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

[John Lewis]

Diagram V12 covered both fitted and unfitted wagons. This shows No.16685, a fitted example, and is the best photo I have showing the off-centre V. It has laminated spring buffers  and instanter couplings. It also shows the earliest livery with 25 inch "GW", "VENTILATED VAN" on the side and the earlier form of the "NOT COMMON USER"  plate. It would have had "VentilatedVan" (in upper case letters) with its number below on the ends between the vertical stanchions. There was not really enough room for the lettering, and the letters were usually squashed together.

It would probably be fairly easy for a modeller to change the buffers on a V14 or V16 to get a V12, but not something that could readily done on the prototype.

[John Lewis]

No. 89662 of Lot 731 is another vacuum fitted V12, but it illustrates some things relevant to the V14s and V16s. It hds last been painted some time between the later 1920s and 1936, note that "Ventilated" no longer appears on the sides or ends, and its number is no longer painted on the ends. It carries the later, common, pattern of the Not Common User plate, these were removed during WW2. These wagons and most of the V14 and V16 covered goods were built with shutters closing off the end ventilators. They were behind the bonnets on the ends and could be operated by a long flat handle which can be seen coming out of the ventilators and behind the diagonals. During the 1920s the GWR found they were not being used and so they were gradually removed during the late 1920s - the early 1940s.

[The Johnster]

On 25/12/2022 at 16:47, The Johnster said:

Oh dear, tx for the correction!  I must now overpaint my steelwork on the LMS open I’ve done in unpainted livery, a job for later this evening.  The wagon in question is no doubt incorrectly numbered and probably an unsuitable prototype for a late 40s/early 50s build anyway; it’s a bit if a Rule 1 punt tbh!

 

Pity; did the black frames 2 days ago and rust-weathered then yesterday, and was quite pleased with the results…

 

Photo of the repainted wagon, actually an Oxford LNER 5-planker (had a couple of glasses of plonk over xmas lunch), over on Layout Topics under South Wales Valleys in the 1950s, and a bit more explanation if any of you are seriously at a loss for something to do at this thin end of xmas…

[Dunsignalling]

19 hours ago, John Lewis said:

Diagram V12 covered both fitted and unfitted wagons. This shows No.16685, a fitted example, and is the best photo I have showing the off-centre V. It has laminated spring buffers  and instanter couplings. It also shows the earliest livery with 25 inch "GW", "VENTILATED VAN" on the side and the earlier form of the "NOT COMMON USER"  plate. It would have had "VentilatedVan" (in upper case letters) with its number below on the ends between the vertical stanchions. There was not really enough room for the lettering, and the letters were usually squashed together.

It would probably be fairly easy for a modeller to change the buffers on a V14 or V16 to get a V12, but not something that could readily done on the prototype.

Photographs of V14s with self-contained buffers seem to indicate that the change of buffers occurred either late in the construction of the 1912 batch or from 1913.

 

The wagons in those photographs all feature symmetrical brake gear, suggesting that both changes were introduced together. That area is nearly always in shadow, but achieving the necessary clearance would have required either moving the cylinder inboard by an inch or two, or fitting one of smaller diameter.

 

There actually seems to be little difference between an early (spindle-buffered) V14 and a fitted V12, at least after the latter had received bonnet vents. However, if (as expected) the model turns out to be of a later V14, backdating it to a V12 or early V14 will involve changing the brake gear as well as the buffers.  

 

I've not yet found a photograph of an unfitted V12 in which the brake gear is visible * in my modest library. Photo of 24927 on Paul Bartlett's website indicates they had offset vees despite not needing them. Presumably in the interests of standardisation or possible future conversion to vacuum brake. 

 

John

 

* West Somerset Railway has (or had, in 1991) No. 16307 but the photo isn't informative as to brake -gear. It had though, by the time of preservation, received self-contained buffers, indicating that was possible.  

Edited December 27, 2022 by Dunsignalling
Addition - in bold

[John Lewis]

This photo of V16 No.100211 was taken by Colin Strevens at Old Oak Common. It is in BR's light grey livery with black patches for lettering. Note that it has an iron roof - a number of V16s were built thus. This one was built in April 1922 and was condemned in January 1960. I would have thought it possible to produce a model with an iron roof by carefully filing off the rainstrip of a wooden roofed van and then sticking thin strips of plasticard across the roof to represent the capping strips. No, I don't know what was the purpose of the piece of wood on the end below the  highest part of the roof!

[BMacdermott]

Thanks John

 

Is it another ventilator???

 

Brian

[MarkSG]

9 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Is it another ventilator???

 

One-off repair to fix a leak, or reinforce a dodgy joint?

[BenL]

55 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Thanks John

 

Is it another ventilator???

 

Brian

It is according to the GWR Journal article on the V14 and V16s.

[sdh-stbriavels]

On 23/12/2022 at 23:51, Clearwater said:

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

That would be brilliant. I'm sure we'll get one one day

[tomparryharry]

On 27/12/2022 at 10:54, John Lewis said:

This photo of V16 No.100211 was taken by Colin Strevens at Old Oak Common. It is in BR's light grey livery with black patches for lettering. Note that it has an iron roof - a number of V16s were built thus. This one was built in April 1922 and was condemned in January 1960. I would have thought it possible to produce a model with an iron roof by carefully filing off the rainstrip of a wooden roofed van and then sticking thin strips of plasticard across the roof to represent the capping strips. No, I don't know what was the purpose of the piece of wood on the end below the  highest part of the roof!

It appears to have  been 'off the road', and not repaired. Note the missing tie bar between the W irons. 3-link, not instanter, and the vac pipe has been taken off. I'd suggest that this particular van contains volatile material, hence the extra vent.

[BenL]

56 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

It appears to have  been 'off the road', and not repaired. Note the missing tie bar between the W irons. 3-link, not instanter, and the vac pipe has been taken off. I'd suggest that this particular van contains volatile material, hence the extra vent.

According to the GWR Journal article on the V14/16s, the extra vent was a standard feature on those fitted with an iron roof.

[Wickham Green too]

8 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

It appears to have  been 'off the road', and not repaired. Note the missing tie bar between the W irons. 3-link, not instanter, and the vac pipe has been taken off. I'd suggest that this particular van contains volatile material, hence the extra vent.

The 'missing' tiebar would have been integral with the axleguard keeps - which are present - so any removal was deliberate. As an unfitted V16, Instanter couplings would have been unlikely - though anything goes for a vehicle of this age - and vac. pipe ( etc.) not put on in the first place. 

[Compound2632]

4 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

The 'missing' tiebar would have been integral with the axleguard keeps - which are present - so any removal was deliberate. As an unfitted V16, Instanter couplings would have been unlikely - though anything goes for a vehicle of this age - and vac. pipe ( etc.) not put on in the first place. 

 

But, from general wagon-theoretical considerations, tiebars are unnecessary on a hand brake only wagon.

[Wickham Green too]

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

... tiebars are unnecessary on a hand brake only wagon.

Indeed .......... but this was the G.W.R. - who tended to think differently from mere mortals !

[tomparryharry]

2 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

The 'missing' tiebar would have been integral with the axleguard keeps - which are present - so any removal was deliberate. As an unfitted V16, Instanter couplings would have been unlikely - though anything goes for a vehicle of this age - and vac. pipe ( etc.) not put on in the first place. 

The wagon I rescued from Caerphilly (103966) was a V16 MinkA. It had one of the tiebars broken, and the other was extant.  For a wagon with cast-iron tiebars, it's usually the first casualty when an off-road accident happens. The vac cylinder was indeed fitted.

[Wickham Green too]

I'm not surprised they break easily if they're cast iron ................. I'd be very surprised if they are, though !

[Dunsignalling]

12 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

The wagon I rescued from Caerphilly (103966) was a V16 MinkA. It had one of the tiebars broken, and the other was extant.  For a wagon with cast-iron tiebars, it's usually the first casualty when an off-road accident happens. The vac cylinder was indeed fitted.

Is the wagon in the photo correctly identified?

 

I can only make out the last two digits with total confidence from the posted image.

 

According to both the mighty tome "Great Western Wagons" and Mr Larkin's "The Acquired Wagons of British Railways", V16s were unfitted equivalents of the otherwise similar V14s, suggesting that the wagon pictured may be one of the latter.

 

Alternatively, the "lump" that I took to be a vacuum cylinder is not where it would normally be expected to sit, so are we looking at a fitted van at all?

 

John

Edited January 2, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Chris Higgs]

On 27/12/2022 at 08:57, Dunsignalling said:

Photographs of V14s with self-contained buffers seem to indicate that the change of buffers occurred either late in the construction of the 1912 batch or from 1913.

 

The wagons in those photographs all feature symmetrical brake gear, suggesting that both changes were introduced together. That area is nearly always in shadow, but achieving the necessary clearance would have required either moving the cylinder inboard by an inch or two, or fitting one of smaller diameter.

 

There actually seems to be little difference between an early (spindle-buffered) V14 and a fitted V12, at least after the latter had received bonnet vents. However, if (as expected) the model turns out to be of a later V14, backdating it to a V12 or early V14 will involve changing the brake gear as well as the buffers.  

 

I've not yet found a photograph of an unfitted V12 in which the brake gear is visible * in my modest library. Photo of 24927 on Paul Bartlett's website indicates they had offset vees despite not needing them. Presumably in the interests of standardisation or possible future conversion to vacuum brake. 

 

John

 

* West Somerset Railway has (or had, in 1991) No. 16307 but the photo isn't informative as to brake -gear. It had though, by the time of preservation, received self-contained buffers, indicating that was possible.  

 

Sorry if this has been mentioned before. The GWRJ article in issue 67 states that the 1912 batches of V14 were residual builds of what were to be V12s. So perhaps they just used up the parts in stock e.g. the offset Vs and the brakegear until they were gone and then switched to the symetrical Vs?

 

Chris

Edited January 2, 2023 by Chris Higgs

[tomparryharry]

59 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Is the wagon in the photo correctly identified?

 

I can only make out the last two digits with total confidence from the posted image.

 

According to both the mighty tome "Great Western Wagons" and Mr Larkin's "The Acquired Wagons of British Railways", V16s were unfitted equivalents of the otherwise similar V14s, suggesting that the wagon pictured may be one of the latter.

 

John

I strongly suggest  that detailed observance of the photo is required. What particular parts of the wagon do you see? Work from the bottom up.

[Dunsignalling]

5 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

I strongly suggest  that detailed observance of the photo is required. What particular parts of the wagon do you see? Work from the bottom up.

I'm not clear what you are driving at, could you expand on that, please.

[Dunsignalling]

13 minutes ago, Chris Higgs said:

 

Sorry if this has been mentioned before. The GWRJ article in issue 67 states that the 1912 batches of V14 were residual builds of what were to be V12s. So perhaps they just used up the parts in stock e.g. the offset Vs and the brakegear until they were gone and then switched to the symetrical Vs?

 

Chris

 

Thanks, pretty much what I had inferred, though perhaps for reasons of practicality rather than policy....

 

I have yet to find a pre-preservation photo showing offset vees and self-contained buffers or symmetrical vees with spindle buffers on the same vehicle. That's not to deny that a few such "missing links" might have been produced around the changeover point, but I haven't yet come across any.  

 

John

 

 

[tomparryharry]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

I'm not clear what you are driving at, could you expand on that, please.

 

We seem to be going at cross purposes. The photo is wagon no 100211. It's vacuum fitted, as witness the vac cylinder. We need to cross reference the 'bible'.

 

Sorry for any confusion. 

[Chris Higgs]

16 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

 

We seem to be going at cross purposes. The photo is wagon no 100211. It's vacuum fitted, as witness the vac cylinder. We need to cross reference the 'bible'.

 

Sorry for any confusion. 

 

I think the question was that the V16s were not built vacuum-fitted, perhaps it was fitted later. But the iron roof was not found on V14s, according to John Lewis. 

 

Chris

[Chris Higgs]

Dare we expect these vans and wagons to appear in N/2mm, as the SECR ones are going to? I have an interest as I designed the kit versions that the 2mm Scale Association has sold for many years (resin body and etched underframe).

 

Chris

 

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by Chris Higgs

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

We seem to be going at cross purposes. The photo is wagon no 100211. It's vacuum fitted, as witness the vac cylinder. We need to cross reference the 'bible'.

I'm not convinced that that shadow is a vacuum cylinder ........... the lack of tiebars, the number series, the lack of a vacuum standpipe and the black patch livery - presumably on grey - all point to it being an unfitted vehicle.