Rails announce SECR box van in OO

[Guy Rixon]

7 hours ago, Pre Grouping fan said:

What would one have to do to backdate the vehicle to early 1900's condition. Assuming it would be mostly underframe differences?

Send positive emails to Rails of Sheffield asking them to produce the early variants.

 

Or, for the maximally impatient:

• Cut away the "freighter" brakes which are a SR fitting and fabricate Hill's brake in place. You'd have to build them from scratch as, AFAIK, there are no commercial products and they look too different to "normal" brakes (e.g. off-set V-hanger) to bodge them easily from available parts.
• Carefully remove the "bobbins" on the lower body-side that were put on by the SR to retain a wagon sheet.
• Drill the roof and add "eros" vents.
• Remove the no.2 axleboxes and replace with P-type.
• Repaint and letter.
• Replace the split-spoke wheels (fitted by the SR) with 3'1.5" Mansell wheels (available from AGW).

That covers three of the 18-odd known variants, one each in early-SECR, late-SECR and early-SR liveries. As Edwardian pointed out, there are other variations involving different springs; also three alternative kinds of door and different roof-vents (Laycock instead of eros) on some of the vans.

Edited April 20, 2019 by Guy Rixon
Note change of axleboxes.

[Guy Rixon]

5 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

And longer buffer housings? But I've serendipitously just this morning had my copy of Southern Wagons Vol. 3 arrive so that's on a speed-read only.

Actually, no, not according to the GA (which is available from HMRS). The variant with the long, shackled, "express"-style springs seems to have had only the normal, wagon-style buffers.

[57xx]

 

20 hours ago, AY Mod said:

20 hours ago, Nile said:

I think this all points to Dapol having acquired a fancy new 3D printer

 

Not necessarily. 

 

Tea, Earl Grey, hot?

Edited April 21, 2019 by 57xx

[Oliver Rails]

The model is produced using cutting-edge print technology, designed for volume production and currently available from only one facility in the UK. This enables a practically layer-free continuous print, up to a 100 times faster than conventional 3D printing. It does so using a photochemical process to project light through an oxygen-permeable window into a reservoir of UV-curable resin. This results in a material with excellent mechanical properties and capable of capturing fine detail. 

[Dunsignalling]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I hope I will be forgiven a moment of marginally off-topic pedantry. This statement gets repeated sufficiently frequently that I suppose it must have appeared in print from some well-known author. Tatlow, LNER Wagons Vol. 1, gives numbers of wagons contributed to the pool by the big four at various dates from 1922 to 1946. The LMS share was consistently around 43%, LNER 39%, GWR 13%, and SR 5%. The total number of wagons in the pool was only a little bit more than the total number of private owner wagons.

 

Of course for a particular location, local factors come into play.

 

Though, of course, once you subtract coal/mineral wagons and tanks from PO vehicle total, it doesn't leave much. Moreover, PO merchandise vans (i.e. not "specials" for carrying salt or grain) were vanishingly rare. I'd be very surprised if there were ever more than one per 1,000 Railway Company vans.

 

The fact remains that LMS and LNER vans were to be seen in significant numbers on GWR and SR territory as a consequence of pooling, even if outnumbering "native" stock probably only happened occasionally and most likely in small yards where the overall number of vehicles present was low.

 

John

 

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2019 by Dunsignalling
emphasis

[Compound2632]

38 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

Though, of course, once you subtract coal wagons and tanks from PO vehicle total, it doesn't leave much. Moreover, PO merchandise vans (i.e. not "specials" for carrying salt or grain) were vanishingly rare. I'd be very surprised if there was more than one for every thousand Railway Company vans.

 

The fact remains that LMS and LNER vans were to be seen in significant numbers on GWR and SR territory as a consequence of pooling, even if outnumbering "native" stock would probably have only happened occasionally and most likely in small yards where the overall number of vehicles present was low.

 

John

 

 

 

 

 

I was including all pooled wagons there, not just covered goods wagons or vans, hence the comparison with the number of PO wagons, the overwhelmingly vast majority of which were exclusively for mineral traffic. Pooled wagons were very much the majority - at grouping, 71% of LMS wagon stock, 74% of GWR stock, 80% of SR stock but only 60% of LNER stock - I suspect this reflects the large number of ex-NER mineral wagons retained in the North East, where the PO mineral wagon was largely unknown. 

 

Diffusion theory tells us that with large enough samples, e.g. a large town or city goods yard, the proportion of wagons from each of the big four should tend to the stated percentages. Probability theory tells us that for a small country goods yard, large random variations from the stated percentages are likely. Against this has to be set the arrangements made for routine maintenance, which continued to be carried out by the owning company - I've never seen an account of how this was managed. 

 

Photographs provide one form of evidence, as might goods station ledgers if any survive. Here's an example, Birmingham Central Goods (Midland Railway), 22 September 1922. I would argue that the proportion of Midland vehicles in this photo is hardly more than one would expect from the fact that the Midland's wagon fleet accounted for 17% of the total number of railway company owned wagons. (Sheets were also pooled, so that's not necessarily a North Eastern wagon under that North Eastern sheet.)

 

Things were very different before the Great War. Here's the same goods depot in the 1890s. I can only see one wagon that clearly isn't Midland.

 

Sorry if this seems a bit off-topic but the point is, the SR-liveried versions of this SECR van that Rails are offering first time round could be seen anywhere in the country (though always with low probability, since it was not a numerous design) and hence are of interest to most modellers of the Grouping era from the late thirties onwards. On the other hand, an SECR-liveried version in original condition will be rather more niche. 

 

But, I fully appreciate that not many of us apply such rigorous logic to our modelling choices. We're in this for fun not self-mortification.

Edited April 20, 2019 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

25 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

Though, of course, once you subtract coal/mineral wagons and tanks from PO vehicle total, it doesn't leave much. Moreover, PO merchandise vans (i.e. not "specials" for carrying salt or grain) were vanishingly rare. I'd be very surprised if there were ever more than one per 1,000 Railway Company vans.

 

The fact remains that LMS and LNER vans were to be seen in significant numbers on GWR and SR territory as a consequence of pooling, even if outnumbering "native" stock probably only happened occasionally and most likely in small yards where the overall number of vehicles present was low.

 

John

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, for instance, I recall that I was forever coming across LNER vans in pictures of the GW in South Devon. 

 

52 minutes ago, Oliver Rails said:

The model is produced using cutting-edge DLS technology, designed for volume production and currently available from only one facility in the UK. DLS enables a practically layer-free continuous print, up to a 100 times faster than conventional 3D printing. It does so using a photochemical process to project light through an oxygen-permeable window into a reservoir of UV-curable resin. This results in a material with excellent mechanical properties and capable of capturing fine detail. 

 

Ah,  a communiqué has been issued from Rails of Sheffield's secret hi-tech facility, hidden in a hollowed-out volcano, in Sheffield.

 

 

However, in the meantime their pre-Grouping product development team are slowly trying to catch up with the latest technological advances ......

 

 

 

 

 

[Compound2632]

I note the interesting array of instruments on the forge wall - to be used on rivet counters and wagon pedants, no doubt.

 

A serious question: what will be the mass of the wagon? 

[Edwardian]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

I note the interesting array of instruments on the forge wall - to be used on rivet counters and wagon pedants, no doubt.

 

 

 

Got to be one of my favourite film lines ever, from The Name of the Rose: "Take him to the forge and show him the implements ..."

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

A welcome idea. Endless potential for representing less common vehicles.

 

34 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

The fact remains that LMS and LNER vans were to be seen in significant numbers on GWR and SR territory as a consequence of pooling, even if outnumbering "native" stock probably only happened occasionally and most likely in small yards where the overall number of vehicles present was low...

And likewise the GWR and SR vehicles, other than those reserved to dedicated flows wholly within group.

 

As for 'outnumbering' the well known commentator C. Hamilton Ellis made an observation to the effect 'the Southern goods train, within which the only vehicle that was that of the line it was running on was the Guard's brake'.

[Edwardian]

For those interested in the early condition appearance of these wagons, here is a picture, copyright National Railway Museum, reproduced in the Southern Wagons volume referred to earlier.

 

Ignore the doors, these were experimental and applied to just 2 wagons.  

 

[Ravenser]

6 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I hope I will be forgiven a moment of marginally off-topic pedantry. This statement gets repeated sufficiently frequently that I suppose it must have appeared in print from some well-known author. Tatlow, LNER Wagons Vol. 1, gives numbers of wagons contributed to the pool by the big four at various dates from 1922 to 1946. The LMS share was consistently around 43%, LNER 39%, GWR 13%, and SR 5%. The total number of wagons in the pool was only a little bit more than the total number of private owner wagons.

 

Of course for a particular location, local factors come into play.

 

This would give a ratio of 7:6:3:1 [LMS:LNER:GWR:SR].

 

Given that PO wagons were slow-moving and liable to be used as static coal stores if the wagon demurrage scale wasn't aggressive enough, a reasonable ratio for railway/PO wagons should be around 2:1

 

These ratios matter . A GW branchline layout might have say 30 wagons - 9 PO, 7 LMS, 6 LNER, 3 GW pool, 1 Southern , and 4 GW non-pool (eg cattle wagons, MOGOs, MICAs, etc). Not at all the proportions you see at shows......

 

I've been working to a ratio of 8:7:2:1 for my boxfile, with BR wagons on top, - that was based on my own calculation from one of the tables in Tatlow's original book, but it's not far off Compound2632's ratios. I currently have no SR wagons, though I'm slightly heavy on GW - but at £27 for a single van I'm afraid I will pass on this one, however praiseworthy the initiative.

[Ravenser]

2 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

A welcome idea. Endless potential for representing less common vehicles.

 

And likewise the GWR and SR vehicles, other than those reserved to dedicated flows wholly within group.

 

As for 'outnumbering' the well known commentator C. Hamilton Ellis made an observation to the effect 'the Southern goods train, within which the only vehicle that was that of the line it was running on was the Guard's brake'.

 

I think it may actually be a caption in one of the OPC Southern wagon books "an example of that not-infrequent phenomenon - a Southern goods train without any Southern wagons in it except for the brake van"

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

For those interested in the early condition appearance of these wagons, here is a picture, copyright National Railway Museum, reproduced in the Southern Wagons volume referred to earlier.

 

Ignore the doors, these were experimental and applied to just 2 wagons.  

 

 

Did the SR instigate a targeted programme to replace the original running gear or was it just a matter of fitting standard RCH-compliant components as and when the vans needed overhaul?

 

John

[Iltman]

6 hours ago, JohnR said:

I hope that The odd one in the early 50s in East Devon wouldn't hurt then...

So checking Volume Three of Southern Wagons five of these were in general traffic until the mid 50s so I think you can justify at least one.  As I’m modelling the Hants/Dorset border in the early 50s I’ll be getting one, and don’t forget some were in engineering service well into the fifties

Edited April 20, 2019 by Iltman
Spelling mistake

[Dunsignalling]

7 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

I think it may actually be a caption in one of the OPC Southern wagon books "an example of that not-infrequent phenomenon - a Southern goods train without any Southern wagons in it except for the brake van"

Around the capital the sheer amount of cross-London traffic would have brought "foreign" vehicles onto the SR in quantity.

 

Elsewhere maybe a case of the canny SR wearing out other companies' wagons in preference to their own whenever the opportunity presented itself?

 

John

 

 

[Ravenser]

1 minute ago, Dunsignalling said:

Around the capital the sheer amount of cross-London traffic would have brought "foreign" vehicles onto the SR in quantity.

 

Elsewhere maybe a case of the canny SR wearing out other companies' wagons in preference to their own whenever the opportunity presented itself?

 

John

 

 

 

How much of the SR's freight traffic was internal within their own network? As the smallest group, probably quite little. I suspect a very high proportion of SR freight traffic came off other systems - suburban and rural areas importing manufactured goods from industrial areas

[Dunsignalling]

10 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

How much of the SR's freight traffic was internal within their own network? As the smallest group, probably quite little. I suspect a very high proportion of SR freight traffic came off other systems - suburban and rural areas importing manufactured goods from industrial areas

And, of course, you don't bring in an empty SR wagon for an outgoing load if you have a predictable supply of newly emptied pooled wagons ready to use.

 

The large numerical imbalances in the pool probably enabled the SR (and, to a lesser extent, the GWR) to build and run rather fewer of its own wagons than would otherwise have been required.

 

John

Edited April 20, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[truffy]

No wonder the LMS and LNER had to contribute so many wagons to the pool, what with the SR and GWR sponging off of them!

 

But it gives us a fair deal of flexibility in building rakes.

[Amand]

6 hours ago, Oliver Rails said:

The model is produced using cutting-edge DLS technology, designed for volume production and currently available from only one facility in the UK. DLS enables a practically layer-free continuous print, up to a 100 times faster than conventional 3D printing. It does so using a photochemical process to project light through an oxygen-permeable window into a reservoir of UV-curable resin. This results in a material with excellent mechanical properties and capable of capturing fine detail. 

 

Using technology borrowed from the replicators on Star Trek???

[Anglian]

If they offer them in the original SECR condition then I'll buy.

[adb968008]

This is a very cool development.

 

Reading olivers statement that only one place in the UK has this tech, does that mean Dapol are supplying the paint job / box ?

 

To have a solution to the quality paint job problem for 3D printing could offer a very lucrative market for niche type 3D model railway products...

I could build a huge wish list here !.. LYR coaches in BR era next please.

 

I've ordered two already, keen to support this approach,  you've never enough box vans..

Edited April 20, 2019 by adb968008

[Compound2632]

3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

The large numerical imbalances in the pool probably enabled the SR (and, to a lesser extent, the GWR) to build and run rather fewer of its own wagons than would otherwise have been required.

 

The number of wagons in the pool from each company was, I believe, agreed at a conference - I don't know the details but would expect that freight revenue came into the equation. 

 

To counter the quote about the only Southern vehicle in a Southern goods train being the brake van, there's also the observation I read many years ago - might have been in an article by those goods gurus Martin Waters or Don Rowland - that the fitted heads of LMS express goods trains were mostly made up of Great Western vehicles.

[Nimbus]

11 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

Yes... There is something really grainy about the finish in the photos. I would guess its an SLS printer. Maybe an HP Jet Fusion, but they say the plastic is PU so I'm not really certain.

PU Resin cast from 3D-printed masters?

 

The Nim.

[298]

Now if only someone would produce a Van to satisfy the needs of the Hull & Barnsley modeller....