Rob Pulham Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 On the first page of the freight section of LNER Reflections by Nigel Harris there is the photograph shown below for illustrative purposes only and credited to the BBC Houlton Picture Library Having recently embarked upon building some GNR OCT's I would like to know which company's OCT the one in the picture is and where if anywhere I could get a drawing or key dimensions for it with a view to modelling one. I would also appreciate similar information or directions for the small LNER container and if it's not being too greedy the large ones too. I think that they would be fairly simple to reproduce with the Silhouette Cutter (I hope). Many thanks in advance for any help or pointers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevex59 Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Looking at the photo the wagon number indicates a Midland Railway truck 756 or 796. I will check my books to see what can be found Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 31A Posted November 24, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 24, 2016 Pretty sure the initials that look like 'MR' are actually 'MK' which was the LNER telegraphic code for an Open Carriage Truck. Normally these codes were applied above the running number on the body side, but on this design nowhere else to put them! It does carry the LNER initials 'NE' on the side in very small letters just inboard of the container fastenings. Having said that, I'm afraid I can't help as to its origins; my reference books haven't helped so far, but will look further. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Pulham Posted November 25, 2016 Author Share Posted November 25, 2016 Based on the higher running number Nick Campling suggests that it might be either GCR or GER and having found this outline drawing on the GER Society Site I think that he might be right. Taken from: https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/rolling-stock/misc-stock/carriage-trucks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium corneliuslundie Posted November 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 25, 2016 Any idea of the relevance of the two dimensions which both seem to indicate wheelbase? I know of a drawing where the wheelbase dimension text was altered by hand but the drawing not changed, but I assume that is not what has happened here. Jonathan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Pulham Posted November 25, 2016 Author Share Posted November 25, 2016 Any idea of the relevance of the two dimensions which both seem to indicate wheelbase? I know of a drawing where the wheelbase dimension text was altered by hand but the drawing not changed, but I assume that is not what has happened here. Jonathan Hi Jonathan, I must confess I hadn't spotted that one. A bit more research is in order I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Pulham Posted November 25, 2016 Author Share Posted November 25, 2016 One brainwave later I think I have the answer. The drawing represents several diagrams which although visually similar were extended in length over time so I suspect that the wheel base was lengthened too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asmay2002 Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 Any idea of the relevance of the two dimensions which both seem to indicate wheelbase? Diagram includes vehicles with two different wheelbases. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium corneliuslundie Posted November 27, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 27, 2016 I agree. And the photo is of the longer version. In addition it has six side verticals instead of the five on the drawing, and the axleboxes are not in line with the verticals. Jonathan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Holliday Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 I agree. And the photo is of the longer version. In addition it has six side verticals instead of the five on the drawing, and the axleboxes are not in line with the verticals. Jonathan I think I must be going mad! As far as my eyes tell me the drawing shows six verticals, just like the photo, or is there another drawing?Reading the article the drawing came from, I am not sure that the design drawn actually came in greatly different lengths. Early OCTs seem to have been 16 feet long, with later ones 21 ft., as drawn. I don't think a single drawing would have been used to cover such widely different lengths, particularly as the wheelbases indicated would not really fit the shorter length. However I do know that the LBSCR diagram for OCTs did cover a number of different lengths, but not such a large range as this would have to be. Possible reasons for different wheelbases might be, as on the LBSC, the same basic design was used for both goods and passenger related services, the shorter wheelbase being for the slower goods running, with the ability to use wagon turntables in yards, or, as the article notes, they were built in three batches, and later ones, whilst retaining the same body length, were given longer wheelbases either to take a heavier load or for greater stability at higher speeds. Edited to add a post script Looking at the drawing again, I am pretty sure that it represents the shorter wheelbase version. Assuming each side panel is equal in length, then each is around 4' 2" long, so three gives 12' 6", which is near as the quoted dimension as to make no difference. In this case the axle guards line up with the verticals. I suspect the photo shows a 21 ft vehicle with the longer wheelbase. Hence the axle guards are spaced beyond the uprights, although if I had been trying to scale the wheelbase from the photo I might have made it a bit longer than the 13' 6", going by the position of the axle guard relative to the panel above. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmrspaul Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 Has anyone asked the LNER Society about this? They have a lot of unpublished information about coaching stock. Aren't the axleboxes familiar to anyone? Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Pulham Posted November 27, 2016 Author Share Posted November 27, 2016 Has anyone asked the LNER Society about this? They have a lot of upublished information about coaching stock. Aren't the axleboxes familiar to anyone? Paul Hi Paul, Not so far, but as you say it's worth asking the question. Thanks for the suggestion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium corneliuslundie Posted November 30, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 30, 2016 My apologies. My eyes must be worse than I thought. Yes both drawing and photo have six verticals. One other thought. The wheels look like carriage rather than wagon wheels on the drawing. If that is also the case in the photo, is it is possible to get a feel for the length from them? Also interesting that the buffers in the drawing are 1 ft 10.5 inches, not a common dimension. Is that any clue to origin? BTW The drawing is for the shorter wheelbase of the two shown if one takes the two actual drawing dimensions and 21 ft as the length over headstocks and calculates.the wheelbase, as noted above. And though my contributions have not been very useful so far, I can point you to LNER Wagons Volume 4b by Peter Tatlow for the LNER containers (though I do not have it and so do not know how much information there is). Jonathan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Pulham Posted November 30, 2016 Author Share Posted November 30, 2016 Thanks Jonathan, About 15 pages worth from what a friend told me, enough to make me finally take the plunge and buy it I think - I have the rest but have been holding off hopeing to pick up a second hand a copy a little cheaper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.