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

[billbedford]

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I feel an experiment coming on.

 

Of course, a shackle breaking when subjected to a sudden snatch as the train gets underway would be perfectly prototypical!

 

I keep telling people that, but the don't seem to want to that prototypical. 

[billbedford]

I thought I might post the other half of the Carr Wagon Works photo because it shows something of more than local interest. 

 

The question is what colour is the 'ghost' wagon?

[Compound2632]

Both splendid photos, especially interesting to one who knows very little of Great Northern wagons. The use of the G NORTHERN R in the freshly-painted low sided wagon does seem bizzare if the photo is from ten years after that style was supposedly discontinued. I've seen one or two photos of implement wagons and the like with G.N.R on the side rail - but I don't know the date of those. Smaller lettering seems to have been retained for the outside-framed meat and fruit vans, going by Tatlow, and the examples in the photo above. Where Great Northern covered goods wagons turned out with white roofs, or are we seeing light grey in strong sunlight? 

 

I'm going on about the pre-1898 livery because I don't particularly care for the 4-plank high G N lettering which I find a bit ugly. The G is a bit ungainly compared to the nicely-rounded one the Great Western used but they had the advantage of balancing a nice wide W not the skinny letter N.

 

There's a row of round-ended wagons, apparently loaded with the bodies and wheelsets of old wagons - accident victims perhaps - the sides of those wagons are bowing outwards; from age as much as from the load?

 

The light-coloured wagon is the same colour all over, and appears to be lettered. Has it sat for an official photo?

 

Note the side-lamps on the brake vans and the roping of the timber load.

Edited June 11, 2021 by Compound2632

[jwealleans]

I was in a discussion about this photo with Steve White of the GNRS (among others) a few weeks ago.  We speculated about the pale wagon - an early essay in Engineers blue, photographic grey or just shunted outside in undercoat for some reason  - but didn't come to a firm conclusion.

 

On the 2 plank with the older lettering,  we wondered whether it had been taken into Engineer's stock and not repainted.   There seems to be extra lettering on the side which might be an area allocation.

Edited June 11, 2021 by jwealleans

[billbedford]

It's certainly an engineer's wagon in Oxford blue, but the reason it appears pale is a artefact of photography. The photo was shot on orthographic film, which is not sensitive to reds so they appear darker than they should be. On the other hand the film is over-sensitive to blue, so anything blue is over exposed and hence paler than they appear in real life. This is why victorian photos usually show a white sky. 

 

Consider this wagon:

 

White lettering over a white plank doesn't make a lot of sense, even for Doncaster, but the stripe would serve its purpose if it was blue and over-exposed in the photo. 

 

 

There are a number of photos in the GNRS book which show one and two plank wagons lettered similar to this one. The date on this photo is 1913, which suggests that this livery was perpetuated on low-sided wagons after large letters were introduced for bigger wagons*. Later photos show just G N fitted to a single plank. 

 

*I wonder if the Large letter liveries were something decided by the RCH for the most common types of wagons. 

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, billbedford said:

I wonder if the Large letter liveries were something decided by the RCH for the most common types of wagons. 

 

I don't think so - the dates of adoption are too spread out - from the 1880s for the Midland, which started the practice - to the 1908 for the LNWR and 1911 for the LBSCR, for instance.

[Worsdell forever]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I don't think so - the dates of adoption are too spread out - from the 1880s for the Midland, which started the practice - to the 1908 for the LNWR and 1911 for the LBSCR, for instance.

 

The NER changed to large(r) lettering in 1911, but only 12" high, if the RCH had been involved would there have possibly been some written evidence? and all companies would have been to a similar size.

[Compound2632]

50 minutes ago, Worsdell forever said:

if the RCH had been involved would there have possibly been some written evidence? and all companies would have been to a similar size.

 

The move to small lettering in 1936 was clearly a concerted move, whether through the RCH or by mutual agreement hardly makes any difference by that date.

[sharris]

7 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

 

Consider this wagon:

This reminds me of the time when I’d just moved into my house and saw a load of police cars with the word ‘Police’ struck through with a strip of black tape.

 

My first thought was that it was a very poor attempt at an unmarked police car, but it turned out they often filmed The Bill in my area and they were prop cars on the way to or from a shoot.

 

[Penlan]

In Bill Bedford's (excellent) second photo of Carr Wagon Works, I'm surprised there's not a runner wagon or similar to safeguard the overhanging planks of the wagon in the foreground.

[Compound2632]

On 12/06/2021 at 02:46, Penlan said:

In Bill Bedford's (excellent) second photo of Carr Wagon Works, I'm surprised there's not a runner wagon or similar to safeguard the overhanging planks of the wagon in the foreground.

 

The Instructions* don't, as far as I can see, mention runner wagons, although they set down maximum overhangs as a function of load weight and wagon capacity. There was, presumably, a maximum overhang that could be run without any further precaution, but I haven't found the relevant paragraph. Several wagons loaded like this could be marshalled together, each load overhanging the next wagon, with maybe a runner at the end:

 

 

Reading Vastern Road yard, c. 1905.

 

 

In the case of the wagon in the Doncaster photo, it's quite likely been shunted onto that siding to await unloading or shunting somewhere else; any runner wagon has been shunted away, no doubt needed elsewhere.

 

*From the Barrowmore Model Railway Group's website. Although these are BR instructions, as I've commented before, many of the diagrams are identical to those in the LNWR instructions reproduced in LNWR Wagons Vol. 1, so I think can be regarded as reflecting the accumulated wisdom and experience of a century or more of goods handling.

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by Compound2632
Images re-inserted

[Compound2632]

Continuing on a bearing of 270° rather than 0°, I've lettered the AA3:

 

 

Lettering below the handrail is Fox. I've gone for "not repainted since 1893/4" (i.e. the date of building of old series Lot 680), with G.W.R on the left. (It'll need some weathering down after the varnish.) I'd been pondering how to do the guard's name - a squiggle with the white Posca paint pen? Then I spotted that the Fox sheet has some italic inscriptions: Fast Goods (two pairs); Fish Wagon; and Fish Brake Van. I could have gone for a nice short name such as F Good or G Woods but thought I'd be a bit more ambitious. Casting around for surnames that could be made out of the available text, I came across the American professional wrestling champion Frank Goodish, known as Bruiser Brody. What the Wikipedia article doesn't mention is that he was named after his great uncle, who was a goods guard on the Great Western. One to be avoided at chucking out time in the Wolverhampton pubs, I imagine, but he could certainly screw the brake on hard.

 

The allocation text came from the brake van allocations on the HMRS LNWR Pressfix sheet, with TO BE RETURNED TO MANCHESTER contributing the slightly larger O and S. Individually lettered, apart from the LE that came together from CARLISLE; there's not an "ing" name on the sheet but I suppose I should be thankful for BUXTON.

 

Here's my interpretation of how the other side would be lettered - the dark side of the toad as far as early photos go:

 

 

I've omitted the tare weight; if anyone has any views as to whether it should appear at this period (when, I think, all brakes were of the same nominal weight) I'd be interested to know.

 

I've not forgotten @Miss Prism's observation that the chimney is too short. The roof is currently too white, too.

Edited September 14, 2022 by Compound2632
Images re-inserted

[Mikkel]

Wonderful stuff, the guard's name not least - which is neatly done and what a great back story.

 

It's interesting how the small "GWR" makes the wagon look older than the larger letters that we are more used to seeing on this diagram. 

 

I wasn't aware that all brake wagons had the same tare at this time. That must have required some fiddling with the older types?

[Annie]

3 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

It's interesting how the small "GWR" makes the wagon look older than the larger letters that we are more used to seeing on this diagram. 

I could make a comment about large letter show off decadence, but I won't.

 

Very nice work on your AA3 brake van Stephen.

[kitpw]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I've omitted the tare weight; if anyone has any views as to whether it should appear at this period (when, I think, all brakes were of the same nominal weight) I'd be interested to know.

I've only been able to glean this: the word "tare" doesn't appear on brake vans (the guard is not considered a load I guess) - where present, the weight is given "XX tons";  vans photographed in 1888 don't have a rated weight written on them;  a PW van photographed as built in 1893 doesn't have the weight written on it;  an AA2 van built 1907 and photo'd in 1922 does have the weight on it.  500 AA3s were built: the weight of the vans started at 13 tons and went up to 16 and 20 tons (examples and weight data from Atkins etc): during this period, the guard's name did appear - perhaps the guard carried the information with him and it wasn't considered necessary to write it on the van.  I suspect that the particular date you are working to was probably transitional in terms of the precise livery - I would leave the van as is, it looks the part!  (There is a suggestion in Atkins that Toads were built with a 12" deep hollow underframe so that they could be packed with kentledge to increase the overall weight. I'm not clear from Atkins when that practice began but it may be that the recording of weight on the outside of the van followed the introduction of the u/f detail since, otherwise, identical vans could leave the wagon shop with different weights).

 

Kit PW

 

Edited June 13, 2021 by kitpw
inadvertant "submit" before completed!

[Compound2632]

6 hours ago, kitpw said:

I've only been able to glean this: the word "tare" doesn't appear on brake vans (the guard is not considered a load I guess) - where present, the weight is given "XX tons";  vans photographed in 1888 don't have a rated weight written on them;  a PW van photographed as built in 1893 doesn't have the weight written on it;  an AA2 van built 1907 and photo'd in 1922 does have the weight on it.  500 AA3s were built: the weight of the vans started at 13 tons and went up to 16 and 20 tons (examples and weight data from Atkins etc): during this period, the guard's name did appear - perhaps the guard carried the information with him and it wasn't considered necessary to write it on the van. 

 

The exception is the post-1904 photo of AA3 No. 17539 allocated to guard J. Young of Crewe, which was my main reference for modifications to the Oxford van. Date of that photo seems uncertain; it could be post-Great War. It carries the inscription Tare 12.4. It also has the guard's name in block rather than script lettering, but one sees the same variation in the digits of wagon tare weights. 

 

6 hours ago, kitpw said:

(There is a suggestion in Atkins that Toads were built with a 12" deep hollow underframe so that they could be packed with kentledge to increase the overall weight. I'm not clear from Atkins when that practice began but it may be that the recording of weight on the outside of the van followed the introduction of the u/f detail since, otherwise, identical vans could leave the wagon shop with different weights).

 

I have been told that that's what all those cast plates were used for once they were removed from wagons. I had to look up kentledge - always learning!

[Western Star]

14 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The exception is the post-1904 photo of AA3 No. 17539 allocated to guard J. Young of Crewe, which was my main reference for modifications to the Oxford van. Date of that photo seems uncertain; it could be post-Great War.

This photo was taken at Crewe, at the time the tranship shed was being built / re-built - that is the work in the background.  Can you put a limit on a date range from the build details of that shed?

[Compound2632]

16 minutes ago, Western Star said:

This photo was taken at Crewe, at the time the tranship shed was being built / re-built - that is the work in the background.  Can you put a limit on a date range from the build details of that shed?

 

The Crewe Tranship Shed opened in February 1901. Neither a 1907 Railway Magazine description nor a 1924 LMS booklet make any mention of any rebuilding or enlargement; both give the same length and width (to within a couple of feet). [Both documents reproduced in E. Talbot, ed. The LNWR Recalled (OPC, 1987) and in C. Northedge, ed. LNWR Wagons Vol 3 (Wild Swan, 2018) Appendix 1.]

 

The National Library of Scotland website only has one post-1900 25" OS sheet showing the Tranship Shed, surveyed in 1908; the dimensions answer to those given in the two descriptions.

Edited June 13, 2021 by Compound2632

[kitpw]

32 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

The exception is the post-1904 photo of AA3 No. 17539 allocated to guard J. Young of Crewe

....and it's the exception which tests the rule (and has me puzzled, which is not exceptional!).  

 

Kit PW

[billbedford]

I've looked through the brake van photos in Tatlow and both GNR and GCR have vans which have 'Tare - - -' while the others only seem to have tonnages, some times expressed as t/cwt/q, so this looks like another 'directive' from the RCH which was interpreted differently by different railway. 

As for the reason the weights were painted on the van sides, surely this is was not useful when the vans were single manned, but necessary when they became common user. 

[Compound2632]

14 minutes ago, billbedford said:

I've looked through the brake van photos in Tatlow and both GNR and GCR have vans which have 'Tare - - -' while the others only seem to have tonnages, some times expressed as t/cwt/q, so this looks like another 'directive' from the RCH which was interpreted differently by different railway. 

As for the reason the weights were painted on the van sides, surely this is was not useful when the vans were single manned, but necessary when they became common user. 

 

LNWR, LYR, and Midland goods brakes carried the tare weight on the solebar in exactly the same style and location as goods wagons, in all thee cases t.c.q. It seems to have been an LMS innovation to write "20 Tons" on the curb rail. The "Crewe" brake van carries the tare weight in the location and in the style one would expect for a GW goods wagon of the period. 

[Compound2632]

I seem to have been doing more research than modelling recently. I spent a happy day yesterday at the Midland Railway Study Centre, transcribing the "Return of Working Stock" section from the Midland's Board of Directors' reports to the half-yearly Shareholdres' Meetings. This provides more detail than I previously had on the changes in numbers of wagons of different types, which will help with understanding when wagons were actually built, lifetime in service, and withdrawal dates - the lot list information in Midland Wagons only tells one about when the instruction was given to the works to start construction of a batch of wagons. For new designs, it can be seen from the Carriage & Wagon Drawing Register that drawings were often prepared after the lot had been ordered - there is some evidence that approval was based on a diagram presented to the Carriage & Wagon Committee of the Board. 

 

I am really doing this for the wagons but I have been transcribing the full return, which also includes locomotives, tenders, carriage stock by type, and horses and road vehicles. As I worked through from 1894 to 1912, I had to add columns for steam motor carriages, electric motor carriages (for the Lancaster-Morecambe-Heysham electrification), and finally tramway vehicles (for the Burton & Ashby tramway), whilst keeping my column for second class carriages hidden! Apropos of Heysham, I had previously noted an increase of 200 in the number of cattle wagons between 1894 and 1905; this is now pinned down to the first half of 1904, which is when the port of Heysham opened. So the increase was evidently in anticipation of the Irish cattle traffic.

 

I have to make a return visit to transcribe the remaining years - the Study Centre has a complete run from 1844 to 1862 and from 1913 to 1922 (when meetings were yearly, possibly in response to changed legislation under the Railways Act 1911) but unfortunately only a dozen or so from 1863 to 1893, two of which I've already seen. I believe the National Archives have a full set. The ones I was working through yesterday are bound in a pair of massive dusty volumes!

 

I wasn't the only wagonista there yesterday - there was a chap researching details for his modelling of the open wagons to D302. He'd drawing up CAD for 3D printing in the larger scales - Gauge 1 up to 5" gauge and beyond. Yes, he has a large printer, but no, he doesn't print whole wagons in one go (except for Gauge 1). Axleguards, drawhooks, and the like he does in laser-cut steel.

 

We were both made very welcome and were well looked after by the Study Centre Coordinator, Dave Harris.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2021 by Compound2632

[Northroader]

Did you have any time to look at the Midland Rly. exhibits section in the Silk Mill Museum? I’m curious to know how that’s got on in the rebuilding, whether it’s been improved or “improved”.

[PenrithBeacon]

57 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

I seem to have been doing more research than modelling recently. I spent a happy day yesterday at the Midland Railway Study Centre, transcribing the "Return of Working Stock" section from the Midland's Board of Directors' reports to the half-yearly Shareholdres' Meetings. 

Are you not allowed to photograph them? Saves a lot of time. 

[Compound2632]

6 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Are you not allowed to photograph them? Saves a lot of time. 

 

I could have photographed them and then transcribed from the photographs into my Excel spreadsheet but it is, I think, quicker to transcribe them directly from the original document into the spreadsheet.

 

In the fullness of time the ideal would be to have all this material scanned. I'm not sure how practicable this would be for the bound volumes. There are getting on for fifty loose copies in the Study Centre collection. The Report to the 93rd Half-Yearly meeting, held on 8 August 1890, has been scanned and uploaded to the Study Centre website, Item 17916. The information I am transcribing is at Item 6 at the top of page 6. Each report gives the position at the reporting date, 30 June 1890 in this instance, and at the previous half-year, 31 December 1889 here. The latter is useful if one is transcribing from the bound volume as a check that one hasn't turned over two reports at once and invaluable if one has an isolated report. I'm not transcribing the Increase/Decrease lines, as Excel can work those out for me, though it was useful to keep an eye on them, as a check. Also, I'd set up Excel to do the adding up for the two "Total" columns, so I checked Excel's total against the total in the document; if the two didn't agree, I'd made a mistake in transcribing one of the other columns - which happened occasionally...