9' wagon chassis (OO)

[22xx]

I'm no expert on wagon brake gear, but it seems odd to me that all the new 9' Dapol POWs I've seen (in the flesh and on the Dapol and Hattons websites) appear to have it on only one side. I assume it's deliberate, so I'd be very grateful to anyone who can shed some light on the prototypical / modelling / manufacturing reason for it. Thanks very much in advance!

[BernardTPM]

Providing they have modelled it with the correct style of linkage so that it could (if real) be operated from both sides (normally achieved with the 'Morton clutch' arrangement) it would not be unusual to have just two brake shoes on the same side. Many steel 16 ton minerals were built this way, even into the 1950s.

[22xx]

Thanks, Bernard. I'll check that out later.

[craigwelsh]

Do you mean this sort of wagon http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=25532 http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=25530 ? Its frankly a bit of a joke all around for new tooling..

 

It has independent brakes gear on one side only so its only really valid up until very early in the century before the RCH ruled that you needed to be able to operate brakes at the right hand end of both sides of the wagon. I think you had brakes both sides by 1907 spec though most of the fittings are the 1907 design.

 

Most of these wagons had bottom doors so no cross shaft.

 

The door catches being 1/2 way up a plank is quite odd and the door strapping leading up to it would really only be the length of the door.

[BernardTPM]

Well, seems they've modelled a very old wagon there!

[22xx]

Do you mean this sort of wagon http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=25532 http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=25530 ? Its frankly a bit of a joke all around for new tooling..

 

It has independent brakes gear on one side only so its only really valid up until very early in the century before the RCH ruled that you needed to be able to operate brakes at the right hand end of both sides of the wagon. I think you had brakes both sides by 1907 spec though most of the fittings are the 1907 design.

 

Most of these wagons had bottom doors so no cross shaft.

 

The door catches being 1/2 way up a plank is quite odd and the door strapping leading up to it would really only be the length of the door.

 

Those are the ones.

[Poor Old Bruce]

Providing they have modelled it with the correct style of linkage so that it could (if real) be operated from both sides (normally achieved with the 'Morton clutch' arrangement) it would not be unusual to have just two brake shoes on the same side. Many steel 16 ton minerals were built this way, even into the 1950s.

At least Bachmann put a brake handle on the opposite side and a cross shaft, Dapol seem to have forgotten them!

 

Richard

[craigwelsh]

At least Bachmann put a brake handle on the opposite side and a cross shaft, Dapol seem to have forgotten them!

 

Richard

The wagon discussed would never have a cross shaft, its either independent brakes one side or both but never Morton. Aside from the possibility of bottom doors I doubt they would want to pay to use the patent for the clutch.

[Pennine MC]

The wagon discussed would never have a cross shaft, its either independent brakes one side or both but never Morton. Aside from the possibility of bottom doors I doubt they would want to pay to use the patent for the clutch.

 

I cant put it any better than that but as added evidence (if t'were needed), the pushrods are 'right over left' at the centre pivot, not 'left over right' as they would be with Morton gear. No doubt they'll sell because of the liveries but even after ten years on the market, Bachmann's wooden POs take a lot of beating. Competition, these aint

[Poor Old Bruce]

The wagon discussed would never have a cross shaft, its either independent brakes one side or both but never Morton. Aside from the possibility of bottom doors I doubt they would want to pay to use the patent for the clutch.

The wagon needs independent brakes both sides then, not just one with nowt on t'other!

 

Richard

[Barry Rhys]

Do you mean this sort of wagon http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=25532 http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=25530 ? Its frankly a bit of a joke all around for new tooling..

 

It has independent brakes gear on one side only so its only really valid up until very early in the century before the RCH ruled that you needed to be able to operate brakes at the right hand end of both sides of the wagon. I think you had brakes both sides by 1907 spec though most of the fittings are the 1907 design.

 

Most of these wagons had bottom doors so no cross shaft.

 

The door catches being 1/2 way up a plank is quite odd and the door strapping leading up to it would really only be the length of the door.

 

I was uncertain about the timing of the 'brake operation at right hand end of both sides' regulations, so I checked this out last night in Bill Hudson's Private Owner Wagon series - Vol.2 has a chapter on wagon construction and regulatory developments. Apparently the regulation was a Board of Trade requirement, as opposed to an RCH (Railway Clearing House) one, that was enacted in 1911 and intended to be implemented for all new-built wagons by November of that year (as far as I'm aware that covered both PO and railway company built wagons), and also requiring existing wagons to be modified within a certain period (sorry, no info). However, due largely to loud cries of anguish from several large railway companies, and later the more immediate effects of the First World War, the implementation dates were extended. The latest new built wagon with brakes on one side only that I can find in said Bill Hudson volume is dated 1914, and there are scarcely any built prior to that date having brakes both sides.

 

Understandably, the RCH 1907 Standard drawing does not specify brakes, or operation of brakes, at both sides of a wagon, whereas the RCH 1923 Standard does specify the requirement.

 

However, implementation of the 'modification of single-side brake operation to both-sides operation' requirement appears to have been somewhat protracted! Bill Hudson states that, although owners of small quantities of PO wagons may have modified them relatively quickly, owners of extensive fleets (he mentions, for example, the immense Stephenson & Clarke (S & C) fleet) took much longer, so single-sided wagons could still be seen well into the 1930's!! I guess there weren't many left by then, but it does show how late such wagons still slipped the regulatory net.

 

Coming to the Dapol model, as Craig says, several of the fittings match the 1907 RCH Standard (eg crown plates on solebar (the semicircular plates above the axleboxes), no door spring), so single side brakes are quite likely to be correct for an as-built wagon - although Hatton's description of "Era 3 - The Big Four 1923-1947" is a little optimistic.

 

However, enough of this armchair modeller's commentary! Although Dapol's prototype correctness is to be applauded, to quote Craig, "Its frankly a bit of a joke all around for new tooling.." Take a look at the moulded ends of the door planks, for example, and the thickness of the ends - more a 7-log wagon than a 7-plank.

 

 

The wagon needs independent brakes both sides then, not just one with nowt on t'other!

 

Richard

 

As above, in an as-built condition, brakes and brake lever on one side only is very likely to be correct for an RCH 1907-spec(don't ask me about the livery though!). If the wagon was unbraked because the shunter didn't fancy jumping between moving wagons to reach a brake lever on the far side, well... tough sh*te.

 

Neil

[Poor Old Bruce]

........ in an as-built condition, brakes and brake lever on one side only is very likely to be correct for an RCH 1907-spec.

Accepted but many wagons built to that spec would still be around donkeys years later when they would have been fitted with extra brake gear. Surely, if Dapol put brakes on both sides of their wagons it would be far easier to chop one side off if you didn't want it than to source extra bits to stick on.

 

Richard

[Barry Rhys]

Accepted but many wagons built to that spec would still be around donkeys years later when they would have been fitted with extra brake gear. Surely, if Dapol put brakes on both sides of their wagons it would be far easier to chop one side off if you didn't want it than to source extra bits to stick on.

 

Richard

 

Yep, good point, I fully agree with you there. Would make the "Era 3 - 1923-1947" thing perfectly credible too.

 

Neil

[Kits from Somerset]

Also the buffers are more sutable for a 1960ies wagon, than a new one out now, and the body is of simerler age. It is mainly aimed at the collectors where the livery is correct but the wagon dosen't matter.

[craigwelsh]

Also the buffers are more sutable for a 1960ies wagon, than a new one out now, and the body is of simerler age. It is mainly aimed at the collectors where the livery is correct but the wagon dosen't matter.

Actually i'd say they are a bad attempt at the round based buffers of the 1907 spec.

 

Dapol already had a generic PO wagon to slap any old livery on though, i'm not sure why they went to all the trouble of doing a new one badly.. It must be about 10 years since Bachmann did the 1923 7-plank and that is a much better tooling. The only downside is that the diagonals meet the vertical ironwork which is very common on 8-plank but not 7, the Parkside kit has the more common type.

 

I did look at the Dapol wagon in Antics yesterday and it didn't improve in my opinion on the closeup! Things like the 'V' lacking bolt heads jump out.

 

Thanks to Barry Rhys for the pretty comprehensive details on brake fitting legislation. As i'm a late BR modeller its pretty much 1923 spec only for me and I only have hazy notes on this earlier period. I know the rules also clarified later that the lever must be at the right hand end for which the GWR got an extension to comply with due to the original Dean Churchward gear being on a cross shart at one end not opposite corners.

[22xx]

Thanks for all the responses. Interesting and useful stuff. I was aware of the Victorian practice of putting the brake on only one side, but this thread has added a lot to my understanding of the transition.