Pre-Grouping Wagon Loading

[Martin S-C]

I'll check with the person who colourised it about the b/w original.

[Nearholmer]

Starey and Woolley, motor body builders and motor engineers of Nottingham.

 

Found via a Nottingham Trade Directory.

 

Some of their flash motors here https://coachbuild.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=12958

 

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Compound2632]

1 minute ago, Nearholmer said:

Starey and Woolley, motor body builders and motor engineers of Nottingham.

 

 

Bingo! Dates fit nicely. I wonder if they were using their branded CCT to bring Rolls-Royce chassis from Derby to their Nottingham coachworks as well as sending the completed vehicles out? There's a photo* in Midland Wagons showing a Silver Ghost chassis being loaded into a D369 motor car van at Derby. This is a goods stock vehicle, whereas the CCTs were passenger rated. I'm not sure when this changed but back in the early 20th century, Rolls-Royce (and other motor manufacturers) only made the chassis, the coachwork being built to the customer's specification by firms such as Starey & Woolley, so there would have been a steady traffic in chassis from Derby etc. around the country. Unfortunately for us modellers, it would appear to have been mostly in CCTs or Motor Car Vans - though one being unloaded might make an interesting cameo. (If loaded on an open carriage truck or wagon, no doubt the chassis would have been sheeted.)

 

*Probably DY 9528, in which case the date is 26 June 1911.

[Martin S-C]

Awesome work Mr. N. Here's the original B/W image, said to be in Nottingham in 1907.

 

https://picturenottingham.co.uk/image-library/image-details/poster/ntgm008488/posterid/ntgm008488.html


 

Now then, about the livery...

[Compound2632]

I think you can see there that there is no distinction between red and black - compare the border of the tank and bunker side to the main panel colour. The film is insensitive to red. It is possible that the CCT is red, which would be the standard colour for Midland NPCS, but it could be any other colour that appears dark on this film. The lettering is evidently a lighter colour, possibly gold/yellow highlighted white. But there is no way of being sure.

[Nearholmer]

I first became aware of these motor company branded CCTs by seeing the Carette for Bassett-Lowke LNWR ones from pre-WW1. They made them in several scales, up to I think Gauge 3, the bigger the more accurate.

 

Below are I think a Gauge 0 one, and possibly a Gauge 2 one,  photos stolen from auctioneers’ websites ........ these exquisite biscuit tins on wheels are way outside my price range! The one I think is G2 has the characteristically wrong look, resulting from re-using G1 wheels and other parts for a scale that was, even in 1910, niche and dying.

 

From what I can understand, the livery is spot-on, as is the fact that it is a LWB four-wheeler. The little white panels under the cantrail were, I think, actually glazed, and that is represented better on the bigger models. There are a lot of modern replicas of these models around, made by Darstaed and by Ace, but strangely both modern makers put them on 6W chassis.

 

Mulliner’s works in London can still be located, by a knowing eye, in back lanes off Long Acre, between Leicester Square and Covent Garden, but it is now offices.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Compound2632]

That's a good representation of the D446 vehicle illustrated at plate 231 in D. Jenkinson, LNWR Carriages (2e, Pendragon, 1995) although that's side view, so the end door lettering can't be seen. Jenkinson describes the colour used for NPCS as "chocolate" but E. Talbot et al., LNWR Liveries (HMRS, 1985) clarifies this: carriage lake before 1900, then "quick brown", a mixture of Indian red and black - a dark purple brown intended as an approximation to carriage lake (and probably the undercoat for it) but less lustrous and transparent. These contemporary models bear witness to the accuracy of that statement.

[Compound2632]

Looking at the version on the Picture Nottingham website, which shows the whole image, the height of the CCT can be gauged from the clerestory carriage to its right - with the flatter clerestory roof profile with handrails, its 13'1" (rather than the 13'3" of the earliest Clayton square-light clerestories). The CCT is taller, i.e. it is 13'3" rather than the 12'8" of the Metropolitan gauge vehicles. I'm inclined to think that the length is 20 ft rather than 25 ft - from the front spectacle plate to the front buffer beam of the 0-4-4T is just over 20 ft. The McNaught & Co. vehicle is, I think, a 25 ft one, also full height not Metropolitan gauge.

 

I've been delving into the relevant section of R.E Lacy and G. Dow, Midland Carriages Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1986) and also the Lot List, as reproduced in R.J. Essery, Midland Wagons Vol. 2 (OPC, 1980). The Midland built a total of 74 passenger rated covered carriage trucks:

 

D402: 20'0" long, 13'3" high

Lot 59, 1881, qty 2

Lot 187, 1887, qty 14

D403: 25'0" long, 13'3" high

Lot 121, 1884, qty 4

Lot 148, 1886, qty 2

Lot 277, 1891, qty 4

Lot 351, 1895, qty 2 - bodies by Gloucester Co.

Lot 373, 1896, qty 4

Lot 683, 1907, qty 2 - for Wolseley Co.

D406: 20'0" long, 12'8" high (Met gauge)

Lot 187, 1887, qty 10

Lot 228, 1889, qty 20

D407: 25'0" long, 12'8" high (Met gauge)

Lot 516, 1901, qty 10

 

(I believe that the diagrams of the 20 ft vehicles in Lacy & Dow, figs. 556 and 560, are transposed.)

 

So if I've got the lengths right, the Starey & Woolley vehicle dates from 1881-1889 and the McNaught vehicle from 1884-1896. Since the motor body trade didn't get underway until the early years of the 20th century, these have evidently been lettered for these firms some time after building. This does suggest that the body colour in both cases might be the original Midland lake, with just the lettering added. It also begs the question why new vehicles were built for Wolseley in 1907, rather than just repurposing existing ones. (Apart from these two, the Midland built no more passenger-rated CCTs after 1901, going over to 6-wheelers with passenger carriage panelling - D414 - or goods-rated 4-wheelers - D369 - all described as motor car vans.)

 

So, are there other Midland CCTs branded for motor carriage body firms out there waiting to be discovered?

 

The vehicle seen through the locomotive's cab is a short (16 ft) horsebox - it's impossible to tell if it's the older arc-roof, flat sided variety to D397 or the cove-roof, tumblehome-sided sort to D398.

 

 

Edited October 25, 2019 by Compound2632
Lot 228 all Met gauge

[wagonman]

19 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

It looks very like a Midland CCT - of which there were four diagrams, giving all combinations of 20 ft and 25 ft length and standard and Metropolitan loading gauge - D402/3/6/7. The vertical boarding is characteristic; I suspect this is one of the standard height ones, since I can't see the top of the doors. A number of these were painted up to advertise the companies making regular use of them: in 1895 a pair were lettered for the Gloucester Wagon Co., on condition that the Goucester Co. gave the Midland as much of its traffic in road carriages as the Midland could handle but if not required by the Midland they could be used for general traffic. Lot 683 of 1907 was for a pair of 25 ft vehicles (D403 or D407), for the use of and lettered for the Wolseley Tool & Motor Co. of Birmingham (Lacy & Dow). There is photographic evidence for at least one lettered for McNaught & Co., Worcester & Broad St, Birmingham, probably 1909 or later (Summerson). The one in this photo is clearly a further unknown example. Is the location Nottingham? No. 1345 was a Mansfield engine. (The colorist has omitted the black shading to the numerals.) Why is there ALWAYS an engine in the way?

 

The well-known S.A. Fuller van of the S&DJR was in the same style but 27 ft long:

 

 

NRM DY 9127, released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence by the National Railway Museum.

 

The LNWR had a similar scheme, but its CCTs were rather different in appearance, having either carriage panelling or outside framing.

 

References:

R.E. Lacey and G. Dow, Midland Carriages Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1986).

S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 2 (Irwell Press 2007) p. 8.

See also Castle Aching topic here et seq. and here

 

I used the same photo as the frontispiece of the Somerset POs book. The caption says that the S&DJR reserved the right to use it for their own traffic when not required by Fullers though I cannot find the original reference. Maybe Russ Garner told me? As to colour, it is clearly a lighter shade so presumably blue.

 

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, wagonman said:

 

I used the same photo as the frontispiece of the Somerset POs book. The caption says that the S&DJR reserved the right to use it for their own traffic when not required by Fullers though I cannot find the original reference. Maybe Russ Garner told me? As to colour, it is clearly a lighter shade so presumably blue.

 

 

If you will pardon my saying so, a slightly odd choice seeing as it's a railway company-owned vehicle!

 

According to Garner, S&DJR NPCS was carriage blue, so if the Fuller van is blue, that lends some support to the idea that the Midland CCTs were also in the standard NPCS livery of crimson lake, with just the lettering added. The agreement with the Wolseley Co. specified that that firm would pay interest at 6% pa on the cost of the vehicles plus the cost of any extra lettering required - which suggests that livery was otherwise standard.

 

Rather frustratingly, I've not come across photos of the vans we know about from the archival record but now have two photos of vans for which no written record has been found!

Edited October 25, 2019 by Compound2632

[Nearholmer]

It might be worth, if you have infinite spare time, which I don't, trawling copies of the automotive periodicals that are now available via Grace's Guide, plus Commercial Motor, which has its own very good on-line archive, to identify other major players in the road vehicle and associated body building industry, to see whether that yields any further leads.

 

The trouble with body builders is that there names are now a bit obscure ....... Mulliner, and Starey's & Woolley's aren't exactly household names these days! Even early motor companies can be obscure, because so much re-partnering, re-naming and consolidation too place up to the 1920s.

 

Good luck!

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

It might be worth, if you have infinite spare time, which I don't, trawling copies of the automotive periodicals that are now available via Grace's Guide, plus Commercial Motor, which has its own very good on-line archive, to identify other major players in the road vehicle and associated body building industry, to see whether that yields any further leads.

 

The trouble with body builders is that there names are now a bit obscure ....... Mulliner, and Starey's & Woolley's aren't exactly household names these days! Even early motor companies can be obscure, because so much re-partnering, re-naming and consolidation too place up to the 1920s.

 

Good luck!

 

Interesting suggestion but I think I will pass. The fact that Lacy & Dow don't mention any other than Gloucester and Wolseley is a pretty good indication that other arrangements are not recorded in the various MR Committee minute books held at Kew, as when I've consulted them I've not found anything relating to passenger-rated stock that does not already appear in Midland Carriages. Those two cases get mentioned because they involved the construction of new stock and hence there was expenditure to be authorised. Commercial agreements for the use of existing stock were probably dealt with at Goods Manager/Agent level and records are unlikely to have survived.

[Fat Controller]

13 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

It might be worth, if you have infinite spare time, which I don't, trawling copies of the automotive periodicals that are now available via Grace's Guide, plus Commercial Motor, which has its own very good on-line archive, to identify other major players in the road vehicle and associated body building industry, to see whether that yields any further leads.

 

The trouble with body builders is that there names are now a bit obscure ....... Mulliner, and Starey's & Woolley's aren't exactly household names these days! Even early motor companies can be obscure, because so much re-partnering, re-naming and consolidation too place up to the 1920s.

 

Good luck!

Mulliners were around until 1960, latterly part of Standard Triumph. 

[Compound2632]

I have amended my earlier post: following the Lot List, I had put Lot 228 as 10 13'3" high and 10 12'8" high, however the Midland Railway Study Centre has a Superintendent of the Line's notice from 1892 that confirms that all the vehicles of that lot, Nos. 370-389, were Met gauge - which is what it says in Midland Carriages. Like I said, Ralph Lacy missed nothing - impossible to get one over on him.

 

This means our Starey's & Woolley's CCT is most likely one of the 14 13'3" high vehicles of Lot 187, built in 1887.

[Talltim]

Insert caption here 

[Compound2632]

"Run that under the loading gauge, will you?"

[Martin S-C]

Thank you all for the fantastic detective work on the MR CCT. At 13'3" high and 20' long it would make a rather cute stocky looking van.

[Nearholmer]

“See that plank at the bottom there? Yes, that wivvery one.

 

Now, I really do like the grain on that one; ideal for the job I’ve got in mind.

 

So, if it’s not too much trouble .,,,,,,”

[wagonman]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

If you will pardon my saying so, a slightly odd choice seeing as it's a railway company-owned vehicle!

 

 

 

That's why I only used it as the frontispiece. It was otherwise ignored. If I hadn't at least mentioned it I dare say I would been deluged with copies post publication...

[billbedford]

1 hour ago, Martin S-C said:

Thank you all for the fantastic detective work on the MR CCT. At 13'3" high and 20' long it would make a rather cute stocky looking van.

 

There's a kit for a D.403 here...

Edited October 25, 2019 by billbedford
Typo

[Compound2632]

11 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

There's a kit for a D.403 here...

 

And, scrolling up, for the two alternative diagrams for the 16 ft horsebox just visible in Martin's photo.

[Compound2632]

On 25/10/2019 at 03:18, Martin S-C said:

Awesome work Mr. N. Here's the original B/W image, said to be in Nottingham in 1907.

 

https://picturenottingham.co.uk/image-library/image-details/poster/ntgm008488/posterid/ntgm008488.html

 

Different crew, different engine? Same porter? Same children?

 

https://picturenottingham.co.uk/image-library/image-details/poster/ntgm008490/posterid/ntgm008490.html

 

[Tricky]

On 25/10/2019 at 16:18, Talltim said:

Insert caption here 

You plank Rodney. 

[Dave Hunt]

On ‎25‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 16:18, Talltim said:

Surely it's an RCH standard 425 plank open......?

 

[Poggy1165]

At one time the GCR had some CCTs painted:  DAILY MAIL

                                                                                WAR EXPRESS

 

I have seen the odd photo. Apparently these dated from the time of the Boer War. (I could comment further about how this particular traffic developed, but it might be seen as "political" . Suffice it to say that demand for a particular type of war coverage increased in the Northern shires and the GC was able to get these papers from London up to Manchester in time for early morning distribution.)

 

What colours were used I have no idea.