More Pre-Grouping Wagons in 4mm - the D299 appreciation thread.

[Western Star]

14 minutes ago, wagonman said:

I read somewhere that cattle were usually loaded head to tail. Quite how they managed that I have no idea! Something to investigate perhaps...

Maybe that is how the animals are arranged on the sprue?

[Ian Smith]

21 minutes ago, wagonman said:

I read somewhere that cattle were usually loaded head to tail. Quite how they managed that I have no idea! Something to investigate perhaps...

 

Richard

I agree. I’ve also read that somewhere. I imagine it was to prevent injury (unlike modern cattle which I think have their horns burnt out, many photos in the earlier period show that cattle seemed to retain their horns).

Ian

[Compound2632]

I've started a topic on this question:

 

[jwealleans]

If I may, another identification question?

 

A current visitor from the Far Colonies acquired this this week.   It's scratchbuilt and missing a central bolster.

 

 

 

It's a scale 27' and 9' x 9' wheelbase. My first thought was Great Western and it's fairly close to a Beaver, but was there a version without ends?  I'm not as well equipped with GW literature as for some other railways.

 

 

 

 

[Siberian Snooper]

There's a 25ft 6 wheel bolster wagon on the HMRS website, sorry I'm not able to provide a link.

 

 

[Anotheran]

1 hour ago, jwealleans said:

If I may, another identification question?

 

A current visitor from the Far Colonies acquired this this week.   It's scratchbuilt and missing a central bolster.

 

 

 

It's a scale 27' and 9' x 9' wheelbase. My first thought was Great Western and it's fairly close to a Beaver, but was there a version without ends?  I'm not as well equipped with GW literature as for some other railways.

Looking at GWR Goods Wagons (Atkins, Beard & Tourret) page190, other than the missing central bolster, it looks very like the BEAVER C (built to diagram J6 in 1889 of which there was one, or converted from broad gauge to diagram J10 in 1880 of which there were eleven). Dia J6 was 27'7" over the headstocks, dia J10 27'6", both with a 9' x 9' wheelbase. But I'm sure there are others out there more expert than me.

[Compound2632]

36 minutes ago, Siberian Snooper said:

There's a 25ft 6 wheel bolster wagon on the HMRS website, sorry I'm not able to provide a link.

 

Couldn't find that - can you give the reference?

 

Is the model really missing a bolster? Three bolsters sounds, if you will excuse my saying so, odd.

[jwealleans]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

Is the model really missing a bolster?

 

There's a mark in the paint (not really visible in the photographs) where something has been and the drawing of a Beaver I found had a central bolster, so we assume there has been one.   It's left a trace the right size and shape.

[Anotheran]

8 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Is the model really missing a bolster? Three bolsters sounds, if you will excuse my saying so, odd.

Maybe it's a GWR thing... both the diagrams in Atkins et al for diagram J6 and diagram J10 (figures 161 and 169 respectively) and the photograph of number 40987 to J10 (plate 215) show three bolsters. So if it is meant to be a BEAVER C then it is missing one. However, I know even less about other companies than the GWR (and I don't have books for them either) so BEAVER C could be a completely incorrect identification and it may not be missing a bolster. (But it does look like the pictures in the book to me)

[jwealleans]

The only other company I could think of who were keen on 6 wheel flat(tish) wagons were the NBR, but we didn't find anything similar in the books I have.

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, Anotheran said:

Maybe it's a GWR thing... both the diagrams in Atkins et al for diagram J6 and diagram J10 (figures 161 and 169 respectively) and the photograph of number 40987 to J10 (plate 215) show three bolsters. So if it is meant to be a BEAVER C then it is missing one. However, I know even less about other companies than the GWR (and I don't have books for them either) so BEAVER C could be a completely incorrect identification and it may not be missing a bolster. (But it does look like the pictures in the book to me)

 

i'll believe you. Poking around with google I found a 3D printed beaver with three bolsters. I suppose the Great Western worked on the principle of one bolster per axle! I'm not aware of any other 6-wheel bolster wagon. The Midland had some 6-wheel 15 ton and 20 ton flat wagons for agricultural machinery, dating from the 1870s/80s - when axlebox/journal technology wasn't up to more than 7 tons or so per axle. That fits with the dates you gave for these beavers.

[Anotheran]

Looking again at the diagrams... There could be some logic to three bolsters... Each is directly above one of the three axles, which means that weight is equally distributed from the bolsters directly above the axles. Obviously the wagon frame should be distributing the weight evenly, but I guess a little bit of help in that distribution by putting the bolsters in the right place can't be a bad thing.

[Compound2632]

6 minutes ago, Anotheran said:

Looking again at the diagrams... There could be some logic to three bolsters... Each is directly above one of the three axles, which means that weight is equally distributed from the bolsters directly above the axles. Obviously the wagon frame should be distributing the weight evenly, but I guess a little bit of help in that distribution by putting the bolsters in the right place can't be a bad thing.

 

That's also true of the earliest Midland double bolster wagons of 1896 but later ones had the bolsters at slightly smaller spacing than the wheelbase.

[wagonman]

It has what look like GWR oil axleboxes, though this could be incidental.

 

 

[Siberian Snooper]

16 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Couldn't find that - can you give the reference?

 

Is the model really missing a bolster? Three bolsters sounds, if you will excuse my saying so, odd.

 

No link,  but here's the url:- https://hmrs.org.uk > hmrs-934--15...

HTH

 

 

[Compound2632]

29 minutes ago, Siberian Snooper said:

No link,  but here's the url:- https://hmrs.org.uk > hmrs-934--15...

 

That's just a link to the HMRS home page. It is straightforward to embed low-res versions of HMRS photos if they are on the website, thus:

 

 

[HMRS photo ref ABZ306]

 

It was that photo ref I was hoping for.

[Siberian Snooper]

Third time lucky

 

HMRS 934: 15 Ton - 6 Wheel Rail Wagon - 9ft/9ft w/b - 25ft over body.

 

 

[corneliuslundie]

Ah, a drawing rather than a photo.

Jonathan

[Nick Lawson]

On 08/03/2023 at 15:24, wagonman said:

I read somewhere that cattle were usually loaded head to tail. Quite how they managed that I have no idea!

 

You can see how easily that would work for dogs though.

[Compound2632]

12 hours ago, Nick Lawson said:

You can see how easily that would work for dogs though.

 

There's that well-known photo of a pack of hounds pouring out of a Great Western hound van.

 

No. 2 Son returns from uni tomorrow so today's task is to remove all evidence of modelling and research activities from his room.

[wagonman]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

There's that well-known photo of a pack of hounds pouring out of a Great Western hound van.

 

No. 2 Son returns from uni tomorrow so today's task is to remove all evidence of modelling and research activities from his room.

 

Ah yes, the end of Hilary...

 

 

[Grahams]

I found the issue with plastic animals is that they don't squash together. Here is my attempt to load sheep realistically in a wagon. It is a Welshpool and Llanfair narrow gauge livestock wagon. which is why is looks like too few sheep for a full standard gauge wagon.

Printing sheep individually would result in about half the number. I had been informed that the sheep would literally have been pushed in, like commuters on a Tokyo subway train, so I let them cut into each other on the CAD model. They are all clones of the same sheep but I'm no expert and they look different enough to me. Some are reflected left and right. The wool thickness would mean it's not as cruel as it looks and in our earlier eras, I'm sure anti-cruelty did not rule over cost.

This method would also apply to cattle I am sure. The animals do not normally need legs so printing time and cost can be reduced by making dummy loads a bit like coal etc.

 

Edited March 10, 2023 by Grahams
clarification

[Compound2632]

38 minutes ago, Grahams said:

I found the issue with plastic animals is that they don't squash together.

 

Get yourselves organised down there!

 

 

For cattle, legs are necessary, since they can be seen through the slats in the truck's sides.

[WFPettigrew]

1 hour ago, wagonman said:

 

Ah yes, the end of Hilary...

 

 

 

My first reading of this was to wonder how you knew the presumably fox victim of the aforementioned hounds was called Hilary....

[Grahams]

22 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Get yourselves organised down there!

Plasticine would work very well too! Take a while to make though, especially multiple wagons. Ah, if only there were a modern technology to design and make multiple items...