, still open in the L&NWR Society Model Railway Competition - see here. I've entered, but I'm really not canvassing for votes here - there's some superb modelling in all categories that far outclasses my efforts. I want to encourage people to vote as I think the competition is an excellent initiative by this line society. My modelling has become more interesting, satisfying, and I hope accurate thanks to the research published by dedicated members of the society, both in print volumes, notably but not only LNWR Wagons, and on the society's website. I really must get round to submitting my membership application!

 

Edited February 2, 2019 by Compound2632

[Mikkel]

It has certainly opened my eyes wider still to the wonders of the LNWR. As you say, some excellent modelling has been submitted, including your wagon builds . I hope people realize how carefully you have researched them. 

[Compound2632]

11 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

I hope people realize how carefully you have researched them. 

Nah, I just read the research of others and acted upon it. Shoulders of Giants and all that.

[Mikkel]

I agree about the giants, but they are not always right - and so checking out things and seeing for yourself is important, and you have a knack for that.

[Compound2632]

Whoopee! Photos are back, right from the beginning.

 

Now I'm beginning to get the hang of things, I'm liking the upgrade - well done Andy!

 

The only slight pain is that using my favourite point of entry - "Content I posted In" - I only get a listing of posts I've posted in post-upgrade. So if you find me making an inconsequential remark in your thread, it's just so I can keep track of what you're doing there!

[Northroader]

I’m just trying to remember the threads I like, then doing a search, then clicking “follow” at the top of the page, it seems to work, if a bit laborious.

stubby just gave me an idea, seen the photo select to wallpaper your profile title?

Edited February 4, 2019 by Northroader

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Northroader said:

I’m just trying to remember the threads I like, then doing a search, then clicking “follow” at the top of the page, it seems to work, if a bit laborious.

stubby just gave me an idea, seen the photo select to wallpaper your profile title?

 

It's got to the point where I'm seeing posts I'd posted in before the upgrade appearing in my Content I Posted In activity stream, so I'm happy.

 

I too saw Stubby's remark and acted on it.

[Worsdell forever]

6 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

I too saw Stubby's remark and acted on it.

 

Me too, I've got a nice green engine on mine...

[Northroader]

Both very classy, too.

[Penlan]

Still trying to understand the 'new' system.
Have there been no updates to this topic since the 4th Feb?

[jwealleans]

That would seem so.

[Compound2632]

9 hours ago, Penlan said:

Still trying to understand the 'new' system.
Have there been no updates to this topic since the 4th Feb?

 

I'm getting to grips with teaching in a state secondary school. This has sapped my energy for modelling. With half term coming up, I may get the chance to make some progress!

[Penlan]

Thank you both, well that's one part understood of the new system.
Half term, right up with the barricades, we have an influx of visitors way down west from Friday.
Fortunatly I've put on a Band in the Club on Saturday night,

so something to keep them entertained.
The weather has been fantastic down here recently,

so Coastal path walkers will be in abundance over half term, and ker-nack-ered.
And if I could find something to do with a D299 I would add it........
 

Edited February 14, 2019 by Penlan

[Compound2632]

Retail therapy:

 

 

... bought for the S&DJR, M&GNJR, and HB&WRJR&DCo content, of course.

 

The most curious thing in Southern Wagons Vol. 1 has to be the LSWR's ballast plough and brake vans (SR Dia. 1737), built in 1898 and 1903 by Hurst Nelson. These are clearly very closely based on the contemporary Great Western brake vans - are they in fact identical to that company's Dia. AA5 ballast plough and brake vans? If so, how? why?

 

The S&DJR section is mildly disappointing - I've come to suspect that I have seen all the extant photos of S&DJR wagons in S&DJR livery several times over. The same could be said for the M&GN section of LNER Wagons Vol. 2 - of the three photos of ordinary service wagons, one is the only photo of a Joint wagon I knew previously, and that from Midland Style, first seen nearly forty years ago. At least I now understand the rarity of M&GN wagon photos - there simply weren't that many wagons to be photographed. Like David, I'm used to my tens of thousands, the wagon fleets of the companies serving the industrial Midlands and North. It comes as a shock to realise that the wagon stock of the LSWR at grouping was only a little over 15,000 - that's about three years' worth of D299s! The Hull & Barnsley, a much smaller railway, had over 5,000. The Cheshire Lines was the largest joint railway in terms of traffic; it had around 4,000 wagons; even the S&DJR had over 1,300 wagons at the time its revenue stock was divided between the LSWR and the Midland in 1914. That division bolstered the LSWR wagon fleet by about 4%, whereas it was a true drop in the ocean for the Midland. It also means that during the Great War around one in fifty LSWR wagons was in fact a Highbridge-built D299 look-alike!

 

But the M&GN, the largest joint railway in the country by route mileage, is recorded as having just 388 wagons, excluding service stock, at the end of 1922. There's a rough-and-ready formula - akin to W.G. Hoskins' formula for dating hedgerows - that says any self-respecting railway would have one locomotive for every mile of track and around a hundred wagons for every goods locomotive. Rural lines with long stretches of single track are unsurprisingly under-par on both categories. The S&DJR had around 44 0-6-0 goods engines in the Edwardian period - which shows that factor of 100 should be de-rated to 30 for such a line. The M&GN had a mere 26 0-6-0s - which would suggest a wagon fleet size of around 780. Perhaps at one time the wagon stock was near this total - the 4-plank open that appears in Midland Style was No. 674, and the highest number in Tatlow's tabulation (p. 191) is 735. A further oddity is that the quantities of different types listed in that table at Nov 1919 only adds up to 263. Where are the missing wagons?

 

Both the S&DJR and the M&GNJR possessed 135 cattle wagons...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 15, 2019 by Compound2632

[Andy Hayter]

That is a very interesting rough and ready statistic for wagon numbers.  I think however it will be highly influenced by a number of factors:

1.  The volume of mineral traffic generated within the company's area - mainly coal mines.  The S+D had several mines over the Mendip, the M+G had none.

2.  The incidence of heavy industry that demanded a flow of minerals - mainly coal, but also perhaps limestone, coke and other minerals.  Neither the S+D nor the M+G had anything of any significance.

3  The occurrence of, or dissuasion against, private owner wagons - compare the NER and the Midland up until it tried to buy up the stock of PO wagons.  Not sure about the S+D but the M+G had many coal factors who used their own wagons up to and beyond grouping.  

[Compound2632]

23 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

Midland up until it tried to buy up the stock of PO wagons.   

 

I've said it before but will repeat: it seems that the true effect of the Midland's PO wagon purchase scheme was to give the private owners the capital to go out and buy or hire new PO wagons to the 1887 RCH spec. Despite the vast numbers of D299s built to replace the bought-up wagons, by the turn of the century the number of PO wagons on the Midland was once again vast.

[wagonman]

11 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

That is a very interesting rough and ready statistic for wagon numbers.  I think however it will be highly influenced by a number of factors:

1.  The volume of mineral traffic generated within the company's area - mainly coal mines.  The S+D had several mines over the Mendip, the M+G had none.

 

 

As Andy points out, the majority of the SDJR freight was minerals, stone as well as coal, mostly carried in PO wagons of which there were a few thousand based on the system – enough to restore the 1:100 ratio perhaps.

 

 

Richard

[Compound2632]

Valid points made - and factoring in PO wagons may well take us back up to the 100:1 ratio. I have a feeling I got that number from a Martin Waters or Don Rowland MRN article of great antiquity; it may not be intended to apply to company-owned wagons only, though it works out for the Midland. 

 

The M&GN was, I'm sure, a net importer - inbound coal in PO wagons of the major East Anglian coal factors being very significant, as discussed here - wade past the initial RTR stuff and base prejudice... (A couple of my work colleagues are from or have previously worked in Norfolk, so I have to watch my step.) Also Coote & Warren here et seq. and here et seq. and probably there again in two years' time...

Edited February 16, 2019 by Compound2632

[wagonman]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Valid points made - and factoring in PO wagons may well take us back up to the 100:1 ratio. I have a feeling I got that number from a Martin Waters or Don Rowland MRN article of great antiquity; it may not be intended to apply to company-owned wagons only, though it works out for the Midland. 

 

The M&GN was, I'm sure, a net importer - inbound coal in PO wagons of the major East Anglian coal factors being very significant, as discussed here - wade past the initial RTR stuff and base prejudice... (A couple of my work colleagues are from or have previously worked in Norfolk, so I have to watch my step.) Also Coote & Warren here et seq. and here et seq. and probably there again in two years' time...

 

There was indeed a series of articles by Don Rowland – called "Keeping the Balance" – which primarily dealt with the LMS c1938. He was of course looking at the whole system and did acknowledge that localised traffic flows could severely distort the averages.

 

Most of the coal that came into East Anglia by rail did so via the GE/GN joint line from the Doncaster area though the M&GN would presumably have tapped into the Leicester coalfield primarily.

[Penlan]

21 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

But the M&GN, the largest joint railway in the country by route mileage, is recorded as having just 388 wagons, excluding service stock, at the end of 1922. 

According to the 'The Railway Year Book' of 1917, the M&GN had :-

 

99 loco's

225 Passenger Train Vehicles

398 Goods Train Vehicles (ex. Service vehicles)
Total Milage (Owned) 
74m 13 ch. Double (or more?)

109m 7ch.
Single track equivalent 183m 20ch.

They also had

101 Drays/carts

66 Horses.

If I've repeated most of what's gone before,

I'm deaf and still trying to come to terms with the new formats, 
 

Edited February 16, 2019 by Penlan

[Compound2632]

3 hours ago, Penlan said:

According to the 'The Railway Year Book' of 1917, the M&GN had :-

 

99 loco's

225 Passenger Train Vehicles

398 Goods Train Vehicles (ex. Service vehicles)
 

 

Which makes it the ideal subject for a model, as that ratio of about two carriages and four wagons to every engine is about what most of us end up at!

[ian@stenochs]

On 13/02/2019 at 18:12, Compound2632 said:

 

I'm getting to grips with teaching in a state secondary school. This has sapped my energy for modelling. With half term coming up, I may get the chance to make some progress!

 

I taught my whole career in senior secondary schools, some of them approved too.  I found that 15 minutes at the modelling bench every night, after my after dinner nap, put the world into perspective and kept me sane.  Since I retired I find that I don’t need the nap but the modelling is still essential.

 

Ian

[Guy Rixon]

I was looking at an old copy of Midland Record and found a GA for D351. One thing that struck me was that the brake hangars and safety loops were distinctly slanted because of the position of the middle bearers. I don't have a GA for D299 to hand, but I suspect those wagons had the same arrangement.

 

None of the 4mm-scale brake-products I've seen, including my own, represent this slant accurately, all having the hangars and loops too nearly vertical. The moulding in the Slaters' kit gets this wrong too.

 

It would be straightforward to product a brake print, based on my existing CADs, that puts the hangars and loops at the right angle. Would anybody want such I thing if I made it?

[Buhar]

I'm sure Stephen will be along with a soundly researched view before too long.  I had a quick run through some drawing and pictures.  The off-vertical safety loop (the easiest to spot) is present on other diagrams too, but a photo of a D299 shows a vertical (as far as I can tell) loop.  Differences between drawing office life and real life?