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

[WFPettigrew]

 

I would like to pose a question for the erudite masses here, following an email exchange with Ron Allison, the Furness Railway wagons guru at the Cumbrian Railways Assocation.

 

Ron mentioned that it has appeared in print that the FR had more 2 plank wagons than any other pre group railway company. 

 

He finds this very hard indeed to believe.  The total FR wagon fleet handed over to the LMS in 1923 was just over 7500 wagons, and that includes non-revenue vehicles like loco coal waogns, ballast wagons and brake vans.  Ron also points out that the FR didn't classify wagons by their planks which makes it very hard to know accurate figures - the Diagram Book produced by the FR for the LMS just prior to the Grouping does feature numbers for the various types of wagon listed, but given that some of the other information in there is demonstrably wrong (e.g. gunpowder wagons which are claimed to be introduced in 1913 that other sources say only had a single wheel single sided brake - a new wagon in 1913 would have legally been required to have brakes on all four wheels), it's hard to know how much the totals quoted can be trusted.

 

Would anyone be able to offer any insights that might prove or disprove the assertion?  I know the Caley had 2 planks, as did the LNW, to name but two other, large pre-grouping companies and there must have been others?

 

All the best

 

Neil 

All the best

[Compound2632]

30 minutes ago, WFPettigrew said:

Would anyone be able to offer any insights that might prove or disprove the assertion?  I know the Caley had 2 planks, as did the LNW, to name but two other, large pre-grouping companies and there must have been others?

 

Where do wagons with three side planks and two end planks fit? (Midland lowsides to Drg. 10.) 

 

The Great Western built 4,388 two-plank wagons (that I know of) of various dimensions but also 6,333 three-plank wagons of the same dimensions as the later lots of two-plank wagons, so how to distinguish? In a period when plank widths could vary from a bit under 7" to 12" - ofttimes on the same wagon - the number of planks is a spurious measure. As for the habit that has recently arisen among some modellers and manufacturers to refer to wood-bodied open goods and/or mineral wagons as "plank wagons"! Plankers.

 

That said, the LNWR rather conveniently but almost certainly coincidentally, but its Emmett-period open goods wagons on diagrams D1, D2, and D4, matching the number of planks. D3 is hors-série having two-plank dropsides.

 

Anyway, according to LNWR Wagons Vol. 1, there were about 14,000 D2 wagons of 15' 6" length over headstocks in service in 1889, after which the total declined despite the building of about 4,700 further wagons 16' 0" long thereafter up to 1906. However, only 453 were left at grouping, of which the great majority were the longer length. (This demonstrates that Ratio, when they repackaged their LNWR wagon kits, emphasising their LMS-ness, knew what they were about, deleting the D2. Possibly.)

 

So it's possible that the Furness might have contributed more two-plank wagons to the LMS than any other English company. I don't know about the Scottish companies. But it's certainly not the case that the Furness had more, over the course of its existence. 

Edited June 27, 2023 by Compound2632

[Compound2632]

Someone had noticed a pause in modelling. With the re-opening of Nuneham Viaduct, I've the run of the dining room table two days a week, compensating for my ejection from reclaimed bedrooms. I've finshed soldering together the D&S LNWR D21 medium cattle wagon (right):

 

 

I think I'd mentioned the idea of replacing the whitemetal axleguards with MJT etched brass ones but I changed my mind after someone mentioned the distinctive shape of LNWR axleguards. The D&S castings have a chamfer on the rear of the axleguard wings, so they present a nice thin edge to the world.

 

I'll probably snip off the buffer heads and drill through for turned ones. I'm not very convinced by the brake gear either, so that may change. The brake block unit moved while being soldered then refused to be coaxed back, so it's a bit far from the wheel, besides which it's set for the wider gauges.

Edited June 27, 2023 by Compound2632
typo.

[MarcD]

Most of the cambrian's wagon stock was 2 planks both fixed side and drop side and they were used to move slate. The Furness two planks has an extrodany long life in traffic but ths was only because they were the only wagons that could be loaded at the slate wharf at Kirkby. The last ones only being sold out of service, to BHSC, in the late 1950's when the slate wharf whent out of use. Is the key to two plank wagon Roofing Slate? LNWR used them in North Wales, as did the Cambrian and the GWR. Furness used them at Kirkby and Coniston and the Cally at Ballachulish. The only place I can't think that extracted slate and had a mainline railway conection but didn't use two plank wagons was Delabole Slate Quarry in Cornwall which was connected to the LSWR who used 1 plank with 12 in sides or 3plk drop side wagons.

 

Marc

[Compound2632]

But the key point is not number of planks but depth of side.

 

The wagon plank, unlike Planck's constant, is not an invariant constant of nature and hence can be only a descriptive, not a quantitative, unit of measure.

[MarcD]

The Furness and the Cambrian wagons were exactly the same size at 1ft6 high(from the floor), LNWR were 1ft10,  as was the GWR.

Marc

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, MarcD said:

The Furness and the Cambrian wagons were exactly the same size at 1ft6 high(from the floor), LNWR were 1ft10,  as was the GWR.

 

Midland lowside wagons being 1' 9" from at least 1858 to 1916.

[billbedford]

Does anyone know when the 10A axlebox was introduced?

[Compound2632]

12 minutes ago, billbedford said:

Does anyone know when the 10A axlebox was introduced?

 

Yes, I do - or at least, I'm pretty sure. The drawing, Drg. 780, was entered in the C&W drawing register on 13 March 1889. It was used on coke wagons (D342) of Lot 221, entered in the lot list on 7 January 1889 (Midland Wagons Plate 115) and on 8-ton highside end-door wagons (D351) of Lot 244, entered in the lot list on 14 May 1890 (Midland Wagons Plate 110). It seems probable it was being used on standard 8-ton highside wagons (D299) and other 8-ton wagons from mid-1889. The first lot of 8-ton hopper wagons (D343), Lot 200 of 16 January 1888, had non-standard (for the Midland) round-bottomed axleboxes (Midland Wagons Plate 118).

 

Carriage & Wagon Committee minute 2401 of 14 November 1889:

 

Wagon Spring Boxes

                              Mr Clayton reported as being unable to obtain various kinds of wagon ironwork which had been ordered since March last.

[kitpw]

39 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

ordered since March last.

Not exactly a 'just in time' supply chain - as the minutes are dated November 1889, and I assume that the wagon parts were still not to hand on that date, that's some lead time on a March '89 order.  I wonder what caused the shortage?

 

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, kitpw said:

Not exactly a 'just in time' supply chain - as the minutes are dated November 1889, and I assume that the wagon parts were still not to hand on that date, that's some lead time on a March '89 order.  I wonder what caused the shortage?

 

There was a complaint some years earlier that some firms, having secured a large Midland order, treated it as a fall-back job to doe between other orders.

 

Also, one has to be a bit wary of lot list dates. For some new types of wagons, the lot list date is a a week or two ahead of the date the drawing was entered in the register, and it could be up to 18 months or two years before a whole lot was complete. 

 

On other occasions, the minutes give authorisation after the event...

 

 

[Penlan]

20 hours ago, MarcD said:

.......LNWR were 1ft10, .....

Described as 20" in the Wagon Stock listings.....

[Andy Vincent]

On 27/06/2023 at 12:51, Compound2632 said:

I think I'd mentioned the idea of replacing the whitemetal axleguards with MJT etched brass ones but I changed my mind after someone mentioned the distinctive shape of LNWR axleguards

 

 

RCH (Masokits sprung) on the left, LNWR (Dan Pinnock rocking, now via EM Gauge Society) on the right. For comparison, you only want to consider the angled part of the wing as the assumed floor height is different. Principle differences are that the legs are wider in the LNWR version and the wings have a sharper angle. The dimensions are on some of the drawings in the LNWR books and I also have an original drawing but neither the books nor the drawing are to hand but I can look it up tonight. 

 

 

 

Edited June 28, 2023 by Andy Vincent
Added rocking clarification for D&S version

[Compound2632]

A few days ago, I received my HMRS membership card along with a letter of welcome, followed today by the summer issue of the Journal and the newsletter Points.

 

I am interested to see that I am member no. 6992. Assuming the Society treats new members as additions to stock rather than as renewals of withdrawn or broken-up members, this figure would appear to imply that new members have joined at the rate of a little under 100 per year. I understand that that is not the current rate. What would need to happen to attract new members at the rate of 100 per year?

 

I have observed in various voluntary organisations that I have been or am involved in, a growing tendency of members to regard the organisation as a service provider, rather than as something in which to be an active participant, without consideration as to who is providing the service aspects or forethought as to what will happen to the service when those people are no longer able to provide it. You know the sort of thing: "The Society ought to be doing X", which invites the reply, too tart to give in fact: "Excellent suggestion; yes, it ought. Please come and make it happen"!

Edited June 28, 2023 by Compound2632

[WFPettigrew]

On 27/06/2023 at 12:16, Compound2632 said:

So it's possible that the Furness might have contributed more two-plank wagons to the LMS than any other English company. I don't know about the Scottish companies. But it's certainly not the case that the Furness had more, over the course of its existence. 

 

Thank you Stephen for such a clear demolition of the suggestion!  And also to @MarcD and @Penlan for further input. 

 

Much appreciated. 

 

Oh and 

 

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Assuming the Society treats new members as additions to stock rather than as renewals of withdrawn or broken-up members

 

this did make me chuckle.  Only in this thread would that make perfect sense... !

[magmouse]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

What would need to happen to attract new members at the rate of 100 per year?

 

Well, your 100/year figure assumes that the joining rate is constant over the lifetime of the society, which may or may not be the case. Perhaps the more important figure is the net increase/reduction in numbers - is the HMRS growing or shrinking? Your question implies it is shrinking, which of course means the society is at risk, at least in the long term.

 

For me, I might join the HMRS - I can see the value, both in terms of direct benefits and a general sense of 'use it or lose it' - as with small suppliers, we need to support the people that support the hobby, because it is in our own interests to do so.

 

The slight thing that puts me off is that I am already a member of the O Gauge Guild, the Scale Seven Group and the Association of 16mm Narrow Gauge Modellers. Given my interests, I should probably join the Great Western Study Group. Where does this stop? It's not so much a matter of money - I am fortunate enough to be able to afford the outlay - but I could end up spending all my time following the publications, forums and meetings of the various associations, and not actually doing any modelling...

 

Other people's mileage may vary, as they say. I do completely agree with your point about the 'service provider' mindset, though. In my experience the only effective way to get people to contribute is to ask them directly - broadcasting calls for volunteers is rarely effective.

 

Nick.

[Compound2632]

32 minutes ago, magmouse said:

Well, your 100/year figure assumes that the joining rate is constant over the lifetime of the society, which may or may not be the case. Perhaps the more important figure is the net increase/reduction in numbers - is the HMRS growing or shrinking?

 

Yes, it's a crude and simple average rate.

 

It would be for a member of the HMRS's committee to comment on the current rate of change of membership, if they wished to do so.

Edited June 28, 2023 by Compound2632

[Andy Vincent]

47 minutes ago, magmouse said:

is the HMRS growing or shrinking?

It, like most similar societies, is slowly shrinking. Indeed, I recently saw it suggested that there may only be one line society that is growing (L&Y). There has been much debate about why this is when the hobby seems to be at least holding its own. I think part of the reason is that much of that growth comes from post-48 modellers where there is only really DEMU. In turn, that is perhaps because most of the post-48 drawings have been retained by the industry and so there isn't an available archive in the way that many of the pre-48 line societies have created.

 

Personally, I think that a greater reason is that so little line society information that has been digitized (with a few honourable exceptions, Stephen!). If you look at how several of these societies operate it is based around a building that can be visited so that material can be studied in person. That model is one that does not appeal to those who have grown up as a Google generation. It also means that such societies do not rank highly in search results so get caught in a vicious circle.

 

In terms of the HMRS (where I am a recently co-opted Trustee, but commenting here in a personal capacity), we are in the early stages at looking into the logistics of substantially scaling up our rate of digitization with a view to making material more easily accessible. Having a workflow where people can also contribute from home will also hopefully bring forward more active volunteers.

Edited June 28, 2023 by Andy Vincent
fixed vicious spelling - although viscous is apt in that it is a cycle that is hard to escape!!

[magmouse]

Thanks for providing that context, Andy - it all makes sense as an explanation of what we are seeing. At age 60, I am not exactly someone who has grown up with Google, but I certainly have a strong preference for digital access to materials. Certainly for me, online access to archives and other information I need for the hobby (or I am just interested in) would be a strong incentive to join a society such as HMRS. I might even be persuaded to join a digitisation project, once I retire fully.*

 

Nick.

 

* I moved 18 months ago to a part-time role, which reduced my working hours to those of a normal full-time job. Mainly my own fault - I keep getting involved in things....

[Compound2632]

10 hours ago, Andy Vincent said:

Personally, I think that a greater reason is that so little line society information that has been digitized.

 

More than you think, I would say, but less than one would like. There does seem to be an expectation that digitised material should be available for free, without the understanding that the costs involved can be considerable; besides which, there is still the question of preserving the original material and continuing to make it accessible, which also carries considerable costs, especially for those societies that maintain their own archive. Thus some societies will make a charge for digital copies to members and non-members, others to non-members only, or have a discount for members (the HMRS does this). There's a balance to be struck, for those societies that are registered charities, between the public benefit obligation and balancing the books. (There are also in some cases issues of copyright - a particularly fraught question with photographs.)

 

But the real limit to any digitisation project is volunteers. That's where the response to: "The Society should make its archives available on-line" needs to be "We look forward to seeing you at our Study Centre on a working group day."

 

As for cataloguing...

Edited June 29, 2023 by Compound2632
typo.

[Jol Wilkinson]

10 hours ago, Andy Vincent said:

It, like most similar societies, is slowly shrinking. Indeed, I recently saw it suggested that there may only be one line society that is growing (L&Y). There has been much debate about why this is when the hobby seems to be at least holding its own. I think part of the reason is that much of that growth comes from post-48 modellers where there is only really DEMU. In turn, that is perhaps because most of the post-48 drawings have been retained by the industry and so there isn't an available archive in the way that many of the pre-48 line societies have created.

 

Personally, I think that a greater reason is that so little line society information that has been digitized (with a few honourable exceptions, Stephen!). If you look at how several of these societies operate it is based around a building that can be visited so that material can be studied in person. That model is one that does not appeal to those who have grown up as a Google generation. It also means that such societies do not rank highly in search results so get caught in a vicious circle.

 

In terms of the HMRS (where I am a recently co-opted Trustee, but commenting here in a personal capacity), we are in the early stages at looking into the logistics of substantially scaling up our rate of digitization with a view to making material more easily accessible. Having a workflow where people can also contribute from home will also hopefully bring forward more active volunteers.

The LNWR Society is healthy and I believe that membership is steadily on the increase.

 

It has a active group of volunteers scanning and digitising its archive, which is accessible online. The Study Centre at Kenilworth is regularly open and the Society runs and attends a number of events and shows. It has a strong Facebook presence which is regarded as effective in promoting the Society and gaining new members. It also produces both a quarterly Newsletter and the Journal as well as the twice yearly "Modelling the LNWR". 

 

So it would appear that good accessibility is an important factor.

[Compound2632]

At a recent meeting of the Line Societies Liaison Group, most societies reported membership as steady, with some showing a slight decline, while others, such as the Midland Railway Society, showing a slight increase. But that headline figure disguise the fact the there are people joining at a steady rate, more or less offsetting the loss of members to anno domini etc. - it seems turnover is around the 5% level or so.*

 

Some years ago, I think as many as twenty, the five Scottish line societies formed a Forum of Scottish Line Societies, with the thought in mind that they might eventually have to amalgamate to remain viable in the face of falling membership - but the encouraging thing is that that day is still evidently far distant. (If I recall correctly, the Cumbrian Railway Association is also a member of the Forum.)

 

What is increasingly a problem for some societies is filling committee vacancies and finding people willing and able to take on the various tasks that enable a society to function. Last year I was treasurer and de-facto secretary of our Scout Group; fortunately we now have a new treasurer but I am filling the role of secretary, which I'd really rather not be doing, it being now four years since either of my boys were in Scouting as Youth Members. But this is a classic example: parents/carers regarding Scouts as a service provider rather than an activity that calls for their committment as well as that of their young persons.

 

*Coincidentally, the renewal rate for Midland wagons...

Edited June 29, 2023 by Compound2632

[Andy Vincent]

7 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

But this is a classic example: parents/carers regarding Scouts as a service provider rather than an activity that calls for their committment

 

I became an FA qualified coach to my kids football team for much the same reasons. Around that time I was struck by a comment our then secretary made that many parents regarded their club fees as the cheapest childcare they could get. Thankfully, my kids have now moved on so I no longer have to try and build goals pretty much on my own as the parents waved kids goodbye and headed home!

[Ian Smith]

I think that getting others involved with running anything is an age old problem. One of my other hobbies is radio controlled car racing, I have been club secretary for more years then I care to remember (over 15 years), the same treasurer has been in post longer than I have (over 25 years!) and the same chairman has held the post for several years too.  At each AGM no one ever puts their names forward to take up the reins, so the 3 of us default to continue.  We have just 2 other club members who are prepared to form a committee.

 

At 62 I am the youngest of the 3 by quite some margin, but one wonders how long we will continue.

 

Getting back to railway matters, I’ve finally joined the Great Western Study Group, and looking at the newsletters so far received, the group journal (Pannier) has finally got a new editor, the previous one continuing long beyond his preferred retirement - it almost seemed that an ultimatum was the only way to get new blood into the role (a kind of “that’s it, no more publications unless someone new steps up”).  But equally, it’s not just people to do the role that is needed, they also need input from the membership as a whole, our 2mm Association magazine editor regularly requests articles for the future magazines, as without that there can be no magazine!

[Compound2632]

1 minute ago, Ian Smith said:

I think that getting others involved with running anything is an age old problem. One of my other hobbies is radio controlled car racing, I have been club secretary for more years then I care to remember (over 15 years), the same treasurer has been in post longer than I have (over 25 years!) and the same chairman has held the post for several years too.  At each AGM no one ever puts their names forward to take up the reins, so the 3 of us default to continue.  We have just 2 other club members who are prepared to form a committee.

 

With the greatest respect to you and your colleagues, this does highlight another aspect of the problem: that where the running of a group has been in the hands of the same group of people for a long time - people who presumably know each other very well and, one hopes, get on very well - it can be quite intimidating for a younger person* to join the committee. This is where one has to look at the way people are recruited to the committee - inviting someone can be much more effective than just calling for volunteers, as it implies that the invitee is wanted and will be welcomed by the existing committee members.

 

*In this context, someone in their 50s!