Oxford announce 12T Tank Wagons

[JaymzHatstand]

I picked one up yesterday from Monk Bar Models (York), and paid for it - usual satisfied customer disclaimer.

 

I must admit, it's very nice, well decorated (I think) and with a good weight to it. The wheels run true so it doesn't wobble either! The three links in the box are a nice addition, and enabled it to go straight into service with my pre-grouping stock for a quick shunt with my NER E!

 

 

I do have an operational question or two for those more knowledgeable; would the odd wagon appear in a mixed goods, and if so, would it have needed a barrier wagon either in transit, or during shunting?

 

Cheers

 

J

[Dunsignalling]

4 hours ago, JaymzHatstand said:

I picked one up yesterday from Monk Bar Models (York), and paid for it - usual satisfied customer disclaimer.

 

I must admit, it's very nice, well decorated (I think) and with a good weight to it. The wheels run true so it doesn't wobble either! The three links in the box are a nice addition, and enabled it to go straight into service with my pre-grouping stock for a quick shunt with my NER E!

 

 

I do have an operational question or two for those more knowledgeable; would the odd wagon appear in a mixed goods, and if so, would it have needed a barrier wagon either in transit, or during shunting?

 

Cheers

 

J

Specific barrier wagons were normally only provided in trains carrying multiple Class A tank wagons, or mixed A & B where the running order was not necessarily predictable. 

 

When an odd tank or two were marshalled in mixed goods trains the requirement was for there to be at least one, sometimes two other wagons (empty or carrying non-flammable loads, and a minimum of five planks in height) between both tank and loco and tank and brake van. The latter because of the guard's lit stove in it. 

 

In your photo above, swap the open over with the tank and you should be "legal". 

 

John

 

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2020 by Dunsignalling
Sentence deleted

[Fat Controller]

1 hour ago, JaymzHatstand said:

I picked one up yesterday from Monk Bar Models (York), and paid for it - usual satisfied customer disclaimer.

 

I must admit, it's very nice, well decorated (I think) and with a good weight to it. The wheels run true so it doesn't wobble either! The three links in the box are a nice addition, and enabled it to go straight into service with my pre-grouping stock for a quick shunt with my NER E!

 

 

I do have an operational question or two for those more knowledgeable; would the odd wagon appear in a mixed goods, and if so, would it have needed a barrier wagon either in transit, or during shunting?

 

Cheers

 

J

'Block Trains' of tank wagons were the exception to the norm, until the late 1950s (apart from during WW2). Tanks would be conveyed in ordinary freight trains, with the proviso that there had to be some wagons between the loco and the brake van and the tank wagons. These barriers need not be empty, as long as their load was relatively inert.

[hmrspaul]

21 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Specific barrier wagons were normally only provided in trains carrying multiple Class A tank wagons, or mixed A & B where the running order was not necessarily predictable. 

 

When an odd tank or two were marshalled in mixed goods trains the requirement was for there to be at least one, sometimes two other wagons (empty or carrying non-flammable loads, and a minimum of five planks in height) between both tank and loco and tank and brake van. The latter because of the guard's lit stove in it. 

 

The same should apply when shunting with a steam loco but I have seen  a few photographs where that is clearly not being observed.

 

In your photo above, swap the open over with the tank and you should be "legal". 

 

John

 

 

 

 

Most of this is good but apologies John this is not true for shunting. The GWR rule book clearly exempts shunting and local movements from the requirement for any protection between locomotive and class A wagon. I would expect the other railways to have similar exemptions. 

 

Paul

[Dunsignalling]

2 hours ago, hmrspaul said:

Most of this is good but apologies John this is not true for shunting. The GWR rule book clearly exempts shunting and local movements from the requirement for any protection between locomotive and class A wagon. I would expect the other railways to have similar exemptions. 

 

Paul

Reference deleted. I think I may have been over-interpreting the use of a runner wagon for visibility reasons.

 

John

[MartinTrucks]

The COLFIX and BENZOL By-Products versions of these tank wagons appear to be with retailers now.

Best regards,

Martin

[Cor-onGRT4]

Colfix Ltd was registered in 1927 and dissolved in 1948, but was in 1938 nearly dissolved according The London Gazette of 1938 

mentioned in the left collum of the article , see PDF

HMRS has a picture from 1927, of a 14 ton tankwagon, the same livery as Oxford rail but with running number 33,

maybe Oxford rail have based theirs on this picture.

But it is clearly this Oxford model is pre war.

data.pdf

Edited September 30, 2020 by Cor-onGRT4

[The Stationmaster]

On 19/09/2020 at 11:29, Dunsignalling said:

Specific barrier wagons were normally only provided in trains carrying multiple Class A tank wagons, or mixed A & B where the running order was not necessarily predictable. 

 

When an odd tank or two were marshalled in mixed goods trains the requirement was for there to be at least one, sometimes two other wagons (empty or carrying non-flammable loads, and a minimum of five planks in height) between both tank and loco and tank and brake van. The latter because of the guard's lit stove in it. 

 

In your photo above, swap the open over with the tank and you should be "legal". 

 

John

 

 

 

 

The GWR Instruction was very simple - unfitted tank wagons conveying inflammable liquids were to be marshalled as near to the middle of the train as possible unless they were vacuum fitted in which case they were to be marshalled at the rear end of the fitted portion (when they were authorised to travel in part fitted trains).  There were additional restrictions regarding tank wagons conveying inflammable liquids being conveyd, or not conveyed, in fully fitted freight trains.

Unfitted tank wagons conveying inflammable liquids could be conveyed in Mixed Trains (if no other service was available) but had to be separated from the passenger vehicles by at least one other wagon and from the brakevan by one wagon. (I once travelled in a Mixed Train conveying a loaded Class A tank wagon but that was in 1969!).

 

On 19/09/2020 at 11:52, hmrspaul said:

Most of this is good but apologies John this is not true for shunting. The GWR rule book clearly exempts shunting and local movements from the requirement for any protection between locomotive and class A wagon. I would expect the other railways to have similar exemptions. 

 

Paul

Which Rule was that Paul ?  I'm blowed if I can find it in Rules 110, 158, or 240 (probably an age thing ). On the other hand I can't find a Rule prohibiting it.

[bigherb]

My Benzol & By Products arrived today. I'm very impressed with the detail apart from the droopy couplings although they don't seem to affect coupling up. Just need to wait for the BP version and hope they do a Berry Wiggins from the southern oil traffic.

 

And one with big brother from Mainline.

 

[Porcy Mane]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Which Rule was that Paul ?

 

I suppose every rule was made to be broken. I've seen good number of photographs of 57XX's hauling block trains of unfitted benzine tanks between Trefor  (Monsanto) & Ellesmere Port.

There are no barrier wagons at either the front or rear.

 

P

Edited September 30, 2020 by Porcy Mane

[Wickham Green too]

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The GWR Instruction was very simple ....... tank wagons conveying inflammable liquids ......... unless they were vacuum fitted in which case they were to be marshalled at the rear end of the fitted portion ........

I'm struggling to think of any vac-fitted class 'A' tanks prior to the 35 tonners in the late fifties ! ( or class 'B' for that matter )

[MartinTrucks]

7 hours ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

I suppose every rule was made to be broken. I've seen good number of photographs of 57XX's hauling block trains of unfitted benzine tanks between Trefor  (Monsanto) & Ellesmere Port.

There are no barrier wagons at either the front or rear.

 

P

I may well be wrong, my memory not being all that it was.  However, I seem to recollect the barrier wagons being introduced in BR days following a rear-end collision to a tanker train on the Eastern Region in BR days when the proximity of the guard's brake van stove to the load gave cause for concern.

Best regards,

Martin

[Porcy Mane]

1 hour ago, MartinTrucks said:

I seem to recollect the barrier wagons being introduced in BR days following a rear-end collision

 

The series of photographs I have sight of were taken during 1964 & 1965.

[Jack P]

Apologies for the vagueness of the question; I really like these and would like to pick up a few, does anyone more knowledgeable than I know if any of these definitely wouldn't have been seen on the Southern in 1947ish?

[bigherb]

5 hours ago, Jack P said:

Apologies for the vagueness of the question; I really like these and would like to pick up a few, does anyone more knowledgeable than I know if any of these definitely wouldn't have been seen on the Southern in 1947ish?

Mobil certainly not, that is a mid fifties livery.

[The Stationmaster]

19 hours ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

I suppose every rule was made to be broken. I've seen good number of photographs of 57XX's hauling block trains of unfitted benzine tanks between Trefor  (Monsanto) & Ellesmere Port.

There are no barrier wagons at either the front or rear.

 

P

I know what you mean having seen some similar photos.  The firtst question is whether or not the tanks were 'empty'. (i.e. not just discharged but properly purged) although I suspect in the case of one photo I recall that probably wasn't the case.   On the other hand of course some folk could be rather lax when they thoight nobody was looking

[1466]

On 01/10/2020 at 02:13, Jack P said:

Apologies for the vagueness of the question; I really like these and would like to pick up a few, does anyone more knowledgeable than I know if any of these definitely wouldn't have been seen on the Southern in 1947ish?

I apologise in advance for my vague replies.

First of all I lived in Mitcham  which was the location of one of Benzole’s sites . So a personal connection.

Secondly , Mitcham was in Southern Railway and then Southern Region territory . So it is entirely possible a Benzole tanker would be appropriate for a Southern layout .

Third , all petrol was “pooled “ during the war so all tankers would have been shared and therefore ubiquitous. You can run any tanker  anywhere credibly as they would have travelled widely .

The “pool” arrangements ceased around 1952, I think , and branded petrol was marketed .

I’m persuaded you could run any of the pre war tankers , if you wish . Probably weathered .

Any livery introduced say post 1952 would be anomalous since new liveries were  only slowly  introduced .Everything was still rationed immediately post war .

But , most importantly, Rule 1 applies .

The Oxford tankers have been well reviewed and I’m pleased with mine . Usual disclaimer.

 

[Iltman]

18 hours ago, 1466 said:

I apologise in advance for my vague replies.

First of all I lived in Mitcham  which was the location of one of Benzole’s sites . So a personal connection.

Secondly , Mitcham was in Southern Railway and then Southern Region territory . So it is entirely possible a Benzole tanker would be appropriate for a Southern layout .

Third , all petrol was “pooled “ during the war so all tankers would have been shared and therefore ubiquitous. You can run any tanker  anywhere credibly as they would have travelled widely .

The “pool” arrangements ceased around 1952, I think , and branded petrol was marketed .

I’m persuaded you could run any of the pre war tankers , if you wish . Probably weathered .

Any livery introduced say post 1952 would be anomalous since new liveries were  only slowly  introduced .Everything was still rationed immediately post war .

But , most importantly, Rule 1 applies .

The Oxford tankers have been well reviewed and I’m pleased with mine . Usual disclaimer.

 

I hope you don’t mind if I elucidate a little.  As you rightly say all tank wagons for petrol and fuel oil were pooled in 1939 when the government took over the supply and distribution.  This ceased in 1947 when the tank wagons were handed back to their owners, and MOS and Air Ministry tanks were distributed as well.  

Its known that some tanks in the pre 1939 stone livery were still to be seen in the early 1950s but please don’t go overboard on the weathering as class A tanks tended to be not as mucky as the class B fuel oil variety

[Dunsignalling]

It is undoubtedly true that older tank wagon liveries persisted for some years after WW2. I've seen photos of buff Class A tanks purportedly taken as late as 1954 showing some in a condition that would suggest they'd not need repainting any time soon.

 

However, by even the early-BR era, many of the smaller owners had amalgamated, been taken over by one of the larger concerns, gone out of business, or switched to road tankers. 

 

The markings on most of these models are clearly pre-war, and will need some amendment for later periods, even where most of the livery might have remained intact. 

 

The only release (so far) of definite benefit to the BR-era modeller, is the Mobil one, notwithstanding the red buffer beams, which should be black. Did Oxford copy those from a preserved example to which some latter-day H&S thinking has been applied, I wonder? 

 

John

[1466]

3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

It is undoubtedly true that older tank wagon liveries persisted for some years after WW2. I've seen photos of buff Class A tanks purportedly taken as late as 1954 showing some in a condition that would suggest they'd not need repainting any time soon.

 

However, by even the early-BR era, many of the smaller owners had amalgamated, been taken over by one of the larger concerns, gone out of business, or switched to road tankers. 

 

The markings on most of these models are clearly pre-war, and will need some amendment for later periods, even where most of the livery might have remained intact. 

 

The only release (so far) of definite benefit to the BR-era modeller, is the Mobil one, notwithstanding the red buffer beams, which should be black. Did Oxford copy those from a preserved example to which some latter-day H&S thinking has been applied, I wonder? 

 

John

Thank you  both for your erudite contributions which I welcome .On weathering , I’ve gone for a smudge of track dirt on the under frame and a hint of rainwater streaks on the tanks .

Ken 

[1466]

On 09/10/2020 at 13:15, 1466 said:

Thank you  both for your erudite contributions which I welcome .On weathering , I’ve gone for a smudge of track dirt on the under frame and a hint of rainwater streaks on the tanks .

Ken 

Any thoughts on stains or spillage around the filler ? I believe discharge was from a valve under the tank . Thanks .

[Porcy Mane]

30 minutes ago, 1466 said:

I believe discharge was from a valve under the tank .

 

For a class A tank   (Benzole or any of its Fractionations in this case) during the timescale of your livery, the tank would have been emptied from the top via a siphon tube after loosening its associated vent plug. 

 

The blanked siphon tub flange and vent plug can be seen in this pic on Nat. Benzole tank, No. 174.

 

P

 

[RJS1977]

Slightly off-topic, but if anyone needs any photos of the underside of an LMS 20 ton tank wagon, let me know. I spent a couple of hours under one today and I suspect (weather and Covid permitting) that it won't be the last time I'll be going under it!

[Mark Saunders]

4 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

Slightly off-topic, but if anyone needs any photos of the underside of an LMS 20 ton tank wagon, let me know. I spent a couple of hours under one today and I suspect (weather and Covid permitting) that it won't be the last time I'll be going under it!

intriguing which tank and where was it? 

[wainwright1]

On 08/10/2020 at 15:33, 1466 said:

I apologise in advance for my vague replies.

First of all I lived in Mitcham  which was the location of one of Benzole’s sites . So a personal connection.

Secondly , Mitcham was in Southern Railway and then Southern Region territory . So it is entirely possible a Benzole tanker would be appropriate for a Southern layout .

Third , all petrol was “pooled “ during the war so all tankers would have been shared and therefore ubiquitous. You can run any tanker  anywhere credibly as they would have travelled widely .

The “pool” arrangements ceased around 1952, I think , and branded petrol was marketed .

I’m persuaded you could run any of the pre war tankers , if you wish . Probably weathered .

Any livery introduced say post 1952 would be anomalous since new liveries were  only slowly  introduced .Everything was still rationed immediately post war .

But , most importantly, Rule 1 applies .

The Oxford tankers have been well reviewed and I’m pleased with mine . Usual disclaimer.

 

Could you advise precisely where the Benzol depot was in Mitcham ? I have looked at the small print on the solebar which says Church Path, Mitcham, but I assume that it was an office address rather than the depot.

 

Many thanks

Ray

Edited October 24, 2020 by wainwright1
To add details