.

[Mookie]

.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2022 by Mookie

[cctransuk]

Hello All,

 

purchased a few Dapol OO 7 plank 9' unpainted wagons for creating some P.O. Wagons using Robbies Rolling Stock transfers.

 

On opening the boxes, I find the chassis brake system different on both sides. One has the working for the brakes, on the other there are no brakes.On close examination the one side has been removed.

 

Is this normal for this style of wagon, or have I been sold duff products.

 

Kind regards,

 

Mookie

 

It looks like an attempt to represent single-sided brakes; however, there should be a V-hanger and a brake handle on the side without brakeshoes.

 

On the other hand, it could be a means of disposing of chassis which had damaged brakegear on one side !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Skinnylinny]

It looks like an attempt to represent single-sided brakes; however, there should be a V-hanger and a brake handle on the side without brakeshoes.

 

On the other hand, it could be a means of disposing of chassis which had damaged brakegear on one side !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Not all single-sided braked wagons had levers and V hangers on both sides! I'm modelling the pre-grouping period and have come across some wagons with only one lever and one brake shoe! In the earlier days of railways, it was not uncommon for a shunter to have to cross the tracks to reach the brake lever of a wagon that was only fitted with brakes on one side. 

 

The requirement for wagons to have a brake lever on either side, with both levers pointing to the right was not enacted until 1911, with a grace period allowing railways to continue running old stock with only one brake lever until 1938! With the intervention of WWII meaning wagon maintenance became less important, some wagons made it until the 1950s still with only one brake lever.

 

The chassis modelled is a wooden solebar chassis, and it looks as though there has been no provision for a V hanger on one side, so Dapol have removed the brake gear from their generic middle section of the chassis to match. The V hangers make me think the chassis is based on an RCH 1927 design - earlier designs were straight V shaped, rather than having the bends to become vertical at the top.

 

In short, this can be used to represent a wagon from 1927 up to probably the 1940s (with some examples lasting a bit longer).

Edited May 14, 2017 by Skinnylinny

[Mookie]

On 14/05/2017 at 12:23, Skinnylinny said:

Not all single-sided braked wagons had levers and V hangers on both sides! I'm modelling the pre-grouping period and have come across some wagons with only one lever and one brake shoe! In the earlier days of railways, it was not uncommon for a shunter to have to cross the tracks to reach the brake lever of a wagon that was only fitted with brakes on one side. 

 

The requirement for wagons to have a brake lever on either side, with both levers pointing to the right was not enacted until 1911, with a grace period allowing railways to continue running old stock with only one brake lever until 1938! With the intervention of WWII meaning wagon maintenance became less important, some wagons made it until the 1950s still with only one brake lever.

 

The chassis modelled is a wooden solebar chassis, and it looks as though there has been no provision for a V hanger on one side, so Dapol have removed the brake gear from their generic middle section of the chassis to match. The V hangers make me think the chassis is based on an RCH 1927 design - earlier designs were straight V shaped, rather than having the bends to become vertical at the top.

 

In short, this can be used to represent a wagon from 1927 up to probably the 1940s (with some examples lasting a bit longer).

 

 

.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Mookie

[The Johnster]

Thank you for the information. I didn't know that early wagons had brakes only on the one side (A pain for the shunter). It has put my mind at rest that I don't have to go through the process of sending them back.

 

Thanks again for the quick responses,

 

Kind regards,

 

Mookie.

 

A pain for the shunter sometimes more literally than you'd think, and all too often a brief pain curtailed by the shunter's shuffling off his mortal coil; having to cross tracks on which stock was moving, or, worse, being tempted to duck under between vehicles to get at the brake was extremely dangerous on top of a job that was fairly dangerous anyway!  The provision of brakes on both sides would seem to be a fairly easy thing to manage, but as has been said the owners, especially collieries, were not in any hurry to do this and the problem persisted into early BR days.

 

Private owner coal wagons were a thorn in the side of railway operations for a very long time.  Some, typically those of a small merchant who only owned a few, were immaculately kept as far as paintwork and livery were concerned for the advertising value, but most were owned by colliery combines, big steelworks, or large merchants such as MOY, and coal is dirty stuff.  Below the solebars they were universally neglected as their owners wanted them kept in traffic and earning money rather than missing a working for a bit of basic tlc, and constantly gave trouble with hotboxes, broken couplings, opening doors, dragging brakes, and anything else they could cause problems with; Thomas's 'troublesome trucks' have a basis in reality!  Until the RCH stepped in, many coal wagons had solid wooden 'dumb' buffers, something you'd associate more with the Stockton and Darlington, and horsehair axleboxes!

Edited May 14, 2017 by The Johnster

[Andy Hayter]

I would have set the start date for these wagons much earlier than 1927.

 

The U shaped keeper plates on the solebar above the W irons was typical of the 1907 RCH* design (and probably used well before then), but was not incorporated in the 1923 design.  Further I think the 1923 design stipulated brakes and brake handles on both sides (for all the reasons given above).  It would therefore be unusual - but not impossible - for wagons to be built in 1927 to a much outdated design, albeit that one sided brakes would be cheaper to build for the thrifty colliery owner placing his order with one of the wagon builders. 

 

I would therefore suggest that such wagons were probably already in   use at the turn of the last century. 

 

* RCH - Railways Clearing House whose responsibilities covered monitoring and organising charges for  the use of wagons off their home system as well as setting standards for various types of goods wagon.  In setting these standards they would incorporate best practice at the time and did not necessarily come up with revolutionary design.  That said they were responsible for ensuring forward momentum on things such as braking systems, lubrication of axles, buffing gear etc..  

[Compound2632]

Before I embark on a detailed critique / rant, can anyone tell me the dimensions of these wagons?

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Thanks for confirming the lack of Brake Gear one side is not a fault!

 

Dapol should possibly think about putting a slip stating this in the wagon boxes..

 

Though I was aware of one-side only brakes, I think this is a first RTR?

 

So, I was almost on the point of sending a question to the supplier!

 

Dapol "Ace Of Clubs" OO Wagon.

 

Funny that the O Gauge AOC wagons have brake gear both sides I believe?..

Edited May 31, 2017 by Sarahagain

[The Johnster]

My instinct would be to agree with Andy Hayter that this model represents a wagon predating the 1927 RCH standard.  Depending on the period you are modelling and how fussy you are about it, I would have thought single side braked wagons were uncommon after the grouping and I doubt if any lasted until WW2, at least in main line service (though I am happy to be proved wrong by someone of greater erudition).  Internal user wagons at collieries, steelworks, on dock systems and the like are another matter, and some real museum pieces survived in such places long after their use on the big railway had ended!  In such use, of course, it would usually be possible to configure things so that the brakes were all on the same side of the train and shunters would have been able to deal with them more easily, not to mention more safely!

[Steamport Southport]

Look in the wagon books by people like Essery. There are plenty of early wagons with one sided brakes well into the 1950s. ISTR there are quite a few photographs of Midland Railway wagons in BR livery still with them. It was only the sudden building of hundreds of thousands of new wagons in the mid 1950s that finally saw the end of them.

 

 

 

Jason

[Il Grifone]

One sided wagon brakes were the norm in the nineteenth century (when they had any at all). Some were only on one wheel and operated by a long lever. Some were also left handed. The early part of the twentieth century saw the call for right hand brakes operable from both sides of the wagon - either two sets of brakes or two levers operating one or two sets of brake gear. The requirement was for the brake to be released from the same side it was applied, which upset the GWR as their brakes could be released from either side.

 

From the 1907 R.C.H. specification,

 

"No wagon to exceed 8 feet 6 inches wide overall nor to exceed 10 feet at the sides or 11 feet 6 inches in the middle above the top of the rails.

(limited to 8 feet 3 inches for the Bristol Channel ports.)

The length of coal wagons not to exceed 16 feet 6 inches over headstocks.

Coke wagons may be made 17 feet 6 inches over headstocks.

The wheelbase not to be less than 8 feet, nor to exceed 9 feet.

The load not to exceed 8, 10 or 12 tons respectively, and the building of 8 ton wagons to be limited as much as possible."

 

There were limits on door size as well basically limiting them to 5 planks high.

 

The 1923 specification limited the load to 12 tons and was 16 feet 6 inches over headstocks. Originally seven planks were specified, but later this was revised to allow 8 planks.

Crown plates were no longer fitted and the wheelbase was 9 feet.

 

(Lots of models have 10 foot wheelbases and are thus incorrect....  The standard RCH wagon is a favourite with R-T-R manufacturers, but the first to get them right is Bachmann. Tri-ang and Trix had near misses. Hornby almost made it - why a rare cupboard door version? - They were popular in Scotland, but they were rare elsewhere)

 

The 12 ton loading was uprated to 13 during WW II.

 

I believe the Dapol model is of a 16 foot 6 inch wagon, but, not having one, I can't say for sure.

[Compound2632]

I believe the Dapol model is of a 16 foot 6 inch wagon, but, not having one, I can't say for sure.

 

Dimensions, dimensions... can someone confirm body length, width, height?

 

The axleboxes are rather in the style of Midland Ellis 10A grease axleboxes.

 

Three unprototypical features evident in the photos: the headstocks are wider than the body; the side rails sit on top of the frames rather than overlapping - they should be notched at the ends to clear the headstock - see this photo (an RCH 1923 spec wagon I think); the corner plates extend all the way to the headstocks - some did, some didn't, but I think stopping short of the siderail and floor planks was more usual.

[Il Grifone]

Side rails on top of the solebars were associated with steel underframed wagons. These were permitted in the spec. but were uncommon. The LMS and LNER switched to steel during WWII I believe, but by this time curb rails were omitted leaving the floor boards visible (the Lima version is like this but has a 10 foot wheelbase...).

 

Oil boxes were preferred but the grease box persisted.

 

An apocryphal tale is told of of persistent hot boxes due to lack of grease. Keeping a watch on the wagons revealed, crows had learned how to open them and were eating the grease.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Il Grifone

[JohnR]

This is not as manufactured. It looks like someone has made an effort to represent a one-side wagon and cut the brake gear off. 

[sandwich station]

This is not as manufactured. It looks like someone has made an effort to represent a one-side wagon and cut the brake gear off. 

 

If you look at Dapol's website, it shows AO14 unpainted 7 plank wagon with brake gear on one side only. Also a 5 plank wagon AO15 with brake gear on one side only.

[The Johnster]

Side rails on top of the solebars were associated with steel underframed wagons. These were permitted in the spec. but were uncommon. The LMS and LNER switched to steel during WWII I believe, but by this time curb rails were omitted leaving the floor boards visible (the Lima version is like this but has a 10 foot wheelbase...).

 

Oil boxes were preferred but the grease box persisted.

 

An apocryphal tale is told of of persistent hot boxes due to lack of grease. Keeping a watch on the wagons revealed, crows had learned how to open them and were eating the grease.

 

Sheep at Cwmbargoed did this as well.  It worked; you never heard a sheep squeaking or saw one running hot up there...

[Graham456]

This is not as manufactured. It looks like someone has made an effort to represent a one-side wagon and cut the brake gear off.

 

Sorry John, they are as manufactured ...(pick pick sold by Dapol after some one there carves one side off). .I have several and they do come from new like that

If feel that Compound2632 is itching to lay into these wagons, but for me I am happy to have the right wheel base at last along with the Hornby nine foot wheelbase wagons which do need work to rid them of toy ness to a greater degree compared to the Dapol ones

Both fit in a rake of coopercraft and slaters with out looking so bloated and stretched like my old mainline and replica did

Edited June 1, 2017 by Graham456

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Here are 3 Wagons. OO Gauge, as received...North Wales Area...

 

2 Dapol. One Oxford Rail Model.

 

 

 

The "Ace Of Clubs" is a 9ft WB Single Sided Brake. Dapol. Like the Subject of this thread...

 

 

 

You can see where the "other" brakes have been removed...

 

 

 

The "Ruabon" is a Steel Chassis (10ft WB?) Dapol.

 

 

The "Barton" is an Oxford Rail model...The way these are packed, with a plasic "wedge" in the wagon body, can damage the internal hinge bar for the end door....the on on this one needed straightening!

 

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Sarahagain

[Compound2632]

 

The "Barton" is an Oxford Rail model...

 

The Oxford model represents an RCH 1923 specification 12 ton wagon - so could someone please kindly explain to me why it is clearly marked "Load 10 Tons"? 

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Possibly the wagon picture used as reference was a 10 ton load wagon?

 

Certainly pre WW2....when the 12 ton wagons were "up graded" to 13 ton loads!

[Compound2632]

Possibly the wagon picture used as reference was a 10 ton load wagon?

 

Certainly pre WW2....when the 12 ton wagons were "up graded" to 13 ton loads!

 

My point exactly. Why? It's like painting a BR Mk1 carriage chocolate and cream and calling it Great Western...

[Graham456]

My point exactly. Why? It's like painting a BR Mk1 carriage chocolate and cream and calling it Great Western...

And you thought the days of taking liberties with liveries finished in the eightys did you ?

But Not quite so in your face as then thankfully

Edited June 2, 2017 by Graham456

[Ruffnut Thorston]

My point exactly. Why? It's like painting a BR Mk1 carriage chocolate and cream and calling it Great Western...

 

Lima, Hornby, et al.

 

At least there were chocolate and cream MK 1 coaches....

 

Better than Chocolate and Cream Caledonian Railway coaches?

[Compound2632]

Lima, Hornby, et al.

 

At least there were chocolate and cream MK 1 coaches....

 

Better than Chocolate and Cream Caledonian Railway coaches?

 

My point is that for at least the last decade we have had the expectation that RTR manufacturers will get things right where locomotives are concerned; we now have the same expectations for carriages and, judging by some threads on here, brake vans and some 'modern image' wagons; why do so many continue to turn a blind eye to the dreadful things passed off for wooden-bodied mineral wagons? - by far the most common item of rolling stock up to at least the late 50s.

Edited June 3, 2017 by Compound2632

[Mark Saunders]

My point is that for at least the last decade we have had the expectation that RTR manufacturers will get things right where locomotives are concerned; we now have the same expectations for carriages and, judging by some threads on here, brake vans and some 'modern image' wagons; why do so many continue to turn a blind eye to the dreadful things passed off for wooden-bodied mineral wagons? - by far the most common item of rolling stock up to at least the late 50s.

The perpetuauation of poor models will continue until people stop buying them or the moulding wears out or manufacturers stop retooling them!

 

There are many who are purchasing wagons and coaches who do not know how wrong they are but the same goes for those who can't tell when something is actually right!

 

The next thing is you must be prepared to pay the price for more accurate models and reject compromises such as one chassis fits all and liveries that are correct but on the wrong wagons!

 

Every one has their standards and where they will start to accept compromises!

 

Mark Saunders