GWR tender options still to be modelled (3500 and 4000 gallon)

[81C]

I do hope everyone has in mind that the double fillers looked like this.

 

Great Western128.jpg

 

 

Not how the Hornby Dublo model was done.

Hornby appeared to have followed the Sir Layland-Barratt or the Roche drawing. Neither are correct to the A113 GA drawing.

 

Richard A 

 

I've bought a couple of new Hornby Kings I thought they had messed up the detail on them till I had a good look 

at the photo, silly me I do have that photo somewhere in the library .

[Signal Box Cat]

Hello everybody,

can anybody supply a good detailed diagram of the single GWR bogie tender as run with The Great Bear?

Thanks,

The Signal Box Cat

[JimC]

On 21/03/2019 at 22:15, Signal Box Cat said:

can anybody supply a good detailed diagram of the single GWR bogie tender as run with The Great Bear?

 

I believe that HMRS can supply a copy of the GA drawing, which is I think GWR no 33806. Not sure whether the NRM have it.

[Miss Prism]

On 22/02/2018 at 00:07, Wenrash said:

Does anybody have Sixsmith "Manor" book and can therefore put an number to the intermediate tender in Miss P's post?

 

Tender number 2379.

 

[MatthewCarty]

I wonder if those more knowledgeable than I could confirm whether I have correctly identified this tender as one of the intermediate tenders. Not possible to really make out, but it's meant to be 7812 at Stoneycombe. If I'm right then hopefully it's in an appropriate thread!

[Miss Prism]

There's no record of 7812 running with an intermediate, if that is 7812. Difficult to tell from the pic angle, but it looks like it's a Collett 3500g.
 

[MatthewCarty]

49 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

There's no record of 7812 running with an intermediate, if that is 7812. Difficult to tell from the pic angle, but it looks like it's a Collett 3500g.
 

Handrails on the Collett tenders didn't have that 90 degree bend towards going towards the back at the top of the handrail, so don't think it's a Collett... 

 

It was not having seen a picture of 7812 will an intermediate that caused me to look again, could well be incorrectly labelled, although there do seem to be a few less documented Manor + intermediate pairings

 

I don't think 7818's pairing is particularly well documented online, but there seem to be a few picture to suggest it happened:

 

 

 

 

 

This one behind 7821 is another that has had me wondering, difficult angle again..

 

Edited March 16, 2021 by MatthewCarty

[Miss Prism]

Yes, that's an intermediate on 7818. (But beware of some of the captions on Neil Dimmer's smugmug site!)

 

(You're right about the handrails, I should have spotted that.)

 

[MatthewCarty]

4 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Yes, that's an intermediate on 7818. (But beware of some of the captions on Neil Dimmer's smugmug site!)

 

(You're right about the handrails, I should have spotted that.)

 

Yes, I’ve been caught out by a couple of the captions before, but the photo apparently of 7812 isn’t from there.

 

I did wonder whether the picture of 7821 might be of the hybrid preservation tender, but I think it’s got the early chimney which presumably rules that out...

[Miss Prism]

Just spotted 7814 had an intermediate tender for a while (the Cardiff pic on smugmug).

 

[MatthewCarty]

28 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Just spotted 7814 had an intermediate tender for a while (the Cardiff pic on smugmug).

 

Is that not the Collett 3500g one? I think it's the only Manor to have been recorded with the Collett tender.

 

The more I look at that picture of 7821, the more I think it must be an intermediate. The join between the tender side and fender looks to be about in line with bottom of the cab window and the characteristic row of rivets is just about visible (in line with where the top of the numberplate would be).

Edited March 16, 2021 by MatthewCarty

[Miss Prism]

12 minutes ago, MatthewCarty said:

Is that not the Collett 3500g one? I think it's the only Manor to have been recorded with the Collett tender.

 

Correct, my apologies, getting my knickers rivet lines in a twist again! However, check out 7814 also with a Collett 3500g

 

I'm undecided about the 7821 pic, the angle is too acute.

 

Edited March 16, 2021 by Miss Prism

[MatthewCarty]

7 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

 

Correct, my apologies, getting my knickers rivet lines in a twist again! However, check out 7814 also with a Collett 3500g

 

I'm undecided about the 7821 pic, the angle is too acute.

 

Yes I think a similar angle photo of a manor with a standard Chuchward tender is required to be sure either way with 7821.

I've just been having another look at the Waters Manor book and he similarly misidentifies 7814's Collett tender as an intermediate, but the Collett frames and fender round the rear are clearly visible in both the book and this one

 

Another interesting point from the Waters book is he mentions at the start that the intermediate tenders were nos 2374-2383, and that tenders 2210 and 2222 were converted to intermediate pattern tenders (presumably just the tanks, not the slightly different frames as well). If correct it would seem 2210 was converted back again as I think this is the tender now behind Caerphilly Castle. There is also a picture of 7806 with an intermediate tender which he says is 2343, so either this was another convert he didn't mention at the start or the number is misquoted. Either way I'm often shocked by how frequently these pop up in pictures given there were so few of them.

[Miss Prism]

I've seen the 7806 pic, and it does seem as though '2343' for its number is probably a typo. Some Dean 4000g units apparently ended up looking like intermediates, but spotting ex-Dean 4000g tenders is knotty.

 

17 minutes ago, MatthewCarty said:

Either way I'm often shocked by how frequently these pop up in pictures given there were so few of them.

 

Yes, the intermediates certainly got around a bit. Ten tenders visited at least 52 locos.

 

Edited March 16, 2021 by Miss Prism

[JimC]

My current opinion, FWIW, and subject to change if more evidence appears, is that high sided 3,500 gallon tanks - or rather tank sides were fitted to more tenders than had the lot A112 double curved frames. Some of the photos of high sided tanks on the earlier pattern frames seem far too early for tank swaps to be very likely. Its interesting that I've never found a drawing that shows the high sides: the official GA for A112 listed in the tender drawings register shows the normal sides, not the longer and higher ones we associate with lot A112.

[Miss Prism]

To illustrate Jim's point, here is the diagram for lot A112 showing the scalloped frames and normal sides. It looks nothing like what we call an intermediate.

 

 

 

[JimC]

I'm interested in the whole high side thing, and am keen on seeing dated photos of both tenders with high sides and tenders with scalloped frames where numbers are recorded/can be identified. 2210 was built in 1923. Lot A112 was 1925-Jan 26. By 1930 there were plenty of 4,000 gallon tenders about. So if we take the view that high sided tenders were built to cosmetically match Castle cabs, there's a fairly narrow window in time when one might have been converted. Tanks were swapped between chassis, there's little doubt about that, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence about how often it happened, but I suspect much rarer than boiler changes. So were 2210 and 2222 (and any others built with high sides or did they receive them later? Interesting to note that the surviving lot A112 tender now has low sides. Or did 2210 and 2222 receive tanks from lot A112 tenders? Its a possibility I hadn't considered before.

Edited March 16, 2021 by JimC

[MatthewCarty]

11 hours ago, JimC said:

I'm interested in the whole high side thing, and am keen on seeing dated photos of both tenders with high sides and tenders with scalloped frames where numbers are recorded/can be identified. 2210 was built in 1923. Lot A112 was 1925-Jan 26. By 1930 there were plenty of 4,000 gallon tenders about. So if we take the view that high sided tenders were built to cosmetically match Castle cabs, there's a fairly narrow window in time when one might have been converted. Tanks were swapped between chassis, there's little doubt about that, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence about how often it happened, but I suspect much rarer than boiler changes. So were 2210 and 2222 (and any others built with high sides or did they receive them later? Interesting to note that the surviving lot A112 tender now has low sides. Or did 2210 and 2222 receive tanks from lot A112 tenders? Its a possibility I hadn't considered before.

It's an interesting question to consider. I suspect the only way to get an answer now would require a lot of research to try and find a period of time where you could pinpoint high sided tenders connected to more than 10 locos. I don't think this is quite impossible but would certainly be very difficult. The other thing is (as with 7812 above) there are plenty of questionable identifications. I've just another one here which claims to be of 7822, but the absence of any other pictures of 7822 with high sided tenders makes me doubt it

(Picture from The Transport Treasury)

[Quarryscapes]

3 hours ago, MatthewCarty said:

It's an interesting question to consider. I suspect the only way to get an answer now would require a lot of research to try and find a period of time where you could pinpoint high sided tenders connected to more than 10 locos. I don't think this is quite impossible but would certainly be very difficult. The other thing is (as with 7812 above) there are plenty of questionable identifications. I've just another one here which claims to be of 7822, but the absence of any other pictures of 7822 with high sided tenders makes me doubt it

(Picture from The Transport Treasury)

 

I have a feeling that's 7803 Barcote Manor c1964

[Miss Prism]

An intermediate body on a non-scalloped underframe

 

 

[Miss Prism]

The origin of this underframe is somewhat disguised by the strengthener brackets on the hornguides. (Mogul 6347 at Neyland.)

 

[Miss Prism]

An original intermediate with a pukka A112 underframe. Probably 1926 (the loco's name was removed in 1927).

 

[Dawnflyer]

Hi all,

I have just joined and looked first t this subject having just modified my Bachmann Collett tender to give some variety away from the usual full coal loads.

I am quite pleased with the results although not perfect, the hardest bit was thinning down the inside surfaces which would be visible above the new coal line.

[Wenrash]

I have been following this discussion with great interest. If the Sixsmith book on the "Castles" is to be believed then 4088's first tender was 2374, which is the first of the "Intermediate's". There seems to be no rhyme or reason to all this. You would think therefore that 4089 would have 2375, but this is not so. 4089 had 2210, and 4090 acquired 2228 both standard 3500 gal  tenders. 4091 is listed to have 1539, which is one of the Dean 4000 gal tenders. So no pattern.

2374 went to 4084 on 3/27 the book says. 4016's first tender was 2380. 4032's first was 2381.  It appears they were fitted with what was around.  4074 supposedly received 2375 om 3/25. This can not be correct if they were not produced until 7/25 - 1/26.

 

I am intrigued about 3500 gal tank swaps. From my engineering experience, and looking at all the rivet holes that have to drilled in the deck angles, it is very difficult to get all the different tender tanks to match. Just to make it more difficult, there were cross frame spreaders in the well with outriggers both sides to be riveted to the frames! This is not easy and would need drilling patterns and construction jigs to manufacture accurately for riveting. I have not read, or seen, how the tenders were made. The GWR seem to think of tenders as after thoughts.

So what evidence is there that there were tank swaps?

Miss P's photo of 3206 is documented, with the donor tank and frame numbers, in the GWRJ and occurred in BR times.

 

Richard Ashenden

[MatthewCarty]

1 hour ago, Wenrash said:

I have been following this discussion with great interest. If the Sixsmith book on the "Castles" is to be believed then 4088's first tender was 2374, which is the first of the "Intermediate's". There seems to be no rhyme or reason to all this. You would think therefore that 4089 would have 2375, but this is not so. 4089 had 2210, and 4090 acquired 2228 both standard 3500 gal  tenders. 4091 is listed to have 1539, which is one of the Dean 4000 gal tenders. So no pattern.

2374 went to 4084 on 3/27 the book says. 4016's first tender was 2380. 4032's first was 2381.  It appears they were fitted with what was around.  4074 supposedly received 2375 om 3/25. This can not be correct if they were not produced until 7/25 - 1/26.

 

I am intrigued about 3500 gal tank swaps. From my engineering experience, and looking at all the rivet holes that have to drilled in the deck angles, it is very difficult to get all the different tender tanks to match. Just to make it more difficult, there were cross frame spreaders in the well with outriggers both sides to be riveted to the frames! This is not easy and would need drilling patterns and construction jigs to manufacture accurately for riveting. I have not read, or seen, how the tenders were made. The GWR seem to think of tenders as after thoughts.

So what evidence is there that there were tank swaps?

Miss P's photo of 3206 is documented, with the donor tank and frame numbers, in the GWRJ and occurred in BR times.

 

Richard Ashenden

Interesting you mention 4089 with tender 2210. This is one of those reported to been converted to an intermediate pattern. This tender is now preserved with 4073 but has standard sides (http://www.ten.rhrp.org.uk/tens/TenderInfo.asp?Ref=19).

According to https://www.brdatabase.info/locoqry.php?action=locodata&type=S&id=4073&loco=4073, this was also the tender 4073 was fitted with from new. Coincidence?!? Also strange is that when you click on the tender details on br database, 4073 isn't listed... only 4089 as you mentioned. Maybe a picture of 4089 between 08/07/1925 and 04/1926 when it gained T1785 can be found.

 

Here is a picture of 4016 in 1926 with what presumably is 2380 according to https://www.brdatabase.info/locoqry.php?action=locodata&id=4016&type=S&loco=4016