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

[Compound2632]

On 08/10/2021 at 06:56, Mikkel said:

If the top of the R could be raised a little (it currently emphasises the join) it would be even better, but that may be easier said than done. 

 

If one looks at photos of the real thing:

 

 

[DY 2492, &c.]

 

... one sees that the M and R are exactly three planks high. Unfortunately the transfers with the Slaters kits are very slightly taller than the kit's three planks. (This goes for the new waterslide transfers, the old Pressfix or Methfix transfers, and the transfers on the HMRS sheets, also Pressfix or Methfix, since they have a common origin in Peter Chatham's artwork.) So I try to loose a bit of the height, usually off the bottom, but with 74888 I didn't get the positioning quite right. With this batch, I not only used the side of the knife blade to squeeze the transfers well into the planking grooves but also made vigorous runs along the groove with my fingernail, to try for the impression of well-worn lettering - most successfully, I think, with No. 89714, the straight D299.

Edited May 4, 2022 by Compound2632
image re-inserted

[Crimson Rambler]

@Rail-Online reminded me of the Settle Speakman article and prompted me to look for it - copy appears below:-

 

 

 

 

Crimson Rambler

 

 

[Compound2632]

17 hours ago, Crimson Rambler said:

@Rail-Online reminded me of the Settle Speakman article and prompted me to look for it - copy appears below:-

 

An unusually detailed PO wagon article for the period. On the whole it confirms my feeling that a P. Speakman & Sons wagon would be out of place for the West Midlands c. 1902. I suspect MCC&I Co. wagons might be more likely, though perhaps in my LNWR mineral train rather than my Midland one. They're seen on the Midland main line in the Wellingborough 1898 photos but would be returning to Apedale Colliery via Leicester and Burton and thence the Knotty, I suppose.

[Tom Burnham]

Although Settle Speakman didn't acquire ownership of Queenborough Wharf until 1931, they had been involved with the wharf from the beginning, in 1908, when Philip Speakman & Sons built the coal washer there.  Settle Speakman also leased the Queenborough Pier from the Southern Railway before WW2.  Giving evidence to the Railway Rates Tribunal in June 1926 in support of the Association of Owners of Railway Rolling Stock, Mr Harry A. Harrison, the deputy manager of Settle Speakman, said that the company used 237 of their fleet of wagons at Queenborough.  When additional wagons were requested from the Southern Railway, it was often found that they were supplied late or in numbers fewer than needed, thus delaying the unloading of ships.  Sometimes the wagons were of an unsuitable type or had not been cleaned properly after their last cargo, for example of lime or bricks.  As late as 1959, Settle Speakman had 5 locomotives and 220 internal user wagons at Queenborough.

[MikeOxon]

An interesting comment at the end of Bernard Holland's article:

 

"...with the solitary exception of Hem Heath whose first shaft was not sunk until the late 1920s and whose reserves are reputedly good for another 600 years."

 

How perceptions have changed!

[Compound2632]

40 minutes ago, MikeOxon said:

An interesting comment at the end of Bernard Holland's article:

 

"...with the solitary exception of Hem Heath whose first shaft was not sunk until the late 1920s and whose reserves are reputedly good for another 600 years."

 

How perceptions have changed!

 

I recall a talk we had in the sixth form - c. 1981/2 - on energy security (as we would now call it). At then rates of energy consumption, the known oil reserves were good for 20 years and coal for 200 years. 

[Andy Hayter]

The numbers are probably still true but getting at the coal in now flooded levels might be a tad difficult.

 

South Africa built a lot of its economy around coal during the apartheid years with no oil and limited availability due to sanctions.

[billbedford]

On 13/10/2021 at 00:09, Andy Hayter said:

The numbers are probably still true but getting at the coal in now flooded levels might be a tad difficult.

 

 

It's probably more to do with what coal is left is in deep thin seams which is much more expensive to extract than in open cast mines. 

[Compound2632]

38 minutes ago, billbedford said:

It's probably more to do with what coal is left is in deep thin seams which is much more expensive to extract than in open cast mines. 

 

The reason all that coal is being left in the ground is two-fold. Firstly, extraction has traditionally relied on strongly-unionised labour, capable of bringing down a Tory government - they have long memories; longer even than the decade between 1973 and 1984; secondly, and rather more to the point nowadays, there's the problem of how to use it without contributing to global warming.

 

Put succinctly by @34theletterbetweenB&D two years ago:

 

[Tim Dubya]

3 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

It's probably more to do with what coal is left is in deep thin seams which is much more expensive to extract than in open cast mines. 

 

Same as the Somerset coal field, where there are millions (?) of tons left, not only are the seams thin and deep but they are fractured, rising and falling 20 odd feet or so, meaning mechanised extraction is impractical.

Cheers

Dubya
Grandchild of a Guss and Crook wearing Somerset miner.
 

Edited October 14, 2021 by Tim Dubya
link

[Compound2632]

Speaking of coal, I've been having some fun with the load-making jig I made earlier this year:

 

 

... loading up some of my Midland mineral wagons:

 

 

The coke wagon loads use Woodland Scenics coarse grey ballast, painted with a dark grey wash of acrylic - the paint mixed in with dilute PVA. I add a drop of washing up liquid to break the surface tension so that this goop flows through the whole load. This gives, I hope, the dull greyish look that I'm told coke has. (Or should that be, had?)

 

The coal loads use Peco Real Coal - medium grade in the D343 and D299 wagons, coarse grade in the dumb-buffer and D305 wagons in the foreground. This gives the shiny surfaces and highlights that would, I think, be hard to achieve using other materials. Glued down by flooding with dilute PVA, as for the ballast.

 

Except for the whitemetal dumb buffer wagon, which is hefty enough, the loads conceal lead weights bringing each wagon up to around the canonical 50 g mark. Being well aware of the tales of reaction of lead with PVA, the lead isn't glued (with UHU) to the underside of the card base until the PVA goop has thoroughly dried out. 

 

The above loads took over a week to make - I've only got one jig and each load needs more than a full day to dry out, given the need to top up both material and goop after the first pass.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Compound2632
Images re-inserted

[Siberian Snooper]

I have recently acquired a couple of MAJ wagon kits for the L & Y. I have a problem with the brake gear for the double end door wagon, in the moulding is longer than the distance between the wheels.

 

 

Does anyone know of a suitable source of alternative brake gear? The only other alternative will be to try and butcher the existing moulding to fit, not too difficult on the long reach rod end, but it will be a right pain at the short end.

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by Siberian Snooper
removal of duplicate pictures.

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, Siberian Snooper said:

a couple of MAJ wagon kits

Thus fulfilling both the kit building and scratch building parts of the thread…

Edited October 17, 2021 by Regularity

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Siberian Snooper said:

The only other alternative will be to try and butcher the existing moulding to fit, not too difficult on the long reach rod end, but it will be a right pain at the short end.

 

That's the approach I'd take though I wouldn't call it butchery; rather, careful modification.

 

I'm trying to get my head round that brake linkage. There seems to be another linkage needed between the two V-hangers, to reverse the direction of rotation from the lever on that side. I've had a look in Coates' Lancashire & Yorkshire Wagons but there's nothing much clearer than the photo you have there in the instructions. Good luck!

[Siberian Snooper]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

That's the approach I'd take though I wouldn't call it butchery; rather, careful modification.

 

I'm trying to get my head round that brake linkage. There seems to be another linkage needed between the two V-hangers, to reverse the direction of rotation from the lever on that side. I've had a look in Coates' Lancashire & Yorkshire Wagons but there's nothing much clearer than the photo you have there in the instructions. Good luck!

 

 

Thanks, there is a linkage, part 9, just visible in the first photo, that goes between the two V-hangers.

 

 

[MR Chuffer]

From the several MAJ kits I have acquired, there has always been brake rigging for the 12' and the 10.6' wheelbases irrespective of the actual diagram, have you been short changed?

[Siberian Snooper]

I will photograph what I have and post it here, hopefully tomorrow.

 

 

[jwealleans]

I believe the brakes on that wagon should work in much the same way as the LNER fitted brake, with a single V hanger on the other side and a linkage between the two V hangers on the near side to reverse the rotation of the handle so as to apply/remove the brakes as you'd expect.   I came across a wagon I'd bought with the same gear recently and thinking it was a mistake I went to look up the correct arrangement, only to find that that was it.

 

There's a thread on this subject here.   Ignoring the vac cylinder it should look like this:

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by jwealleans

[Compound2632]

17 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

I believe the brakes on that wagon should work in much the same way as the LNER fitted brake, with a single V hanger on the other side and a linkage between the two V hangers on the near side to reverse the rotation of the handle so as to apply/remove the brakes as you'd expect.   I came across a wagon I'd bought with the same gear recently and thinking it was a mistake I went to look up the correct arrangement, only to find that that was it.

 

There's a thread on this subject here.   Ignoring the vac cylinder it should look like this:

 

 

 

Except that that vehicle has clasp brakes; but I understand what you mean; the double V-hanger arrangement allows the brake levers to be at the right-hand end on both sides. I think the MAJ kit could benefit from a bit of brass or plastic rod representing the cross shaft.

 

I wonder if there was some perceived advantage of this linkage over the Morton cam, which seems such a simple solution. 

[billbedford]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I wonder if there was some perceived advantage of this linkage over the Morton cam, which seems such a simple solution. 

 

Yep,  there were no patent fees to pay. 

[Compound2632]

5 hours ago, billbedford said:

Yep,  there were no patent fees to pay. 

 

Interesting. The Midland was using the Morton brake from before the Great War and the LMS used it widely - was Morton a Midland employee?

[MR Chuffer]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

was Morton a Midland employee

According to Noel Coates' L&Y Wagons, the original Morton patent dated from 1885, and would appear to anticipate the 1886 Board of Trade requirement that wagons should be fitted with brakes capable of being applied from either side. This is well before the requirement for brake levers to be right handed, so the issue of reversing cams (or linkages) would not have entered into any thinking. Morton was a L&Y employee, yet the L&Y wanted to get round the patent fees, and perhaps because the patent itself was too specific.

[phil_sutters]

On 14/10/2021 at 09:56, Tim Dubya said:

 

Same as the Somerset coal field, where there are millions (?) of tons left, not only are the seams thin and deep but they are fractured, rising and falling 20 odd feet or so, meaning mechanised extraction is impractical.

Cheers

Dubya
Grandchild of a Guss and Crook wearing Somerset miner.
 

My geography teacher, back in the late '50s, an unpleasant Scot, from the central lowlands, teaching in Kent, refused to accept that there was a Somerset coalfield. During the next holiday, back home at Coleford, about four miles from Radstock, I got a load of information leaflets from the local NCB office and proved him wrong. It was about the only time I managed to enjoy one of his classes.

Edited October 18, 2021 by phil_sutters

[billbedford]

2 hours ago, MR Chuffer said:

According to Noel Coates' L&Y Wagons, the original Morton patent dated from 1885, and would appear to anticipate the 1886 Board of Trade requirement that wagons should be fitted with brakes capable of being applied from either side. 

 

And Gresley was C&W superintendent on the L&Y before he went to Doncaster. He was always on the lookout for neat ideas he could patent. 

[Compound2632]

4 hours ago, MR Chuffer said:

According to Noel Coates' L&Y Wagons, the original Morton patent dated from 1885, and would appear to anticipate the 1886 Board of Trade requirement that wagons should be fitted with brakes capable of being applied from either side. This is well before the requirement for brake levers to be right handed, so the issue of reversing cams (or linkages) would not have entered into any thinking. Morton was a L&Y employee, yet the L&Y wanted to get round the patent fees, and perhaps because the patent itself was too specific.

 

From what I can glean, Morton held several patents, the most recent of which was from 1902 (possibly), so it's unclear which one covered the arrangement used by the LMS etc. with a cam on one side. Also, I gather the 1885 patent was for a both-levers-at-the-same-end arrangement, which the L&Y did use extensively - with the (presumably Morton) clutch for each lever, so either could apply the brake without affecting the other. This was the type of Morton brake first used by the Midland, on fitted wagons with clasp brakes, from c. 1904, though that was followed soon after by application to some open wagons - see Midland Wagons plates 71 and 72; these D305 dropside wagons are presumably from Lots 631 / 636 / 682 of 1905-7 since I think Lot 718 of 1909 marks the introduction of long brake levers; there is a version of Drg. 1143 in the Study Centre collection that shows a full Morton cam arrangement, with the cam on the non-brake side, actuated by a curved lever, marked as Drg. 2881, while the "normal" lever on the brake side (which must embody a Morton clutch) is Drg. 2062. According to the C&W Drawing Register, Drg. 2062 is dated July 1904 (though with a query), and titled "Details of Morton Hand Brake for Wagons"; Drg. 2881 is September 1907, title "Arrangement & Details of R.H. Morton Brake" - so the date would point to Lot 682. There are several drawings relating to the Morton brake from 1907 but there are also a couple more from 1904 (although again with query as to date: the drawing numbers are out of sequence but only by one month - in sequence they would be June rather than July 1904). As far as I can see, 3-plank dropside wagons were the only non-fitted opens to be favoured with Morton brakes, all other types having bottom doors.

 

I suppose if one was to look at patent records one would get a better understanding of the development sequence from Morton's point of view.

Edited October 18, 2021 by Compound2632
sp.