GWR fleet circa 1910-1915 - Most common wagon types?

[Guest WM183]

Hi folks!

I am very fond of the pre-WWI scene on the GWR. Lots of outside frames, saddle tanks, open cabs, polished brass, red rubbing elbows with brown on coaching stock - bliss! However I admit to knowing comparatively little about the wagon fleet. Opens in particular I am confused by; were the massive lot of 4 plankers that eventually became 021 the mainstay of the era I am concerned with? Would the bulk of the fleet be 05s then? Let's say I wanted 20 goods wagons, 15 or so would be opens I'd guess; which diagrams would be most represented? The GWR wagon bible helps some, but... I'm still confused =(

Thanks folks,

Amanda

[Miss Prism]

I think your estimate of 15 of a 20-wagon train being opens is close to a typical picture, if there is such a thing as a 'typical' goods train. I suggest make a list of the totals of each pre-1915 diagram - that will give a good indication.

 

[Guest WM183]

At this period most would be home road wagons too, yes?

 

It seems there were thousands of 2, 3, and particularly 4 plank wagons that were never in the diagram book and would likely be a huge chunk of the fleet in my period. Atkins et al don't cover these older wagons. Anyone know where some good photos may be found?

Edited November 9, 2022 by WM183
More info

[Siberian Snooper]

Don't forget a plethora of private owner mineral wagons. These may emanate from collieries, coal factors and local coal merchants, on top of which there may be local or distant quarry wagons. 

 

 

[Miss Prism]

2 hours ago, WM183 said:

At this period most would be home road wagons too, yes?

 

No, but this would be highly dependent on location. Try this 1920 Bristol snapshot, courtesty of @Penlan:

[Guest WM183]

Cools! I like a lot of wagon variety =D 

Seems like, as one might expect, wagon numbers more or less correlate with how many the owning company has, with the home road having the largest chunk. I wonder why Midland opens are so close to GWR ones... likely just due to the sheer number of 299s?

[Guest WM183]

1 hour ago, Siberian Snooper said:

Don't forget a plethora of private owner mineral wagons. These may emanate from collieries, coal factors and local coal merchants, on top of which there may be local or distant quarry wagons. 

 

 

Oh true! I just meant regular "merchandise" types, but I do like the colorful PO coal wagons too =)

[bécasse]

Pregrouping a significant proportion of loaded company-owned open wagons would have been sheeted, but note that, prior to the Great War introduction of pooling, roughly half of foreign wagon mileage would have been empty.

[hmrspaul]

2 hours ago, WM183 said:

I wonder why Midland opens are so close to GWR ones... likely just due to the sheer number of 299s?

Bristol was a MR destination. This doesn't suggest it was a census of GWR Bristol but all Bristol. 

 

It is the Caley, North British, NER and LNWR numbers which are notable. 

 

Are there any private trader wagons?

 

Paul

[magmouse]

Info from @Compound2632

 

"There were 24,208 of these 4-plank wagons with conventional brakes built 1887-1902, so they made up around 42% of the Great Western's wagon fleet around 1904/5 - very much the equivalent of the Midland's D299 5-plank wagon, though the latter was used for mineral as well as goods traffic. The next most common Great Western wagons around that date were the 3-plank opens of 1879-1887 - i.e. the preceding design of open goods wagon (6,960, 12%); then an almost dead heat between the even older 2 plank wagons and the V6 iron mink covered goods wagons (4,904 and 4,901 respectively, 8.5%). The O4 5-plank wagons of 1901-4  made up a further 5.7% of the fleet, with timber trucks at 5% and cattle wagons at 4.3%. With a further 3.1% for the ancient 1-plank opens still on the books, ordinary open goods wagons accounted for over 70% of the Great Western wagon stock.”

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/125274-midland-in-bristol/&do=findComment&comment=3558697 

 

For the GWR wagons of my one-day 1908 layout, I am planning:

 

1 x 7-plank open

1 x 5-plank open

6 x 4-plank open

2 x 3-plank open

1 x 2-plank open

1 x 1-plank open

2 x vans (1 iron mink, 1 earlier outside framed van)

 

Plus a smattering of wagons from other companies, non-revenue (some loco coal wagons and a Cordon gas tank), and PO.

 

I should really have one or two more 4-planks, but this will give roughly the right balance without being too monotonous.

 

7 out of 12 GWR opens will be sheeted.

 

Nick.

 

 

 

[Guest WM183]

Thank you! That is incredibly helpful! A bunch of 4 plank wagons it shall be, along with a handful of 3 planks. 

[Mikkel]

Good to see a 1910-15 layout in the planning, it's an interesting period.

 

Apart from your 4 planks and some 3 planks, I'd throw in a couple of 5 planks and a 7 planker too. If you only use 4- and 3- planks you would in my view be signalling something earlier than 1910.

 

[drduncan]

Like Mikkel, I’m pleased to see another pre 1914 GW layout being planned. If you are a member of the GWSG perhaps you’ll bring you layout along as a work in progress to a members day once you get going ((if not a member you should think of joining for the wealth of info the members have and share with each other…) 

 

However, I’m loathe to disagree with Miss P, but that census Penlan shared would be highly misleading if used for a pre-WW1 layout. In 1915 many companies started pooling non specialist wagons (not the GW) and by the end of the war the basics of the common user scheme was in place with the result that foreign wagons covered by pooling/common user could get anywhere. This was not the case pre 1914 when companies would be charged for each day they had foreign wagons on their system. Therefore foreign wagons would be relatively rare except at transshipment points or complete wagon loads being forwarded on to a destination and returned. So a sleepily branch line would not be likely to see such traffic - the one exemption I could think of would be farm moves, which would demand a number of specialist wagons.

 

regards

 

Duncan

[Guest WM183]

Thanks guys.

Yeah, I was thinking, for say  any batch of 10 GWR wagons, to have 4 4 planks (One with DC brakes), 2 3 planks, 1 newer 5 plank, and 1 7 plank, along with maybe 1 Iron mink and 1 wooden mink. The remaining 10, in a batch of 20, will be a mix of Midland, GN, LNWR, NE, and Caledonian, perhaps. 

I have always loved GWR, but have wavered due to 1) it being very commonly modelled and 2) the fact I do love BR-era parcels trains too! However, I love both 7mm and scratchbuilding, and pre grouping GWR seems to fit both well, particularly for my modest space. I really like older outside frame engines and little tank engines, and there's plenty of both, along with 4 wheel or smaller bogie coaches. 

 

I do waver somewhat between P4/EM and 7mm, and there's loads of nummy parts available for both scales. My next build will be a scratchbuild attempt of an 850 class tank, not least of which cause there's some helpful guidance in The 4mm Engine by Guy Williams. 

I am not a member of the GWSG - I should join it? As far as attending meetings, I live in the Netherlands, so coming to meets is a challenge. However, I do hope to be able to exhibit *something* at Dutch shows - likely the small dockside layout planned for the 1366 I have been building. Sadly, it's a bit into the grouping era!

[Compound2632]

Looking again at that Bristol census of 1920.

1. As has already been said, it represents the situation with the pooling of ordinary opens and vans that started during the Great War. Before then, any "foreign" wagon arriving with a load would have to be unloaded promptly and returned to its home line within a specified period of time (certainly no more than three days), by the same route as it had arrived, irrespective of whether or not a return load could be found for it - so if you do have "foreign" wagons, half of them should be empty.
2. Cattle wagons were not pooled at the date of the survey. The fact that all the cattle wagons were Great Western ones is an indication that this survey was of Great Western yards in Bristol only. The Midland goods station, St Philips, had a cattle dock.
3. Apart from the Great Western tally, the numbers of wagons from the various major companies is pretty much proportional to the size of their non-mineral goods wagon fleets, indicating the effect of the pooling scheme.
4. Bristol, as a major traffic centre, is no guide to smaller locations lacking its variety of industries and, of course, the ports, both of Bristol and Avonmouth.

From study of photographs and an understanding of how goods traffic was worked, I draw the following conclusions:

1. If modelling a Great Western branch line before the Great War, all your goods wagons should be Great Western - foreigners would be very rare and their presence would require some justification.
2. If modelling a Great Western branch line after the Great War, Great Western wagons should be in a minority, with LMS and LNER wagons (or those of their constituents) dominating.
3. If modelling a Great Western branch line at any period, there should be no special wagons - ordinary opens and vans would have been sufficient for the traffic of the district. The proportion of vans rose throughout the first half of the 20th century, so perhaps only one-in-ten before the Great War but maybe one-in-four by the late 1930s.

In the above, I've only dealt with merchandise traffic. Mineral traffic, principally coal, is another complex question!

 

So, @WM183 is on the right track thinking about Great Western wagons only for a layout set in 1910-15. For a fleet of twenty wagons for a country branch, I'd say a couple of iron minks, one later wood mink, a couple of cattle wagons and the remainder a 50/50 split of four and five plank opens, with maybe one older 3-plank. Possibly a couple of timber trucks if there's any timber traffic - felled tree trunks or sawn timber.

 

Then add ten PO coal wagons, appropriate to the district. 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Compound2632

[Miss Prism]

2 hours ago, drduncan said:

However, I’m loathe to disagree with Miss P, but that census Penlan shared would be highly misleading if used for a pre-WW1 layout.

 

That's why I mentioned it related to 1920!

 

[magmouse]

As others have said - great to see someone else thinking of modelling this period.

 

1 hour ago, WM183 said:

Yeah, I was thinking, for say  any batch of 10 GWR wagons, to have 4 4 planks (One with DC brakes), 2 3 planks, 1 newer 5 plank, and 1 7 plank, along with maybe 1 Iron mink and 1 wooden mink.

 

One small thing to be aware of - the DC braked 4-plank opens were very much in the minority. If I remember correctly, only 1 lot of 200, against the 24 thousand with conventional brakes. The early 5-plank wagons came with DC brakes as standard, of course, so you still get an opportunity to model those.

 

There aren't a huge number of 7-plank wagons either, but looking at photos of goods yards, etc., from the period, they seem to show up more often than I would expect. Possibly just a random effect, but it has made me more comfortable with including one.

 

Nick.

[Guest WM183]

Well. I like DC brakes! I will have the 4 plankers all just be single-side brakes, but I can add an 04 and an 02 for DC brakes, and perhaps a V5 or V12. I like some variety. The stairstep effect of different heights of wagons is a big part of the "image" for me, so I would like that 7 plank 02 to make an appearance, alongside an old 3 plank.

Did the double-frame 4-4-0s ever make it onto secondary lines (not out in the woods branch lines) as I would love to include one of these too. 

[drduncan]

3 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

 

That's why I mentioned it related to 1920!

 

My apologies! 
D

[drduncan]

54 minutes ago, WM183 said:
Did the double-frame 4-4-0s ever make it onto secondary lines (not out in the woods branch lines) as I would love to include one of these too. 

There is photographic evidence for 3521 class 4-4-0 locos on the Launceston line. Dukes and Bulldogs might be found on secondary lines at this point, but remember 4-6-0s were still in 1910 relatively new beasts and in relatively small numbers on the mainline, so many of the non top link express workings were 4-4-0s pre WW1 and Cities/Atbaras were still in 1910 top link engines.  An interesting question would be where were the Armstrong/Dean period 2-2-2 and 4-2-2 single wheelers (those that had survived) and what were they employed on? An examination of the loco shed allocations for the area/time you are interested in might be an interesting way to while away a day at the National Archives. 

Another way of looking at it would be to consider what route colour your line would be (probably blue/yellow) and this will then gives you the classes that would be allowed to work over the line by the civil engineer- if any of your chosen class were shedded in the area.
Duncan

[Miss Prism]

The number of Dean Singles  dwindled rapidly after 1910, but were employed on secondary passenger work and milk trains. One Cobham survived until 1914, based at Oxford I think.

 

[Guest WM183]

I was thinking blue, but I am unsure. I was thinking of running small tanks and maybe a Dean Goods, but I'm also tempted to depict something urban and capable of handling the 4-4-0s, Aberdares and 4300s, and the bigger tanks like 2721s? 

[Cwmtwrch]

45 minutes ago, WM183 said:

but I'm also tempted to depict something urban and capable of handling the 4-4-0s, Aberdares and 4300s, and the bigger tanks like 2721s? 

All of these were Blue or lower, apart from the 83XX and 93XX series of Moguls, and the County class 4-4-0s.

[Compound2632]

Pardon my ignorance, but when were the route colour codes introduced? 

[drduncan]

52 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Pardon my ignorance, but when were the route colour codes introduced? 

About 1912 I think. I recall finding a map of the North to West route giving the route colours from about then - unless my memory is playing tricks on me.

D