Minerva announce O Gauge Iron Mink van

[Miss Prism]

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrb1787.htm      lower right seems to have a similar buffer beam end to the Minerva model, but not the same buffers.

 

It's a Taff Vale Iron Mink, fitted (later) with twin-independents and double vees.

[Miss Prism]

Speaking to Minerva yesterday, I got the impression that the minks were pretty much ready to go, I don't know how much room for manoeuvre they still have. They were pretty keen to keep this a secret until ready to go - possibly a result of the 57xx duplication experience.

 

Whilst it is heartening to have all this wonderful 7mm RTR stuff around, and I do appreciate Minerva's position, there is a downside to keeping these things 'secret'.

 

I wonder who might be planning a 7mm AA3 or AA15...

[Great Western]

Maybe you could offer your services as an volunteer error spotter with the company?

I'm sure Chris and Chris would value your free expert imput, then we would have perfect models every time - everyone is a winner then.

[Andrew Young]

There were, from memory, "improvised gunpowder vans" that were modifies Iron Minks but the proper Cones had square corners so very different.

Thanks Wagonman, having looked at some more photo I see what you mean. Knew that someone would know the answer!

 

Cheers,

Andrew

[Poggy1165]

Out of interest, are there other potential liveries for this wagon? I know various other railways and bodies had Iron Minks, but I'm not too well up on the subtle differences, which I know exist but can't recall exactly.

[wagonman]

Btw, just to add to the confusion, some 'Iron Minks' were non-GWR, built by outside contractors. The blue circle ferroconcrete ones had heavier springs, Ellis-type boxes and double vees:

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/hatton/gwrhj2260.jpg

 

 

The Spillers vans, built by Harrison & Camm in 1906/7, had DCI brakes...but a subtly different body. 

[Gilbert]

But apart from all the observations people like it then...

 

I saw them today and they are splendid models that are done  to such a level that they are consistent with my detailed knowledge of GWR wagons...lovely

[Western Star]

An absolutely necessary wagon for GWR lines set in the Edwardian period.  OK - the wheels are not what is needed for S7...  and the buffer stocks need attention...  neither of those concerns have stopped us from ordering ten for our GW&GC Jt layout.

[boxerbayrailway]

Looks very nice,  will definitely be getting one,  or two,  or three      Seems a much needed wagon,  with no kit being available from the big kit makers.

Any little detail differences I can overlook,  as long as the overall impression and major details are correct.  I try and not take things too far -  accuracy wise,  

it takes a bit of the fun away (for me).    I was hoping for a Andrew Barclay loco,  but perhaps in 2018   

[Gerald Henriksen]

Maybe you could offer your services as an volunteer error spotter with the company?

I'm sure Chris and Chris would value your free expert imput, then we would have perfect models every time - everyone is a winner then.

 

Speaking in generic terms, not specific to this model or company, it is up to the people/company producing the models (if they are interested in making an accurate model, which is sometimes a big if) to either generate the in house expertise to make an accurate model or to reach out (in private as necessary) to people/organizations that have the required knowledge.

 

It is of no use to volunteer as an error spotter when the item in question is already in production - and in this case a November delivery means if it is not already in production then it is likely days away.  It is also, obviously, much cheaper to catch errors in the CAD stage before the expensive tooling is produced, which would have happened many months ago.

[Compound2632]

Speaking in generic terms, not specific to this model or company, it is up to the people/company producing the models (if they are interested in making an accurate model, which is sometimes a big if) to either generate the in house expertise to make an accurate model or to reach out (in private as necessary) to people/organizations that have the required knowledge.

 

It is of no use to volunteer as an error spotter when the item in question is already in production - and in this case a November delivery means if it is not already in production then it is likely days away.  It is also, obviously, much cheaper to catch errors in the CAD stage before the expensive tooling is produced, which would have happened many months ago.

 

We should respect Miss Prism's expert knowledge and the generous if appropriately didactic manner in which it is offered. That it is too late for the manufacturer to correct an error is not a sufficient ground for refraining from pointing it out.

[Gerald Henriksen]

We should respect Miss Prism's expert knowledge and the generous if appropriately didactic manner in which it is offered. That it is too late for the manufacturer to correct an error is not a sufficient ground for refraining from pointing it out.

 

I have a great deal of respect for the knowledge shared, particularly given that the effort has been made not just to point out the issues but to demonstrate them with visual images and/or references to prototype images which takes more time and effort than just listing a bunch of points.

 

My point wasn't to comment upon the points made by Miss Prism, or the method, but rather to point out that if a manufacturer wants to wait until the model is in production to unveil it then the onus it entirely on the manufacturer to get things right.

 

Suggesting that someone volunteer their expertise doesn't work if no one is aware that such expertise is needed because the entire process is being done in secret.

[Gerald Henriksen]

I should also point out that just as I appreciate the time and effort put in by the knowledgeable experts on RMweb to share their expertise with the rest of us, I also am aware of and appreciate the time, effort, and most importantly the money that the people who are behind the small manufacturers put in.

[Craigw]

Maybe you could offer your services as an volunteer error spotter with the company?

I'm sure Chris and Chris would value your free expert imput, then we would have perfect models every time - everyone is a winner then.

 

"Hello Minerva?"

"This is Miss Prism here"

"i would like to offer my services for any secret projects you may or may not have in development"

 

I can just imagine how well that would go.

 

Seriously though, one of the bits about being involve in manufacturing is developing the knowledge of what you inrtend to model and making sure it is as accuarte if possible.

 

All the items listed by Miss Prism are fairly easy to see and verify. They could have been picked up if a critical eye had been cast over the drawings.

 

Before you ask, yes I have assisted manufacturers and also written articles and reviews.

 

Craig W

[tomparryharry]

From any side, it's very easy to pass a critical eye over a finished product, whatever it may be, regardless of scale.

 

Not so easy, perhaps, is knowing what to decipher in the information presented to you. It might be 'wrong', but why is it 'wrong'?.

 

It might be easier, and more diplomatic, if explanations were furnished as to why a rivet might be 'here', as opposed to 'there'. Sometimes, it just takes a photo, or a bona-fide drawing. Not, I should stress, a computer-aided document, more prime source.

 

Remember, that your chosen subject will have gone through umpteen refits & repairs, before you get your hands on it.  

 

I still maintain that the easiest way to clear an office, is to say:- "OK folks, our next project is to make a product in Great Western guise...."

 

Just for starters, most gunpowder vans didn't carry gunpowder, and lots of flour didn't mean the baker was a busy man...

 

Ian

[Western Star]

1  Springstop please.

2  If the leaves are to be shown, make it standard 4 and not 3.

3  The front face of the turret top section should slope inwards slightly, rather than being vertical, and this would then enable a better and subtler spring clip representation. The turret recess should have the oiler.

4  The box looks rather big for a Mink. (Is that a 10" x 5"?)

5  The box lacks the flanges and the bolts on the side of the top and bottom bits of the box.

 

minerva-mink-box-and-spring.png

Good observation and you have prompted me to look further at the prototype.

 

1/ Agreed and a surprising omission - not too much of a problem and can be dealt with by the customer (I have ordered ten).

2/ Good point... the prototype at Didcot has 5 leaf springs so there may have been a change over the decades.

3/ Agreed about the inward slope, maybe the toolmaker is not as aware as we are about the nuances of GWR boxes.  Your point about a "better" representation of the spring buckle is dependent upon the number of spring leaves (see 2/).  The GWS vehicle appears to not have an oiling point in the top of the 'box.

4/ Agreed that the model 'box does appear to be wider than the prototype (compare width of 'box' to gap between horns).

5/ I am not sure what you are describing here... unless you are referring to the bolts which fix the keep to the top in which case omission of those bolts may be due to how the underframe is moulded.

 

regards, Graham

[gardenwall]

On ordering some today I was informed that they are in production now. So any details that have not been fixed already will be up to us to fix (my words). But it's still very definitely an iron mink, which a while ago we could only dream of.  Production models will not be too long now.

[Miss Prism]

5/ I am not sure what you are describing here... unless you are referring to the bolts which fix the keep to the top in which case omission of those bolts may be due to how the underframe is moulded.

 

 

The cavity on the tool would be coplanar with the W-iron and solebar planes.

 

The axlebox design seems to stem from the '8 Dapol wagons for Guildex' era.

[The Bigbee Line]

I've had a quick speed read through the thread.  There was a brief mention of the possibility of a Gunpowder variation. 

 

There is a picture in the Mike King Book, Southern Wagons in Colour, has a picture of an LSWR grounded body.  Built by G.R.Turner.  Corners are rounded, without the bonnet vents on the ends.  The doors are flush not panelled, so hope for bashers...

 

I'll try one in BR paint.  Just need to scour the books for one in a Southern Region freight train.....

[Marshall5]

If anyone wants a copy of the excellent but long OOP HMRS Iron Minks book there's one on the G0G sales & wants.

Ray.

[brossard]

I was chatting with my friend today and he mentioned this model.  My layout is set in ~1962 and he has purchased various GWR kits which I have built for him to reflect their appearance in 1962 (some might be pushing it).

 

My question is whether any of these would have been in BR revenue service in 1962.  These were pretty long in the tooth by then having been built in the first decade or so of the 20th century (and some in the late 19th cent.)  My impression is that any that were not condemned when BR took the reins were fairly quickly relegated to Departmental use.  In post #1 there's a picture on one in BR livery but how plausible is that?

 

John

[Dunsignalling]

I've had a quick speed read through the thread.  There was a brief mention of the possibility of a Gunpowder variation. 

 

There is a picture in the Mike King Book, Southern Wagons in Colour, has a picture of an LSWR grounded body.  Built by G.R.Turner.  Corners are rounded, without the bonnet vents on the ends.  The doors are flush not panelled, so hope for bashers...

 

I'll try one in BR paint.  Just need to scour the books for one in a Southern Region freight train.....

A complete LSWR Gunpowder Van, part of the National Collection (I think), can be seen at the Yeovil Railway Centre.

 

John

[Marshall5]

 

 

My question is whether any of these would have been in BR revenue service in 1962.  These were pretty long in the tooth by then having been built in the first decade or so of the 20th century (and some in the late 19th cent.)  My impression is that any that were not condemned when BR took the reins were fairly quickly relegated to Departmental use.  In post #1 there's a picture on one in BR livery but how plausible is that?

 

John

Very few, if any, IMO.  They were, however, widely used as stores in many goods yards until well after 1962.  One pair were grounded and used as buffer stops (with a buffer plank fitted half way up one end) at Machynllech IIRC,  The livery shown in post # 1 is probably correct for a layout depicting the early B.R. period. Sorry I can't check in my copy of HMRS Iron Minks at the moment.

Ray.

[brossard]

Thanks Ray, I did some further reading today and I concur with your assessment.  We'll scratch the Mink off the list for my 1962 layout and look for something else.

 

John

[kkwup]

Hi,

 

just read in the latest issue of Railway Modeller that Chris & Chris will add the Gunpowder and improvised Gunpowder Vans to their range of rolling stock. An undecorated sample of the new body is shown on Page 891. What a lovely surprise! (once again)

 

Regards

Klaus