A Plea For Accurate Milk Tanks

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, Pint of Adnams said:

And when it reached Ipswich it would wait for and be connected with the (notionally) UD Milk Tanks sent from North Elmham Dairy via Norwich for onward movement to Ilford via Stratford.

 

Interesting that its tail traffic rather than coupled immediately behind the locomotive.

It is not tail traffic but a milk train - it's lamped as perishables (milk) train not as a passenger train.  It would be formed in accordance wuth the relevant Marshalling Instructions as influenced by local needs where traffic had to be attached.

 

Tail traffic could of course be, and was, marshalled at either end (or even at both ends simultaneously) of a passenger train. However that sometimes might depend on the type of vehicle(s) running as tail traffic and if they had the necessary steam pipes during the train heating season..  Generally convenience in attaching/detaching was the deciding factor for where tail traffic was marshalled in the train.

[Pint of Adnams]

4 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

It is not tail traffic but a milk train - it's lamped as perishables (milk) train not as a passenger train.  It would be formed in accordance wuth the relevant Marshalling Instructions as influenced by local needs where traffic had to be attached.

 

Tail traffic could of course be, and was, marshalled at either end (or even at both ends simultaneously) of a passenger train. However that sometimes might depend on the type of vehicle(s) running as tail traffic and if they had the necessary steam pipes during the train heating season..  Generally convenience in attaching/detaching was the deciding factor for where tail traffic was marshalled in the train.

Point taken but, on the GE Section, the Milk Tanks or Mobile Milk Tank Wagons were invariably pictured next to the locomotive...

[BMacdermott]

2 hours ago, Combe Martin said:

Why is it ok to expect absolute accuracy with all other types of rolling stock now but not milk tankers, just because there's lots of diagrams.  I'm not expecting dozens of different diagrams to be produced, just a handfull.

 

Hello everyone

 

As CM says, he's not expecting dozens of different diagrams to be produced and neither is The 00 Poll Team, but - as noted and in an earlier post - we believe there is significant commercial potential from a comparatively small range that would satisfy many.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

[BMacdermott]

Hello again everyone

 

I forgot to re-iterate that three 'milk items' were in The Top 50.

 

Second Place Overall was the 3000 gallon Ladder & Filler in Centre type (GWR, SR, LMS, LNER, BR - 29 Diagrams).

 

In Overall Equal 30th Place were:

3000 gallon, Ladder off-centre, small platform type  (GWR, SR, LMS, LNER)

Milk Tank Truck,  20ft 6in, with 4-wheel Milk Road Tanker Trailer Load (GWR,SR, LMS. LNER)

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll  Team)

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, Combe Martin said:

 

Are you sure, my Russell picture of an 0.55 (page 241) only shows numbers going up to 1995, which ties up with the Rumney models list.

Apologies

My Bad. Misreading two things together. Yes 1995 is correct.

 

If you look on page 279 the allocated numbers go up to 2000. Maybe for more more, never built?

Doesn't look like there ever was a 1999 in the passenger rated vehicles.

 

[Pint of Adnams]

2 hours ago, Combe Martin said:

 

Why is it ok to expect absolute accuracy with all other types of rolling stock now but not milk tankers, just because there's lots of diagrams.  I'm not expecting dozens of different diagrams to be produced, just a handfull.

 

As I've pointed out, the underframes are standard for each of the 4 railway companies (with just some small differences in the ex GWR examples which could be 'not modelled' if necessary).

Which may be another way of suggesting the handful that meet your requirements?

 

The underframes may have been similar but not standard. The braking arrangements differed even between the LNER types, the LNER uniquely tended to plate over the underframe, as has been pointed out the wheel types differed as did the axleboxes and presence or absence of a stiffening bar between the axleguards.

 

And are we proposing the earlier 4-wheel as well as 6-wheel underframes, the former lasting well into the 1930s?

[Steamport Southport]

2 hours ago, Combe Martin said:

 

I accept that with N gauge a lot of the details are too small to see properly, but that's not the case with a 4mm model.

 

I wont be running a 10 tanker milk train.  At Bailey Gate the most that ever arrived on one train were 3 usually attached to the front of  a down passenger working.  They were then detached and shunted by the train loco into the milk siding.  Later, some other milk tankers going out would be shunted out of another siding and onto the back of an up passenger service, again 3 at the most. So I want about 10 at least, 3 max going in, 3 max going out and 4 maybe already there, and some coming tomorrow or the next train. And yes I'll weather them too.

 

Why is it ok to expect absolute accuracy with all other types of rolling stock now but not milk tankers, just because there's lots of diagrams.  I'm not expecting dozens of different diagrams to be produced, just a handfull.

 

As I've pointed out, the underframes are standard for each of the 4 railway companies (with just some small differences in the ex GWR examples which could be 'not modelled' if necessary).

 

As usual, a dated photo of your prototype is best to work from. 

 

The Dapol version does at least have brake blocks in line with the wheels and the tank end supports are attached to the front of the buffer beam, neither is the case with the Hornby model, but it does have big 'boiler bands' which may need removing depending on the diagram being produced.  Unigate tankers (Bailey Gate was a United Dairies Milk Factory) mostly didn't have external tanker support bands, which is what the 'boiler bands' are part of.

 

Trying to improve the current RTR generic tankers will be a bit of a challenge, that I will try.

 

Can't really blame Hornby for the milk tanker. It's the old Lima one and dates from 1980!

 

The last time it appeared it was in the Coca Cola livery so Hornby do know it's Railroad standard.

 

 

Jason

[BMacdermott]

18 minutes ago, Pint of Adnams said:

And are we proposing the earlier 4-wheel as well as 6-wheel underframes, the former lasting well into the 1930s?

 

Hello Pint of Adnams

 

We couldn't see a good case for the 4-wheelers but others may have views?

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

[BMacdermott]

10 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

Can't really blame Hornby for the milk tanker. It's the old Lima one and dates from 1980!

 

Hello Jason

 

Hornby re-tooled the chassis for 2007 and our late - and much missed - Poll Team colleague and 'milk aficionado', Glen Woods, was involved with that.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

[gwrrob]

3 hours ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello again everyone

 

I forgot to re-iterate that three 'milk items' were in The Top 50.

 

Second Place Overall was the 3000 gallon Ladder & Filler in Centre type (GWR, SR, LMS, LNER, BR - 29 Diagrams).

 

In Overall Equal 30th Place were:

3000 gallon, Ladder off-centre, small platform type  (GWR, SR, LMS, LNER)

Milk Tank Truck,  20ft 6in, with 4-wheel Milk Road Tanker Trailer Load (GWR,SR, LMS. LNER)

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll  Team)

 

Can you remember Brian how well they fared on the mini-poll ran on my thread .

Edited July 25, 2023 by gwrrob
spilling

[The Fatadder]

28 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Hornby re-tooled the chassis for 2007

They didn’t do a particularly good job of it though, (by 207 standards).  It was more changes to add 26mm axles and nem pockets rather than dealing with the crude chassis detail 

[BMacdermott]

Hello Rich

 

Agreed. I think Glen was a tad disappointed with the outcome.

 

In Ramsay's Catalogue, Pat Hamond notes "... a more accurate GWR chassis" - not an 'accurate' one per se!

 

A wide open goal still remains!

 

Brian

[brossard]

1 hour ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Pint of Adnams

 

We couldn't see a good case for the 4-wheelers but others may have views?

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

 

4 wheeled milk tanks were found to be unstable runners at speed and were phased out in favour of 6 wheels.  I recall Peco had a 4 wheeled tank.

 

John

[BMacdermott]

1 hour ago, gwrrob said:

 

Can you remember Brian how well they faired on the mini-poll ran on my thread .

 

Hello Rob

 

Below is how milk fared in the Mini-Poll for Fruit, Fish, Milk & Meat

 

All the 'tank' types were High Polling amongst the 23 voters. I can't recall why we only listed these  types though.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

 

High Polling

17        Milk Tank Wagon – 6-wheel, twin tank (Diag.O41 of 1935 & Diag.O50 of 1940)

14        Milk Tank Wagon – 6-wheel, ladders/filler at one end (eg Diags.O57 of 1946 & O60 of 1950)

13        Milk Tank Truck – 6-wheel with Dyson Milk Road Trailer Load (eg Diags.O37, O48, O49, 1932-47)

13        Fruit Van – Fruit C, 22ft long (Diag.Y9 of 1937)

 

[Karhedron]

22 minutes ago, brossard said:

4 wheeled milk tanks were found to be unstable runners at speed and were phased out in favour of 6 wheels.  I recall Peco had a 4 wheeled tank.

 

Yes, all the 4-wheelers had been rebuilt as 6-wheelers by 1937 so they lasted less than 10 years in original condition. "Rebuilt" may be slightly misleading as believe the tanks were transferred to entirely new 6-wheeled chassis. The 6-wheeled tanks outnumbered the 4-wheeled by about 10:1 and lasted from 1931 to 1980 so are probably a better target in the first instance.

[Karhedron]

On 21/07/2023 at 11:13, Combe Martin said:

My Hornby one is silver and labelled United Dairies with number W1954 which is actually correct for a Diagram 0.53 built for Alpin & Barrett who did become part of Unigate, so is correct.

 

Actually I am not sure it is correct. W1954 was originally painted in Aplin and Barret's own livery.

 

 

Aplin and Barret were not taken over until 1960 by which time Unigate had already been formed so it is unlikely that W1954 would have been fitted with "United Dairies" plates that were already obsolete. More likely it would have been fitted with "Unigate Creameries" plates like the example below.

 

 

Of course if anyone has photos to the contrary I would be very interested to see them.

[Pint of Adnams]

1 hour ago, brossard said:

 

4 wheeled milk tanks were found to be unstable runners at speed and were phased out in favour of 6 wheels.  I recall Peco had a 4 wheeled tank.

 

John

But they were the original designs and hence the only ones accurate for the initial period for anyone modelling it. So did Triang...

 

 

[gwrrob]

1 hour ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Rob

 

Below is how milk fared in the Mini-Poll for Fruit, Fish, Milk & Meat

 

All the 'tank' types were High Polling amongst the 23 voters. I can't recall why we only listed these  types though.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

 

High Polling

17        Milk Tank Wagon – 6-wheel, twin tank (Diag.O41 of 1935 & Diag.O50 of 1940)

14        Milk Tank Wagon – 6-wheel, ladders/filler at one end (eg Diags.O57 of 1946 & O60 of 1950)

13        Milk Tank Truck – 6-wheel with Dyson Milk Road Trailer Load (eg Diags.O37, O48, O49, 1932-47)

13        Fruit Van – Fruit C, 22ft long (Diag.Y9 of 1937)

 

 

I recently suggested the milk tank in the Rapido product suggestion page.

 

https://rapidotrains.co.uk/product-suggestion/

[Combe Martin]

39 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

Actually I am not sure it is correct. W1954 was originally painted in Aplin and Barret's own livery.

 

 

Aplin and Barret were not taken over until 1960 by which time Unigate had already been formed so it is unlikely that W1954 would have been fitted with "United Dairies" plates that were already obsolete. More likely it would have been fitted with "Unigate Creameries" plates like the example below.

 

I wasn't suggesting that W1954 was painted silver or fitted with UD plates (more likely it just became covered in grime) but just that it became part of the UD 'empire'.  I've also since corrected myself and pointed out that the diagram 0.53 tank was fitted to a one foot longer underframe. So this particular Hornby version is wrong.  

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, brossard said:

 

4 wheeled milk tanks were found to be unstable runners at speed and were phased out in favour of 6 wheels.  I recall Peco had a 4 wheeled tank.

 

John

 

Still do. Now under the Parkside label as a kit.

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/687735/parkside_models_pc91_10_milk_tank_wagon_plastic_kit/stockdetail

 

I can't vouch for it's accuracy, but seems to be a nice kit. 

 

 

Jason

[brossard]

39 minutes ago, Pint of Adnams said:

But they were the original designs and hence the only ones accurate for the initial period for anyone modelling it. So did Triang...

 

 

 

I think that any manufacturer willing to invest in milk tanks is going to do the most common and widest available prototype, which is to say the 6 wheelers.

 

3 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Still do. Now under the Parkside label as a kit.

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/687735/parkside_models_pc91_10_milk_tank_wagon_plastic_kit/stockdetail

 

I can't vouch for it's accuracy, but seems to be a nice kit. 

 

 

Jason

 

Yes, I know, I had one eons ago, seemed a nice model to me at the time.  There's a recent thread here showing one built.  I hadn't noticed but the Peco tank ends look to be very rounded while the prototype tanks have got quite sharp edges.

 

John

[Rugd1022]

7 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

Very nice photo, thanks for sharing. A bit of a rarity in showing a Mk1 full brake. Milk trains usually ran with pre-nationalisation brake vehicles and I have only seen Mk1 vehicles used a handful of times.

 

Broadly I'd agree with you but I do recall seeing quite a few Western hauled milk trains with Mk1 BGs in the formation down in Devon and Cornwall. Two in particular spring to mind as i copped both locos at the time, D1026 with a Hawksworth BG, nine milk tanks and a Mk1 BG in tow at Newton Abbot at silly o'clock in the morning (I think it was running late awaiting train crew), and D1044 (which I cabbed!) with a Mk1 BG, a Siphon G, six milk tanks and another Mk1 BG bring up the rear at Plymouth late at night.

 

Are there any articles available on improving the Dapol 0 Gauge milk tank...?

[hmrspaul]

10 hours ago, Combe Martin said:

 

The livery is authentic for an Express Dairy tanker, and the underframe is definitely an ex SR one (Brake lever near the middle and huge spring dampers), however 4409 was a diagram 3159 belonging to United Dairies !

 

By the end of the 50's most of the smaller dairy fleets  had merged into either the Express Dairy fleet or with the United Dairies fleet to become Unigate.

 

Also, apart from one picture of W2596, all the photo evidence of  Express Dairy tankers show them with external strapping round the outside of the tank, whereas the United Dairies tankers were the opposite, all seemed to have the strapping under the top half of the tanker cover.  The exceptions to this were the ex Co-Op and the IMS tankers which had external strapping and went to United Dairies.

 

There were also the Milk Marketing Board tankers which went to BR who then passed them to both Express Dairies and United Dairies. All the photos I've seen of these hasd external strapping.   

 

I wonder if the tanker in the above picture has a 'bogus' livery because it looks attractive ? 

 

Most of my info is taken from 'BR Parcels and Passenger-Rated Stock  Volume 2' by David Larkin, and from the Rumney Models '3000 Gallon Milk Tanker diagrams' list.  

 

Now illustrated in CWS green. http://www.ws.rhrp.org.uk/ws/WagonInfo.asp?Ref=504 I can see no mention of the SR building frames for CWS whereas the Express Dairy does appear to be a good interpretation of a livery used on the barrels of a couple of frames supplied by the SR. United Dairies appears to have been the main SR user and it's not clear why this isn't used by Didcot. 

 

Heritage railway stock should always be treated with caution as an historical source. In BR days UD and Express had much plainer finish, although MMB and IMS had some more interesting liveries. 

 

By the way there are lots of book sources of information on milk tank wagons, especially the SR ones. 

 

Paul

https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/srmilk

[Combe Martin]

5 hours ago, Pint of Adnams said:

Which may be another way of suggesting the handful that meet your requirements?

 

The underframes may have been similar but not standard. The braking arrangements differed even between the LNER types, the LNER uniquely tended to plate over the underframe, as has been pointed out the wheel types differed as did the axleboxes and presence or absence of a stiffening bar between the axleguards.

 

And are we proposing the earlier 4-wheel as well as 6-wheel underframes, the former lasting well into the 1930s?

 

Nowhere have I suggested just a 'handful that meet my requirements'.  When I started this thread I suggested making an accurate ex GWR underframe because there were more ex GWR  tankers than any other, plus with BR adopting the GWR underframe for BR built examples this means that this was the most numerous type in use.  After nationalisation all 4 'old' companies tankers could be seen anywhere in the country not just in their old region.

 

The early GWR underframes had the Dean-Churchward brake gear but this was only up to diagram 0.47 plus possibly 6 diagram 0.51 .   A total of just over 100.   From Diagram 0.52 they were succeeded by the later large brake level style, a total of over 200.   For this reason I suggest the later large brake lever type.  Both types were seen at Bailey Gate and I don't mind which type is produced but if only one is done it surely makes sense to produce the one with the largest quantity.  The other small difference is that BR built examples (after 1948 I believe)  were fitted with rollerbearing axle boxes.  This is only a small difference, and I would have thought could be an easy tooling alternative.  Photos suggest that some earlier individual underframes had rollerbearing axle boxes fitted later in their life (when in the works for maintenance), but you need a photo of a particular tanker at a specific time to say what was fitted and when.  I would suggest making the non BR underframes with the original axle boxes.

 

If a manufacturer wanted to build LMS underframes I have no problem with that, they were also seen at Bailey Gate, so were the SR ones too, but there wern't many of them.  I wouldn't suggest making LNER types, these were the smallest group, even less ..  only 38 tankers in total, so the comments re LNER differences are irrelevant.  As also are wheel diameter differences, because they are all the same size for GWR types. and a different same size for LMS types. 

 

By the late 50's there were two big fleets of tankers, the Express Dairies group and the United Dairies/Unigate group.  Bailey Gate was the later.  If a manufacturer was just to make just 2 diagrams it would make sense to make one from each. I would suggest picking tankers from the diagrams that had the largest numbers of tankers but also where there are photos showing which other details the tanker had, ie central ladder, or ladder/frame/side platform and its position, full straps or half hidden straps, top platform style, number and shape of tank supports, etc.  

 

Given a bit more time, I can produce a short list of diagrams that have ... 10 or more tankers but also where I have a photo too, that's of course provided I'm not accused  of trying to 'swing things my way'.

[BMacdermott]

10 hours ago, Combe Martin said:

Given a bit more time, I can produce a short list of diagrams that have ... 10 or more tankers but also where I have a photo too, that's of course provided I'm not accused  of trying to 'swing things my way'.

 

Hello CM

 

I can save you some time - The 00 Poll Team did that as part of the paper that was submitted.

 

I can't repeat it here (as we noted to the maker that we were sending it to them only) but many of the 6-wheel diagrams do have more than 10 examples. 

 

In summary though (and that can be gleaned from published sources open to all)...

 

If we ignore the circa 180 Milk Tank Wagons built in BR days, then the various companies had:

 

GWR - 236 

SR - 56

LMS - 170 (but 128 of those were from just Diag.1994)

ER - 42 (but only one diagram had more than 10 examples built)

 

For Milk Tank Trucks it was:

 

GWR - 34

SR - 7

LMS -13

ER - 9

 

Note that all figures are plus or minus a small amount as we can't account for every minor variant without massively detailed research.

 

It is fairly clear that the ER is the most likely to miss out.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)