GWR O11/15 Opens and V14/16 Vans - order book now open!

[RapidoCorbs]

4 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

 

Is there? I must have missed that. It's not one of the options on Rapido's website.

 

 

Bear in mind that the RTUK site only shows what's in stock or available to pre-order at the moment. There may still be stock available via retailers.

[BenL]

24 minutes ago, BenL said:

I’m pretty sure there’s something about the buffers in the latest version of the GWR wagon bible, I seem to recall the change didn’t exactly match the change in diagram from I think V12, but happened early in the construction of one of the subsequent diagrams - I’ll check next time I’ve got my books to hand.

Turns out I have Atkins et al to hand after all - on p379 of the latest version it says that the switch from laminated sprung buffers (as fitted on the V12s) to self-contained buffers happened in 1912 during the construction of the first lot of V14 (L708).

[Wickham Green too]

45 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

 Buffers could & would be changed at C&W exams. ...

... but not between laminated sprung and self contained without a certain amount of chassis rebuilding.

[Dunsignalling]

12 hours ago, MarkSG said:

 

Is there? I must have missed that. It's not one of the options on Rapido's website.

 

 

Ref. 908008, it's listed as BR grey but the picture (on Rapido's website and Hatton's) is definitely the darker GWR shade.

Edited December 24, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

3 hours ago, RapidoCorbs said:

 

This is a real noodle-baker. I'll try and summarise what we have.

 

John Lewis wrote an article in Great Western Journal in 2007 on GW 16ft Vans, which had this in a section on DC.III brakes:

 

This matches with what we've been looking at, as there are several preserved V14s where the V is in the centre of the vehicle:

101720 at Didcot and 101961/103592 at the SVR are examples of this.

In this photo it is below the central body support stanchion (which is shown as being dead-centre on drawing 78302). This is mid-restoration and hasn't had the vac cylinder refitted yet, it is down as a V14.

 

This tallies with some of the works drawings we have for underframes where both the unfitted and fitted versions have the V marked as 'centre line of vehicle'.

Here is a comparison to show just how offset the V was.

Note that in these two pics, the van with the offset V has the slim buffers too. Unsure if there may have been a changeover year we can pin this down to, any ideas?

 

 

 

Going from the photos I've found so far, my opinion is that it most likely coincided with the change to self-contained buffers. 

 

To be a little more definitive, all with six-digit numbers (built 1923 or later) so far found have the vees on the centre-line. 

 

89667 (in the Larkin book) has the offset layout and spindle buffers. Without evidence to the contrary, I'd presume the whole of the1912 lot it came from was similar (89001 to 90000). There were more built between then and 1923 with higher 5-digit numbers but I haven't yet found a photo of one*.

 

John

 

* EDIT: 1913- built 93016, preserved on the SVR, has symmetrical vees and SC buffers, so it seems likely that only the 1912 batch (and possibly not all of it, see post by BenL above) had the offset arrangement. (Cover photo on GWR Wagons Before 1948, Vol.2 (R. Tourret, Cheona Publications, 2009).

Edited December 23, 2022 by Dunsignalling
typo

[Dunsignalling]

55 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Going from the photos I've found so far, my opinion is that it most likely coincided with the change to self-contained buffers. 

 

To be a little more definitive, all with six-digit numbers (built 1923 or later) so far found have the vees on the centre-line. 

 

89667 (in the Larkin book) has the offset layout and spindle buffers. Without evidence to the contrary, I'd presume the whole of the1912 lot it came from was similar (89001 to 90000). There were more built between then and 1923 with higher 5-digit numbers but I haven't yet found a photo of one*.

 

John

 

 

* 1913- built 93016, preserved on the SVR, has symmetrical vees and SC buffers, so it seems likely that only the 1912 batch (and possibly not all of it, see post by BenL above) had the offset arrangement. (Cover photo on GWR Wagons Before 1948, Vol.2 (R. Tourret, Cheona Publications, 2009).

 

Question is, did any of the vans numbered between 89668 and 90000 have offset vees with SC buffers or were both features amended concurrently?

Edited December 23, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[Miss Prism]

It seems not all of the O15s had offset vees (they have a similar build period to the V14s), so they could have been updated post initial build or later lots had the central arrangement.

 

[Miss Prism]

Btw, congratulations on the much-improved W-irons.

 

[Dunsignalling]

Just now, Miss Prism said:

It seems not all of the O15s had offset vees (they have a similar build period to the V14s), so they could have been updated post initial build or later lots had the central arrangement.

 

I haven't yet started chasing pics of the opens, but it seems reasonable to think that any changes made to the V14 vans would also have been applied to other types concurrently under construction.

 

I am sceptical of any being subsequently altered to the symmetrical arrangement, though. It would have been a fairly major job and would, I think, only been done if the offset layout had proved problematic in some way. Had that been so, surely it would have been eradicated altogether. Retro-fitment of self-contained buffers at overhaul might be another matter, however.

 

John

[Corbs]

I know it's dangerous to equate correlation with causation, but could the relocation of the brake hangers be as a result of the change in buffers?

 

With no transverse spring, could that allow the vacuum cylinder to be moved?

[Clearwater]

Aren’t we missing a nice GWR freight loco to haul these? An Aberdare could fit the mark?

[The Johnster]

4 hours ago, MarkSG said:

Well, I'm not a GWR modeller, but another 5-plank and another van are always welcome, and I presume these were pool wagons so they'd have shown up elsewhere.

 

What I would really like, therefore, is a version in realistic early BR condition. That is, not painted in BR grey, but simply with the BR running number patched over a very tattered and worn GWR livery. As far as I'm aware, this has never previously been offered by any manufacturer. Bachmann have done some ex-PO wagons with patched numbers over the PO livery, but I've not seen any examples of ex-Big 4 liveries done like that. So this could be yet another first for Rapido 😀

Yes, pool since the 20s as they were general merchandise wagons for general traffic, and could not be claimed to be needed for any specific traffic needing specialised vehicles.

 

For the first 6 months of BR’s existence in 1948, all rolling stock was painted in the same big 4 liveries it had been previously, with the company numbers in the company style, but with the W, M, E, or S prefixes added in the appropriate style but with no indication of ownership.  The familiar Gill Sans BR lettering was not used until 1/6/48.  
 

So a GW dark grey liveried wagon with a W-prefixed number in GW style, but without the small GW initials above the number, can be achieved fairly easily, by painting over or removing the GW initials and applying a suitable W transfer from the HMRS GW wagons sheet or similar as the prefix. 
 

In a similar vein, TTBOMK no RTR company has produced a 4mm model of any of the unfitted wooden open wagons built new to fulfil orders placed before nationalisation of big 4 designs by BR (or to those orders placed by BR for more of them in the period before the BR standard designs became available) that were put into traffic with unpainted planks, though Dapol do a 7mm 5-planker in this ‘unliveried livery’.  This was a result of a shortage of paint in the post-war austerity economy, which was more severe in it’s austerity than during the actual war and lasted well into the early 50s. 
 

These are a bit more difficult to recreate by repainting, as the effect of new seasoned wood is not easy to achieve, nor is that of it a while later when it becomes faded and bleached.  The steel end stanchions and strapping of such wagons was painted black, but rusted after some time in service. 

 

 

[tomparryharry]

5 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

... but not between laminated sprung and self contained without a certain amount of chassis rebuilding.

 

Both of these models feature S/C buffers, actually.

 

 

[tomparryharry]

Just to clear up a little misapprehension or two.

 

The larger Vee bracket is a fulcrum crossbar, enabling the brakes to be worked either side.  The smaller Vee bracket is an inverted saddle, which cradles the vacuum cylinder. The distance from the centres of the Large Vee to small Vee coincides with the size of Vac cylinder, Which was either 15, or 18". Destroying the Vac brake makes the cylinder piston shoot up, and brings the brakes into play via the large Vee  brackets.  Typically, you should end up with the 2 large Vee brackets on the centreline of the solebar (thanks John) with with the 2 smaller Vee brackets offset to the central Vee. One of these is tight behind the solebar, whilst the other is bolted up underneath the main chassis rails. I think we used to call these trunnions.

 

In short, the large Vee bracket is normally dead centre on the solebar, and the vac cylinder brackets being offset by whatever scale ratio you're working with. 

 

Remember it's only on one side, however!

Thanks to John (Dunsignalling) for pointing out my lack of clarity. It's been a very long time since I've worked on a wagon, and I've been to bed since then!

Edited December 24, 2022 by tomparryharry
late at night...

[Dunsignalling]

6 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

Just to clear up a little misapprehension or two.

 

The larger Vee bracket is a fulcrum crossbar, enabling the brakes to be worked either side.  The smaller Vee bracket is an inverted saddle, which cradles the vacuum cylinder. The distance from the centres of the Large Vee to small Vee coincides with the size of Vac cylinder, Which was either 15, or 18". Destroying the Vac brake makes the cylinder piston shoot up, and brings the brakes into play via the large Vee  bracket. 

 

In short, the large Vee bracket is normally dead centre on the solebar, and the vac cylinder brackets being offset by whatever scale ratio you're working with. 

 

Remember it's only on one side, however!

 

Though the large vee bracket must always line up with the one on the other side because they support a cross-shaft. 

[Hal Nail]

13 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

In Twilight of the Goods, there's a photo of a similar unfitted Mink, W105468, albeit the slightly later V18 type with Morton brakes instead of DC. Hopefully Rapido might do this too. 

 

Freshly painted, still with the original outside-braced doors; caption states 1960. All that sounds highly improbable (not to mention wasteful) but Don Rowland's notes can be trusted. I wonder how long it survived after it's day in front of his camera....

 

On the opposite page, there's a 1962 pic of a vacuum fitted V14 (W112513) in a somewhat more careworn state, but still clearly in active use.

 

Their 9' wb would have led to most disappearing by around 1964 I'd think, with the unfitted ones generally a bit earlier.

 

John

 

EDIT: Loads more in The Acquired Wagons of British Railways, Vol.4 (David Larkin) including a couple more shiny 1960 repaints!

 

 

I've seen a photo of an older 9' mink at Wadebridge in the 60s still with the older Dean brake lever but in 20 or 30 books from the late 50s period (onwards) thats the oniy one I can recall. I haven't seen an older open in use by then.

 

Retro fitting, which for the most part was 10' wagons, happened in the mid 50s and a lot of 9' went at that point.

Edited December 24, 2022 by Hal Nail

[Dunsignalling]

9 hours ago, Corbs said:

I know it's dangerous to equate correlation with causation, but could the relocation of the brake hangers be as a result of the change in buffers?

 

With no transverse spring, could that allow the vacuum cylinder to be moved?

 

Perhaps, but possibly decided more from the angle that, having dispensed with what led to the offset arrangement being necessary, the rest could be done "conventionally".

[Dunsignalling]

3 minutes ago, Hal Nail said:

 

I've seen a photo of an older 9' mink at Wadebridge in the 60s still with the older Dean brake lever but in 20 or 30 books from the late 50s period thats the oniy one I can recall. I haven't seen an older open in use by then.

 

Retro fitting, which for the most part was 10' wagons, happened in the mid 50s and a lot of 9' went at that point.

That seems reasonable. Opens always led harder lives than vans so it's to be expected they would wear out sooner.

 

Also, of course, from the mid-late 1930s, loading whatever could be into vans was increasingly prioritised on the grounds of security, weather protection and saving the man-hours involved in sheeting open wagons. 

 

All that said, and allowing for the unusual disproportionately attracting photographers' attention, it surprises me that  9' wb, unfitted vans were clearly receiving overhauls and full repaints as late as 1960. They generally seem to have been V18s so did being less than 40 years old perhaps decide eligibility?

 

John

[RapidoCorbs]

7 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

Just to clear up a little misapprehension or two.

 

The larger Vee bracket is a fulcrum crossbar, enabling the brakes to be worked either side.  The smaller Vee bracket is an inverted saddle, which cradles the vacuum cylinder. The distance from the centres of the Large Vee to small Vee coincides with the size of Vac cylinder, Which was either 15, or 18". Destroying the Vac brake makes the cylinder piston shoot up, and brings the brakes into play via the large Vee  bracket. 

 

In short, the large Vee bracket is normally dead centre on the solebar, and the vac cylinder brackets being offset by whatever scale ratio you're working with. 

 

Remember it's only on one side, however!

 

Drawing 46170 (fitted brakes) confirms the distance between the vac cylinder centre and the V hanger to be 18", so I am guessing it was also 18" on the earlier wagons with the offset V, but with the vac cylinder being mounted closer to the centre of the wagon.

 

@Dunsignalling yes I imagine that having a single size of push rods etc. to keep in stock that would work for both fitted and unfitted wagons would have been appealing.

[Dunsignalling]

10 hours ago, Corbs said:

I know it's dangerous to equate correlation with causation, but could the relocation of the brake hangers be as a result of the change in buffers?

 

With no transverse spring, could that allow the vacuum cylinder to be moved?

Acquired Wagons of British Railways Vol 4. Page 59.

 

Van W72910 of "indeterminate design", but from the number, most likely to diagram V4.

 

This is vacuum braked with central Vee hangers and spindle buffers, suggesting that, whatever the reason for the offset arrangement on (some) diagram V12/14 vans, it may not have been the buffer type.

 

Purely speculative, but could it possibly have been an attempt to equalise the effort required to operate the handbrake levers on either side that was later judged to be ineffective/unnecessary? It seems only to have been applied for a few years, perhaps just 1907-1912.

 

John  

Edited December 24, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[Compound2632]

13 hours ago, MarkSG said:

Well, I'm not a GWR modeller, but another 5-plank and another van are always welcome, and I presume these were pool wagons so they'd have shown up elsewhere.

 

Unfitted opens and vans were common user but GWR fitted opens and vans were not in the pool before the second world war. LMS, LNER, SR, and Metropolitan fitted vans were pooled from 9 October 1936, also fitted opens, excepting those of the SR - were there any? But the Great Western stood aloof.

[tomparryharry]

A Change in buffers would allow the transverse buffers to be removed. The addition (or deletion) of vacuum brake apparatus is immaterial here: The chassis arrangement has 2 (or 3) separate functions. The first is the drawgear (Headstocks, buffers, couplings, etc). The second is the application of handbrake,   Thirdly, vacuum (nowadays, air) powered braking. 

[tomparryharry]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Unfitted opens and vans were common user but GWR fitted opens and vans were not in the pool before the second world war. LMS, LNER, SR, and Metropolitan fitted vans were pooled from 9 October 1936, also fitted opens, excepting those of the SR - were there any? But the Great Western stood aloof.

 

Yes, quite right. If you go over to the GWR combined wagons volumes,  have a look at tarpaulins.

[Wickham Green too]

1 minute ago, tomparryharry said:

A Change in buffers would allow the transverse buffers to be removed. ...

BUT ..... fitting self contained buffers would require strengthening of the headstock ends to take the buffing forces which - when sprung with a transverse leaf spring - would have been taken by the middle longitudinals.

[tomparryharry]

57 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

BUT ..... fitting self contained buffers would require strengthening of the headstock ends to take the buffing forces which - when sprung with a transverse leaf spring - would have been taken by the middle longitudinals.

 

Yes, quite right. The Western added a diagonal (one in each corner) to overcome buffing forces on the headstock.