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

[phil_sutters]

16 hours ago, Penlan said:

I've never been sure about this photo, I'm wondering if it's been vertically squashed, because the height to length ratio's look wrong and the signal arms are rather slender.
But here's an example of an 'open' Cattle wagon.
.
 

Strangely, looking at the wheels of the open and the van, it looks as if the image has been squashed the other way, making the wheels look oval, with the vertical dimension greater than it should be.

[Compound2632]

31 minutes ago, phil_sutters said:

Strangely, looking at the wheels of the open and the van, it looks as if the image has been squashed the other way, making the wheels look oval, with the vertical dimension greater than it should be.

 

Assuming that's a D32 covered goods wagon, one has a scale for length and for height, even if they are different scales.

 

But this is, I recall, only a corner or edge of a photo and with the glass plate cameras of the time there is often radial distortion - see 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distortion_(optics)#Radial_distortion

I'm not entirely sure but I think this arises from optimising the lens shape for uniform focal plane, avoiding spherical aberration, i.e. the whole image is in focus, at the cost of being distorted at the edges.  

[airnimal]

1 hour ago, Penlan said:

Pages 46 - 48 of Vol 3 - LNWR Wagons.

Something like this !

[Compound2632]

Speaking of LNWR wagons, browsing the Midland Railway Study Centre online catalogue, I came across this; I think I've seen it before, or similar:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue image of MRSC 31505.]

 

The point of interest is that the train is made up, at least at this rear end, of LNWR D1 one-plank wagons. The Midland did not have a great many wagons of this sort: those it had, it regarded as specially-constructed wagons, such as the 300 long lowsided wagons, D336; there were also wagons for the conveyance of agricultural implements, such as D333, of which there were no more than 90 at any one time. There might be one just to the left of the building.

 

The date is, presumably, 1 May 1906 or thereabouts, so contemporary with this advert of January 1906:

 

 

[Embedded link to Grace's Guide.]

 

The National Archives catalogue has an entry for a 1951 catalogue for this firm, held by the Museum of English Rural Life, which gives their address as Lincolnshire Ironworks, Stamford. I've also found this, that purports to show their works:

 

 

[Embedded link to Christie's website.]

 

This shows a rail-connected works. The OS 25" maps on the NLS website show two such, both on the Great Northern Stamford & Essendine line: the large Rutland Engineering Works, which is a different firm, and an un-named Engineering Works immediately to its north, which is on the 1928 revision but not that of 1902. Grace's Guide's earliest reference for the firm is June 1907, so these 1906 adverts were presumably to promote the firm when it was just starting up. EDIT: I note, though, that the advert says every prize won "since 1900".

 

On the other hand, the location for the postcard photo appears to be the Midland Syston-Peterborough line, with the Great Northern engine shed in the background and the Welland beyond, the line being on a low embankment: https://maps.nls.uk/view/114655143. The train is standing on the wrong line but I suppose it has been set back from the MR / GNR junction purely for the photo.

 

So we have a Midland train composed of LNWR wagons, loaded with the products of a firm whose works are on the GNR line... 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Compound2632
Date of 1900 for the firm?

[Penlan]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

But this is, I recall, only a corner or edge of a photo ....... I'm not entirely sure but I think this (distortion) arises from optimising the lens shape for uniform focal plane, avoiding spherical aberration, i.e. the whole image is in focus, at the cost of being distorted at the edges.  

Yes 🙂 and y e s ! ! !

[MarcD]

Just goes to show that you can't have enough LNWR Dia 1 wagons.

Marc

[Jol Wilkinson]

21 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

AFAIK, the early open D20 on display was from new castings creating by modifying the patterns for the closed version. I don't yet know when it will be supplied as a separate kit. 

 

Also in the pipeline from LRM are a LNWR Ballast wagon and a LNWR Loco Coal wagon.

Nope, I got that wrong, the early open LNWR D20 Small Cattle Wagon was modified from the castings for the roofed version. I have however suggested to John Redrup that the open version would be a popular option.

 

The LNWR Loco Coal wagon kit will be for the dumb buffered one, as Airnimal's excellent model. 

 

 

[Andy Vincent]

9 hours ago, Penlan said:

Isn't this typical, I've made a 'cross my heart, hope ..... ' promise to my wife not to buy (or even accept) anymore more kits, and then the market explodes with very suitable kits, after all these years............ 

 

Maybe I should apologise now - John/LRM isnt the only one bringing out some LNWR wagons  . . . ;-)

 

[Grahams]

On 15/06/2023 at 09:27, Compound2632 said:

this underframe, being by then standard, was used for the 10 ton lowside wagons of lot 905 of 1915, D818, which also had wheelsets with 9" x 3¾" journals but at the non-standard centres of 6' 7½". The second batch. lot 915, were only 8-ton capacity, being given old wheelsets due to wartime shortages of new wheels and axles. Graham can probably tell us if the different capacities also resulted in different bearing springs.  

I've had a further root round in the drawings. I now understand what "3B" means on Drg 4340 (the D818 16ft lowside of August 1915). 3B refers to the bearing spring type,

shown on Drg 17, screenshot here

. Even more interesting is the note on Drg 4340  leading us to Drg 4362

 

Drg 4362 shows the arrangement for the non-standard 6ft 7 1/2 inch wheelset centres using oil axleboxes No 2 with 8 x 3 3/4 journals. It refers us to Drg 17 with the 3B springs and different spring shoes. Drg 4362 also states Lot 905 are 10T wagons.

It seems that the links between these drawings either clarifies some of the unknowns or asks even more questions! I will keep delving into the drawings to see if any more clarification arises.

I would like to express my thanks to the Midland Railway Study Centre in Derby for making this treasure trove of drawings available for research.

Edited June 21, 2023 by Grahams

[billbedford]

3 B in these drawings refers to the number of leaves that are full width, ie not tapered at the ends. Though I can't guess what the 'B' actually stands for. 

[Compound2632]

9 hours ago, Grahams said:

shown on Drg 17, 

 

... which was originally made in January 1874! Though I think had been re-drawn and updated numerous times. Titled "Bearing and Buffing Springs for Wagons", it shows:

• No. 4 Buffing Spring for Wagons
• No. 3 Bearing Spring for 8 ton Wagons (per Graham's extract), to which has been added:
• No. 3A with Bent Plate Shown in Red (I'm looking at a monochrome scan but presumably the added quarter-curve in the second plate), dated 16 March 1894, and
• No. 3B with the additional plate, added 2 October 1915
• No. 5 Bearing Spring Goods Brake Van, this has a loop or eye forged into the end of the top spring to take the pin for the swing-link suspension, this has a mass of emendations with only one date shown, 22 June 1898, by which the original version becomes 5B and
• No. 5A for Meat Vans, with the eye made by rolling up the end of the top spring, and No. 5 is for Fish Tank Trucks - which date from 1886/7...
• No. 6 Bearing Spring for Ballast Brake, which is similar to that for Goods Brakes but is 6' 0" rather than 4' 6" between centre of eyes; this too shows the change from forged to rolled eyes dated 22 June 1898.
• No. 12 Bearing Spring for 30 ton Boiler Truck; this I think refers to the Long Boiler Trucks of Drg. 78, bogie vehicles Nos. 29570 and 29571 built in 1875 by the Patent Shaft Co., Wednesbury.

So 3 is simply a reference number for the type of spring and B a suffix for a variation of the type; no other significance.

 

 

[Compressed crop from scan of microfiche copy of MR C&W Drg. 17, MRSC 88-D0579.]

 

Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12 cover all the springs needed for wagons being built in 1874-5; there are numerous other drawings for other types at later dates. But it's intriguing that the same drawing was still current to be emended twenty and forty years later!

[Grahams]

8 hours ago, billbedford said:

3 B in these drawings refers to the number of leaves that are full width, ie not tapered at the ends. Though I can't guess what the 'B' actually stands for. 

I'm not sure how that would relate in this case. It's actually "No. 3B" as opposed to "No. 3" and "No. 3A". They are both 12 leaves and 3B has two full width top leaves with different shaped ends. The 'standard' spring on the 16ft underframe is a 9 leaf with thicker plates and 2 full width top plates. It is a No. 31.

It seems to me that the Midland just used a number to describe the particular design of spring. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Grahams

[Grahams]

14 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

But it's intriguing that the same drawing was still current to be emended twenty and forty years later!

Yes indeed. I suppose your point about re-using the wheelsets has influenced the use of 3B springs in this case. 

The development of iron-based materials from wrought iron to spring steels and the production processes took place through this period and it must have led to the decreasing number of leaves we see as well as the ability to form the ends. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Grahams

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Grahams said:

The development of iron-based materials from wrought iron to spring steels and the production processes took place through this period and it must have led to the decreasing number of leaves we see as well as the ability to form the ends. 

 

Ah, yes, now I see that this would result in the change from forged eyes - wrought iron - to rolled eyes* - spring steel; the 1898 date seems relatively late though; perhaps there was a period in which eyes were forged in steel spring plates.

 

*I dare say there was some rolling of eyes in the smithy at this innovation taking work away from the men with hammers.

 

I had meant to comment on Lot 905 with 6' 7½" journal centres, noting that not only did this need a bespoke bearing shoe but also a joggle in the axleguards, to give the ¾" displacement outwards. I was wondering of this non-standard dimension was due to using European-made wheelsets, but 6' 7½" is ¾" more than 2.000 m. But I don't know what the European standard then was.

[Grahams]

I'm making the roof for the WD wagon converted from a D663A, Midland wagon number 23333. It happens that I have built a spare underframe and it will make a more interesting model than yet another D663A. 

The lids are thin, probably 7/8 inch and I reckon they have been made from standard tongue and groove floorboards. On the highest zoom, I can convince myself there is evidence of a tongue and groove on the bottom of the lid and there seems to be a join running up the lid. Floorboards would have been available and the Midland never made specials when standard was available. This would give them a reasonable seal when painted. I suppose the war was not expected to last very long by 1917 so there was considered less need for a durable seal on the lid. 

The hinges look like standard hinges but with only 3 bolts. I'll try some D305 hinges to see if they look right.

I reckon there was ironwork on the inside of the lids running along the wagon, seen protruding under the lid ends. 

The hasp and staple closures may be standard too. 

The ridge looks like a piece of 4 x 6 or thereabouts. 

I wonder how many were built and whether they were returned to normal revenue service after the war. It's still carrying its Midland number. It would have been a simple job to convert them back. 

Any comments or suggestions most welcome. 

[Compound2632]

6 minutes ago, Grahams said:

I wonder how many were built

 

There were 24 converted from 10 ton wagons with oil axleboxes, i.e. D663A, WD Nos. 37801-37824, and 50 converted from 8 ton wagons with grease axleboxes, i.e. D299, WD Nos. 37751-37800. There were much larger numbers of wagons thus converted from other companies: 950 LNWR 10 ton grease axlebox, 500 Great Central 10 ton oil axlebox, and 400 Great Western 10 ton oil axlebox wagons. The axlebox type mattered since the Nord would not accept grease axlebox stock, such was used only in the large ROD marshalling yards and other ROD lines. 

[C.E.R. Sherrington, ‘Rolling Stock of the Railway Operating Division, Royal Engineers, 1916-19, Part VII – British Wagon Stock sent Overseas’, The Railway Magazine Vol. LXXII No. 429 (March 1933); thanks to @Northroader for this reference.]

 

Sherrington describes these as "pill box" wagons but his explanation that they were for pre-cast sections of pill box fortifications seems certainly wrong; the term being used to describe how they were divided up into compartments.

 

During the Great War, 6,128 Midland wagons were loaned to the War Department for use in France. By December 1920, 5,974 had been returned, of which 5,901 had been repaired and returned to traffic. The repairs were in many cases heavy, as wagon bodies had been removed or altered to suit military requirements [R.W. Reid's monthly report to the C&W Committee, 16 December 1920, TNA RAIL 491/260]. So it's probable that these wagons were returned to traffic.

[Grahams]

31 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

There were 24 converted from 10 ton wagons with oil axleboxes, i.e. D663A, WD Nos. 37801-37824, and 50 converted from 8 ton wagons with grease axleboxes, i.e. D299, WD Nos. 37751-37800.

Stephen thank you and northroader very much for this info. Are there any more pictures of the wagons in the article? 

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Grahams said:

Are there any more pictures of the wagons in the article? 

 

No. The photo you posted is the only one known to me. But there are photos of the LNWR and GWR versions in the relevant wagon books. LNWR Wagons Vol. 1 p. 79 has a pair of photos of D9 No. 19162 as WD 36374, with the lid and side door closed, and open. I'm afraid I don't have GWR Goods Wagons here at the moment.

[Andy Vincent]

58 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

GWR Goods Wagons

Plate 405 on page 306. It has a slightly better view of the hinges which likely come down about a third of the top door but the longitudinal plank looks narrower to me (but could be the angle). GWR diagram O17 incidentally, based on O11 to which the survivors reverted. Order O.748 of April 1917 the book says.

Edited June 22, 2023 by Andy Vincent
Added diagrams and order details

[MarcD]

Could the last batch of 299's with the extra vertical strapping be the same as the WD wagons? I don't suppose there is a photo of the 299's in WD livery?

Marc

[Dave Hunt]

13 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

But it's intriguing that the same drawing was still current to be emended twenty and forty years later!

 That was quite common with locomotive drawings. I've seen drawings for Compounds and 4Fs, for instance, that were produced in 1910 and were still being updated in the 1950s.

 

Dave 

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, MarcD said:

Could the last batch of 299's with the extra vertical strapping be the same as the WD wagons? I don't suppose there is a photo of the 299's in WD livery?

 

Traffic Committee, Jan 18/17

37440    Renewal of Wagons.

                              Referring to minutes Nos. 36,442 and 36,701.

                              The Assistant General Manager reported that, having regard to the difficulty there is in obtaining wheels and axles for the renewal of ten-ton wagons and, also, bearing in mind that the Company is depleting their wagon stock owing to the demands of the War Office overseas, it would be an economical arrangement to authorise the Carriage and Wagon Superintendent to construct one thousand eight-ton wagons on renewals account so as to utilise two thousand pairs of wheels which he has in stock suitable for the purpose. He, therefore, recommended that this course be adopted.

                              The recommendation was approved and the matter referred to the Carriage and Wagon Committee.

 

... who passed it on to the Board.

 

Lot 919 for these wagons had in fact been entered in the list on 4 Jan 1917 and so they will have been constructed during 1917. Looking at the list in the Sherrington article, 250 8-ton grease-axlebox opens were sent to France in 1916-17 - evidently these will have been older wagons - and over 1,000 but less than 3,000  8-ton oil-axlebox opens in late 1918 (the balance being 10-ton opens, D663A - there was a batch of 2,000 that was a mix or 8-ton and 10-ton, followed by a batch of 1,000 8-ton wagons). It's possible that this included the Lot 919 wagons; the 10-ton opens that went to France had all been built since 1913. But we've seen that some grease-axlebox D299s were given oil axleboxes in the twentieth century.

 

No photographs in WD livery known to me beyond those in Midland Wagons.

[Chas Levin]

On 20/06/2023 at 15:17, Compound2632 said:

There had been some anxiety about the shade of green, owing to some publicity photos in which it looked quite yellow. These photos are taken in natural light on an overcast day; they represent well what I see with my own eyes, which is, I think, pretty much the colour one expects.

 

Yes, that looks like a very good representation of the NER green to me too: good job all round, looks like a lovely loco!

[Andy Vincent]

Since we are having a bit of a pause, I thought I would post some data that I meant to add to the discussion on buffer heights a while back.

 

The RCH repair specifications have the following:

• Minimum height from rail level to centre of buffer for wagons in service: 3'1" (loaded) and 3'2½" (unloaded)
• Height from rail level to centre of buffer for wagons (unloaded) coming out of repair shops: 3'3½" (minimum) and 3'6" (maximum)

These values were the same in the 1937, 1947 and 1953 handbooks.

[Grahams]

20 hours ago, Andy Vincent said:

Since we are having a bit of a pause, I thought I would post some data that I meant to add to the discussion on buffer heights a while back.

 

The RCH repair specifications have the following:

• Minimum height from rail level to centre of buffer for wagons in service: 3'1" (loaded) and 3'2½" (unloaded)
• Height from rail level to centre of buffer for wagons (unloaded) coming out of repair shops: 3'3½" (minimum) and 3'6" (maximum)

These values were the same in the 1937, 1947 and 1953 handbooks.

Interesting. 

The earlier Midland drawings have 3'4" (D305) and 3'5" (D299) and the later wagons tend to be 3'5". The D1666 which went straight to LMS was drawn at 3'5¼".

The convention seems to have been to draw them unloaded because the axleboxes are shown at the bottom of their travel. This makes sense. 

The brake vans I have looked at all have 3'4½". Loaded and unloaded would presumably be very similar for brake vans so that appears to be the 'nominal' height for the Midland.