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

[MR Chuffer]

9 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I don't think you need worry about having either loco coal or ballast wagons in an ordinary mineral or goods train

Rationally stated, I'll go with that, thx.

 

And for the record, I think there were a number of MR small sheds where there would be minimal loco coal requirements - Wirksworth, Leicester West Bridge, Ripley Old Station, Barnoldswick, Tewkesbury, Southwell and Ingleton - an end on junction with the LNWR but functionally a terminus for much of its life - many featuring in LMS Sheds Volume 2.

Edited September 7, 2021 by MR Chuffer

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, MR Chuffer said:

And for the record, I think there were a number of MR small sheds where there would be minimal loco coal requirements - Wirksworth, Leicester West Bridge, Ripley Old Station, Barnoldswick, Tewkesbury, Southwell and Ingleton - an end on junction with the LNWR but functionally a terminus for much of its life - many featuring in LMS Sheds Volume 2.

 

Indeed; I started counting them. Also Coventry (!), Dursley, Malvern, Redditch, and some others I've forgotten. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Compound2632

[Compound2632]

Leafing through LMS Engine Sheds Vol. 2, I see that Ingleton - about as small as they came - didn't have any sort of coaling stage, coaling apparently being done from a wagon parked on an adjacent siding. On 11 Oct 1936, this was a LNWR D84 5-plank open, still lettered LNWR. There was a similar arrangement at Tewkesbury, but on a larger scale, with a raised siding bringing the wagon doors to tender - at least for the Midland flared tenders. 

 

At these locations, the wagons would be held for a while, maybe a week - how long would it have taken the Ingleton branch engine to consume 10 tons of coal? Would that affect the likelihood of a loco coal, revenue, or colliery PO wagon being used?

 

Although this discussion is about Midland practice, I expect it's equally applicable to all the northern lines (including the Great Western), very few of which could not source their loco coal from collieries on their own system. (Great Eastern excepted - did it receive loco coal by sea?) The southern companies made use of coal factors - Stephenson Clarke (any others?). I think this has to do with not having local sources of coal and not wanting to run their own loco coal wagons over other companies' lines. I suspect this has to do with the whole business of these not being revenue wagons. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Compound2632

[Regularity]

The GER had access to coalfields via the GE/GN joint line, and also via the LDEC, with whom it had a very close working relationship and I imagine the acquisition of the latter by the GCR didn’t go down well!

(There’s an interesting might have been: Chesterfield being served by the GER!)

[Compound2632]

16 minutes ago, Regularity said:

The GER had access to coalfields via the GE/GN joint line,

 

Only after 1882; what did it do before then?

 

A considerable amount of coal for non-railway consumption in East Anglia went via Peterborough, from the 1840s.

[Rail-Online]

In Bill Hudsons' 'Through Limestone Hill's there is a lovely photo of a complete train of sleeper wagons heading for Manchester. Interestingly it is in LMS days and every one is the hinged side variety as opposed to the solid type, making me wonder if the latter were converted to drop side, perhaps in early LMS days?

 

Tony

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Only after 1882; what did it do before then?

 

A considerable amount of coal for non-railway consumption in East Anglia went via Peterborough, from the 1840s.

No idea, except for via Posh.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Rail-Online said:

In Bill Hudsons' 'Through Limestone Hill's there is a lovely photo of a complete train of sleeper wagons heading for Manchester. Interestingly it is in LMS days and every one is the hinged side variety as opposed to the solid type, making me wonder if the latter were converted to drop side, perhaps in early LMS days?

 

I've failed to find that in my copy - I have the 3rd (1998) impression of the OPC 1989 edition. I believe there's a later edition - does this have different illustrations? Can the photo be dated any more precisely? - e.g. if the engine has LMS on the tender side, it's no earlier than 1927.

 

The sleeper wagons were built to four lots, the first three to drawing 535, 50 as lot 70 of 1881, 20 as lot 137 of 1885, and 175 as lot 273 of 1891, and the last to drawing 1456, 50 as lot 495 of 1900. (The dates are those of the raising of the lots; construction may have been over the following year; drawing 535 is dated 13 Dec 1881, with an additional detail drawing 546 not made until March 1882; drawing 1456 is dated 19 October 1900.) The main difference recorded between the two drawings is that the later drawing specified a "standard" underframe, presumably as used on cattle wagons at the time. It's possible that drawing 535 wagons did not have continuous drawbars, as would be standard by 1900. (As far as I can see, drawing 550 for the D299 open was the first to feature continuous drawgear; even the first batch of 16'6" covered goods wagons in 1893 didn't have it.) The two surviving official photos show a fixed-side wagon of lot 70 and a dropside wagon of lot 237 - both to drawing 535. The Midand Railway Study Centre has a copy of drawing 1456 but unfortunately not one of 535. I'd bet that if one had the latter, it would have the dropside drawn in, possibly in red ink, with a note "For Lot 273". That would be entirely typical of the Litchurch Lane C&W DO. 

 

The table of wagon stock at 31 Dec 1894 recorded in the C&W Committee minutes of 14 Mar 1895 [Midland Wagons Fig. 22] shows 246 8 ton sleeper wagons and 20 9 ton ones, so at that date there were some pre-1877 sleeper wagons still in service, which had probably all gone by the time the diagram book was compiled, which I think was early 1900s - by which time they would have been over 30 years old.

 

The total number of rail and sleeper wagons was 627 in 1913-15 and 614 in 1920-22 [Reports and Statistics presented by the Directors to the Annual Shareholders' Meetings, copies held in the Midland Railway Study Centre]. There were 330 long rail wagons to D334 built 1892-99 and 71 short rail wagons to D335, 65 built in 1889 and 6 in 1909 (251 rail wagons at 31 Dec 1894, as only the first lot of 50 had been built by then there were 136 pre-1877 rail wagons in service). Add to these the 20 bogie rail wagons of D340 built in 1907 gives 421 rail wagons built since 1889 and so we have a total of 716 rail and sleeper wagons built since 1881, implying that 102 of these had been withdrawn by 1920. The oldest wagons in this group were the 70 fixed-side sleeper wagons of lots 70 and 137, so these are the most likely to be included in those withdrawals, although the 71 short rail wagons might also have been withdrawn as no longer suitable - too short to carry 60 ft rails in pairs.

 

So, I'm fairly sure that there were never more than 70 of the fixed side version, all withdrawn by the 1920s (when they would be over 30 years old) but 225 of the dropside version, at least 50 of which were under 30 years old in the 20s. That means that not only were the dropside version more numerous (from c. 1891) but they are also the only type one could expect to see in a 1920s/30s photo.

 

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Compound2632

[MR Chuffer]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

there were never more than 70 of the fixed side version,

And that's what I have scratch built on a spare cattle wagon u/f. Wasn't prepared to cope with the extra rivet detail on the drop sided versions. I haven't got your patience for individual rivet detailing!

[kitpw]

On the subject of coal wagons (and thus not too far off topic) I came across the photo in this reference in Cornwall archives (Kresen Kernow): https://kresenkernow.org/SOAP/detail/06ae1129-9976-445f-a712-74cce763b8c4/?tH=["CRO|UK|889"] which was taken in the 1890s at
Heath Colliery Bristol - includes (rather indistinctly) wagons marked "MR".

 

And a bit off topic, I'd be interested in your take, Stephen, on the ancestry of the wagons in this photo, also from Kresen Kernow - "Loading China Clay":  a nice collection of clay barrels loaded and waiting to go, also in the 1890s: https://kresenkernow.org/SOAP/detail/ffe7051b-28cf-43cf-b4a6-3a135edc03fc/?tH=["china"%2C"clay"]

 

Kit PW

Edited September 7, 2021 by kitpw
web reference added

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, kitpw said:

On the subject of coal wagons (and thus not too far off topic) I came across the photo in this reference in Cornwall archives (Kresen Kernow): https://kresenkernow.org/SOAP/detail/06ae1129-9976-445f-a712-74cce763b8c4/?tH=["CRO|UK|889"] which was taken in the 1890s at
Heath Colliery Bristol - includes (rather indistinctly) wagons marked "MR".

 

I think there's a rogue comma in the caption - this should be Coalpit Heath colliery. I believe this was one of the collieries served by the Bristol and Gloucestershire Railway, an early tramroad most of the route of which was taken over by the Bristol & Gloucester Railway, which was taken over by the Midland. So the presence of Midland wagons is hardly surprising - they do look to be D299.

 

1 hour ago, kitpw said:

And a bit off topic, I'd be interested in your take, Stephen, on the ancestry of the wagons in this photo, also from Kresen Kernow - "Loading China Clay":  a nice collection of clay barrels loaded and waiting to go, also in the 1890s: https://kresenkernow.org/SOAP/detail/ffe7051b-28cf-43cf-b4a6-3a135edc03fc/?tH=["china"%2C"clay"]

 

These wagons show clear signs of being "reconstructed" dumb buffer wagons. They look to have self-contained buffers - wider than usual buffer housing, containing a coil spring - and the one nearest the camera clearly has the diamond-shaped "reconstructed" plate on its solebar.

 

When the RCH wagon specification was introduced in 1887, it contained a clause that any repairs to a wagon had to be, as far as possible, in accordance with the specification. If the railway company's inspector was not satisfied that this could be done without rebuilding, he could require that to be done in accordance with the specification.

 

This, of course, was an expensive business and strongly resisted by the wagon builders and private owners. The Gloucester Wagon Co. submitted a wagon not to the RCH specification for registration by the Great Western in 1893: HMRS ACG236. (According to Tavender this was not a new wagon but a refurbished one, having previously been on hire to J. Butler of Pangborne and probably originally built in 1872. The Great Western made a drawing of it that is reproduced in Montague.) The Great Western turned it down and the Gloucester Co. took them to the Railway and Canal Commissioners Court, arguing that the railway companies were imposing regulations that their own vehicles did not meet. In evidence, the Gloucester wagon Co. submitted photographs of Midland mineral wagon No. 63067 that they had abducted; these are reproduced in Midland Wagons, Plates 18-20, from which Mike @airnimal made a superb S7 model:

This was one of the 60,000+ private owner wagons that the Midland had bought up over the preceding decade; they remained in traffic until replaced by new D299 or D351 wagons. 

 

The case was settled out of court, the railway companies ceding some ground: a wagon that at repair needed two new solebars or one new solebar and three cross-timbers had to be reconstructed, though ironwork and wheels could be re-used. When passed as fit by the railway company's inspector, rather than the usual circle-and-crossbar registration plates, diamond-shaped "reconstructed" plates would be fitted. More minor repairs evidently did not require inspection.

 

References:

A.J. Watts, Private Owner Wagons from the Ince Waggon & Ironworks Co. (HMRS, 1998) - from which I have freely paraphrased

L. Tavender, Coal Trade Wagons (L. Tavender, 1991)

K. Montague, Private Owner Wagons from the Gloucester Railway Carriage and Wagon Company Ltd (OPC, 1981)

[kitpw]

8 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

diamond-shaped "reconstructed" plates would be fitted

Many thanks for the comprehensive answer:  I didn't know about the diamond shaped plates or the protocol for demanding a rebuild (or not).... we can learn something new every day!

 

Kit PW

[Dave Hunt]

22 minutes ago, kitpw said:

.. we can learn something new every day!

 

We certainly can. As a dyed in the wool locomotive enthusiast I used to regard wagons as relatively featureless things that trailed along behind or broke up the secenery in sidings but since meeting Stephen and then reading this forum my eyes have been opened to the myriad features of interest that such vehicles involve. It truly is never too late for old dogs to learn something new. Thanks Stephen.

 

Dave

[Compound2632]

28 minutes ago, Dave Hunt said:

reading this forum my eyes have been opened to the myriad features of interest that such vehicles involve.

 

I should say that most of the knowledge I have about wagons in general and Midland wagons in particular has been accumulated since starting this thread, thanks to the spur provided by people more knowledgeable than myself. 

 

I'm off now for an impromptu visit to the Midland Railway Study Centre. I'm still having to make a weekly day trip to Brum to check on my late father's house for insurance purposes but my house clearance man has let me down. Fortunately Dave Harris is able to accommodate me so the mileage won't go to waste!

[Annie]

2 hours ago, kitpw said:

Many thanks for the comprehensive answer:  I didn't know about the diamond shaped plates or the protocol for demanding a rebuild (or not).... we can learn something new every day!

 

Kit PW

[JustinDean]

I'm looking for some assistance regarding the box van in the photo below. I'm fairly sure this is an LSWR D1410 10ton van seen here in the 1940's on the Cromford & High Peak Railway. Can anyone confirm this is the van type? Also does anyone have any idea of the livery that would have applied to this van?

 

Thanks

Jay

[Tim Dubya]

If it's the same as the Cambrian kit, then yes it be.   Although I can't tell with any certainty tbh.  Oh and just noticed the SR van next to it too.

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Edited September 8, 2021 by Tim Dubya
the price of paint

[kitpw]

Whilst on the subject of wagon ident (as Justin's posting above), can anyone identify the two GW wagons in this photo taken at Newbury:  https://www.aditnow.co.uk/SuperSize/Newbury-Colliery-Coke-Ovens_100847/ ?  I'm not absolutely certain that they are GW wagons - the G is clear and typically GWR but "W" could be a "V" (as in Vobster?) The photo is undated but (if they are GW) must be post 1905 when 5" lettering ceased and before 1927 when the coke ovens closed. Atkins etc isn't much help on this:  the closer wagon has a raised, curved end whilst the further wagon may have a straight top plank and the lettering position is different in each example. (Apologies for not posting the picture here, the caption says free of copyright but copyright is claimed in watermark on the image - better safe than sorry!).  

 

Kit PW

Edited September 8, 2021 by kitpw

[Western Star]

Kit @kitpw ,

 

I believe that Richard Kelham @wagonman has done some research on this image in regard to his book on Somerset PO wagons (published Lightmoor Press and a good read / reference).

 

regards, Graham

Edited September 8, 2021 by Western Star

[Compound2632]

12 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I'm off now for an impromptu visit to the Midland Railway Study Centre. 

 

"Foreign wagons must not be loaded to Burton."

[Compound2632]

7 hours ago, JustinDean said:

I'm looking for some assistance regarding the box van in the photo below. I'm fairly sure this is an LSWR D1410 10ton van seen here in the 1940's on the Cromford & High Peak Railway. Can anyone confirm this is the van type? Also does anyone have any idea of the livery that would have applied to this van?

 

Looking in Southern Wagons Vol. 1 (I'm a broad-minded chap) which is the volume dealing with L&SWR and S&DJR wagons, I'd say yes but it looks to be stove in between the end pillars - the metal plate is supposed to be flat on to the end pillars. The width and hence number of planks varied - few broad ones early on, many narrow ones later. The Cambrian kit represents the latter, so is inappropriate for my c. 1902 date, as I discovered after I'd built one:

 

 

I gather there was a Finney (?) brass kit for the wide-planked version. They were built with wooden underframes from 1885 to 1912 and with steel underframes from 1899 to 1912. The one in your photo looks to me to have wooden underframes, unlike the Cambrian kit, but narrow planking. As to livery - would it be more likely to be in very worn brown with faded large S R or post-1936 small SR in the bottom left corner? The SECR-style van certainly has the later livery - it looks to me to have plywood sides? - so was probably turned out thus when built. 

[JustinDean]

11 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Looking in Southern Wagons Vol. 1 (I'm a broad-minded chap) which is the volume dealing with L&SWR and S&DJR wagons, I'd say yes but it looks to be stove in between the end pillars - the metal plate is supposed to be flat on to the end pillars. The width and hence number of planks varied - few broad ones early on, many narrow ones later. The Cambrian kit represents the latter, so is inappropriate for my c. 1902 date, as I discovered after I'd built one:

 

 

I gather there was a Finney (?) brass kit for the wide-planked version. They were built with wooden underframes from 1885 to 1912 and with steel underframes from 1899 to 1912. The one in your photo looks to me to have wooden underframes, unlike the Cambrian kit, but narrow planking. As to livery - would it be more likely to be in very worn brown with faded large S R or post-1936 small SR in the bottom left corner? The SECR-style van certainly has the later livery - it looks to me to have plywood sides? - so was probably turned out thus when built. 

Thank you for the information - much appreciated and very useful! 
 

Cheers

Jay

 

[Compound2632]

 

5 minutes ago, JustinDean said:

Thank you for the information - much appreciated and very useful! 

 

We aim to please. I meant to add, I'm baffled by the thing on the left-hand side of the end, that looks like a slidey hatch. Nothing like it in Southern Wagons, as far as I can see. Note that L&SWR van doors slide to the left to open whereas Midland doors slide to the right.

[JustinDean]

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

 

We aim to please. I meant to add, I'm baffled by the thing on the left-hand side of the end, that looks like a slidey hatch. Nothing like it in Southern Wagons, as far as I can see. Note that L&SWR van doors slide to the left to open whereas Midland doors slide to the right.

I’d just assumed they’d patched the end of the van!

Great thread by the way - I’ve been lurking here for some time and learning a lot. Your earlier mention of the Midland Study Center has also reminded me I need to visit; I’m a Derby person and still never been in there.

 

Jay

 

[Craigw]

14 hours ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

We certainly can. As a dyed in the wool locomotive enthusiast I used to regard wagons as relatively featureless things that trailed along behind or broke up the secenery in sidings but since meeting Stephen and then reading this forum my eyes have been opened to the myriad features of interest that such vehicles involve. It truly is never too late for old dogs to learn something new. Thanks Stephen.

 

Dave

 

I have always been a wagon enthusiast. From my point of view, locomotives are things you have so that you do not leave sweat marks on wagons from handling them.

 

Keep up the good work everyone, I am currently off building Panzers but still enjoying this thread.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W