Miss Prism Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 I think I'm getting my head around the 3500g intermediates, and I assume this is one: http://www.gwr.org.uk/tenders/7828.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 I think I'm getting my head around the 3500g intermediates, and I assume this is one: http://www.gwr.org.uk/tenders/7828.jpg Yes. The tell tale seam of rivets is there. Note the strengthening sections welded into the underframe to support the spring hangers, similar to the underframe with preserved 2818 Mike wiltshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Note the strengthening sections welded into the underframe to support the spring hangers Presumably a mod made fairly soon after their 1925 build? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Note the strengthening sections welded into the underframe to support the spring hangers, similar to the underframe with preserved 2818 I'm confused. What's the difference between what we are seeing there and the standard Lot A112 / drawing 72342 underframe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 I do not have the drawing, but the section at the base of the spring hangers mount are welded in. David Geen and myself have spent many hours going over the A112 tender behind the 2818 when it was at Shildon and the join lines are clearly visible through the paint. more so from behind. I am assured that this was a repair that was applied to all the intermediates. Mike Wiltshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) OK, I *think* I see. Take a look at this. Apologies for the drawings, my sketches were never meant to survive reproduction at this sort of size. The upper one is my best interpretation of the setup in drawing 72342, which is Drawing 18 in Pannier no 17, and not the best reproduction for interpreting fine detail. The lower one is my interpretation of your photo and others of tender 2376 as preserved behind 2818. 2818 is at Swindon now isn't she? I'll have to try and get down there and take a closer look. As far as I can tell from the way things line up, the actual profile of the frames looks the same. What's changed are the later style springs and spring hanger arrangement. *If* I'm right one might guess that there were stress cracks all round the bolt holes, being so close to the edge of the frames, and so they had to weld up the cracks and the holes - or more likely weld a whole new piece in. How does that match up with what you've seen in the flesh? Edited February 21, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I see you point. They look pretty much the same to me now I have compared you drawings. All the drawings/images for the Pannier articles were supplied by David Geen. The challenge with drawing 72342 is, it is speculated, it is not the first. On the drawing it is marked up 'PREVIOUS DRAWING 41425'. Unfortunately the date stamp is not legible. I will be seeing David at the weekend so I will have a rummage through his drawings and see what i can find. Here are some close ups we took before 2818 departed from Shildon. The repair marks do not show up in picture form. Mike Wiltshire 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) Mike, 41425 is the drawing for lot A79 on, (the drawings register lists 41428 as being the frame plan for that lot) so it is indeed the previous drawing - but for the previous design back in 1911. Drawings were amended as required, but I think if radical changes had been made they'd have had to issue a new drawing. The drawings register lists 72342 as being dated 24-11-23. The drawings register suggests work on the flush tank design started from 24-4-25, so before the A112 tenders were in service. So it doesn't seem as if the A112 frames were anything but an interim design. I suppose the A112 frames may have proved unsatisfactory on repairs even before A112 was built, but its very very unsafe speculation. Swindon is more accessible for me than Shildon, so I shall have to go and have a look, but it seems a reasonable hypothesis that this design of frame cracked spectacularly and had to be welded up with all the original rivet holes gone. Edited February 21, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenrash Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 Hello Mike, Drwg 72342 is available on the NRM web site in the Free Samples. Drwg 41429 which is "Tank for Tender Capacity 3500 GALS" is also freely available in the same section. I agree with what JimC is saying, and look forward to results of his investigation. Does anybody have Sixsmith "Manor" book and can therefore put an number to the intermediate tender in Miss P's post? Richard Ashenden Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) The complications are interesting. I was just looking again at this photo, claimed to be circa 1923. http://railphotoprints.uk/p176522356/hc2648ef#hc2648ef A 3,000 gallon tender unless I am mistaken, bearing lot A112 style frames, so that suggests it cannot be before Dec 1923. But when I looked at it further there are short spring hangers and the later very straight springs, much the same as tender 2376 now has, but which don't appear, as far as I can make out, to have been fitted to new tenders until lot A123 in 1931. So I very much doubt that photo is circa 1923. Might 1933 be more likely or is there other dating evidence that I am not au fait with? The other interesting variation is the tender believed to be 2202 (currently carrying 2056) normally with Ditcheat Manor. That one has the prominent rectangular reinforcing, which uses long spring hangers, not the short ones, but still the straighter springs. The permutations of frame/reinforcement/spring type/spring hanger etc seem almost endless. That's the trouble with Swindon's standardisation for modellers. It didn't mean all parts were the same, it meant that parts were highly interchangeable over decades, and there really is no such thing as a definitive configuration. Edited February 22, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) The complications are interesting. I was just looking again at this photo, claimed to be circa 1923. http://railphotoprints.uk/p176522356/hc2648ef#hc2648ef That's later than 1923. Riveted smokebox rings and plated cab portholes makes it at least 1925/6, and probably at least 1928. See also Duke 3271 'c 1928', with long spring hangers: http://railphotoprints.uk/p176522356/hc2648ef#h16a4a684 Edited February 22, 2018 by Miss Prism Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 (edited) OK, I've been trying to put together a little summary of changes to some of the major components from the drawing register for the 3,500 gall tenders up to A112, and the 4000 gal ones beyond that. Starting with lot A79 At Lot A92 the axleboxes changed from drawing 12504 to drawing 47737, and the brake cylinder changed from 25611 to 48415. At Lot A112 the frame/erecting plan drawing changed from 41428 to 72342, and the spring gear drawing from 41660 to 72129. At Lot A113 the frame/erecting plan changed to 76937, the frame plates from 41509 to 76938, the spring gear to 77388, the tank to 76940, and the brake gear to 76941. A GA drawing was now listed, 76936. The frame/erecting plan appears to have served that purpose earlier on. At lot A120 the GA changed to 89790, the spring gear to 89791, and the tank to 87554. At Lot A123 the GA changed to 92460, the erecting plan to 92461, the frame plates to 92642, the spring gear to 92464, and the brake gear to 93074. For A123 only 76941 has been crossed out and replaced with 93074. At Lot A145 the axle boxes changed to 111273. At Lot A167 the brake gear changes to 113704 The Hawksworth tenders changed frame plan to 122517, frame plates to 121720, and tank drawing to 122574. so even though the slab sided Hawksworth tenders looked radically different a lot of the components were the same as their predecessors. Its quite clear that the design changes were incremental, which in turn means that new and improved components could and as we have seen often were fitted to earlier tenders. What would be useful is to correlate the drawing numbers with what we actually see. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to look at a tender and say those are 111273 axleboxes. Or is my background running a parts dept in my youth showing? From a modelling POV it would doubtless be handy if component manufacturers could correlate their offerings with the drawing numbers. Edited February 23, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 A question. Were there any welded/flush rivetted Collett 4000 gallon tenders? I seem to recall a reference to there being some but have never seen a photo. I was at Quainton Road last week and noticed a half-completed welded 4000 gallon tender for their rebuilt Hall. However that is I think just the best way to construct a tender tank these days. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 (edited) A question. Were there any welded/flush rivetted Collett 4000 gallon tenders? I seem to recall a reference to there being some but have never seen a photo. I was at Quainton Road last week and noticed a half-completed welded 4000 gallon tender for their rebuilt Hall. However that is I think just the best way to construct a tender tank these days. Chris RCTS states that about 5 of the last lot of "Collett" tenders (A186), probably the last 5, had welded tanks. That would be 4015 to 4019 in 1946. There's no mention of a drawing number for a welded tank in the drawing register though. Not everything seems to have been recorded, as with the high tender sides we've discussed above, which also don't have a drawing listed in the register. Edited February 23, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castle Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 A question. Were there any welded/flush rivetted Collett 4000 gallon tenders? I seem to recall a reference to there being some but have never seen a photo. I was at Quainton Road last week and noticed a half-completed welded 4000 gallon tender for their rebuilt Hall. However that is I think just the best way to construct a tender tank these days. Chris Hi All, The only issue with welding tender tanks is that it is very easy to get the large, flat and relatively thin panels to warp and bow slightly with the heat involved and there isn’t any easy way of getting it out once it’s in there.. In fact I’ve seen teams of workers going around modern shipyards with huge gas torches and massive hammers to flatten stuff out post welding which is a skill in itself! Hot riveting, although more labour intensive and much slower, is far easier to keep flat. The new tender tank for No. 2999 is a mix of both. On the inside where it is difficult to get to with rivet gear and can’t be seen it’s welded, and on the outside it’s flush riveted just as it would have been back in the day. If you look down it’s flanks, it is absolutely flat. It’s not to say welded tanks can’t be done well - they can and have been done so - it’s just not as easy as you first think. I hope that’s interesting! All the best Castle 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 The book "Great Western Saint class locomotives" has a number of photos with varying tenders. Anyone after this book might like to try ordering it on the German amazon site (amazon.de) where I got one for a fiver! I think the price is a bit higher now but still massively below the marked price of 25.00. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenrash Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 Hi All, I would speculate that the A112 Frame plate fell out of favour only because the internal radii are more expensive to make with available tools in the 1920's. Straight lines of the Collet type are simpler to cut and machine up. The shape harks back the the curves of the Dean era. The A113 4000 gal tender seems to be the first radical change in design since the start of the 3000 gal tenders in 1890's. The 3500 gal tenders have the same length and height of the 3000 gal type. Only the tank width was changed from 6ft-6ins to 8ft-0ins. Around 1904 there must have been an edict that all future passenger(?) tenders were to be vacuum braked. Possibly prompted by the Southall accident. Have been watching, on Youtube, 6023 doing "Load Tests" on the Seven Valley Line a few days ago. Gents wind up the volume. It awesome!!!!!!!!! Richard A. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted March 11, 2018 Share Posted March 11, 2018 On the way back from the Aycliffe show, a couple of us called in at Shildon to find 2818 still there. A surprise to us all as last time we saw 2818 the tender had been separated and it was ready to leave. Now reconnected and not in a position to leave in a hurry. We took the opportunity to crawl around the tender again. As JimC says, the frames are the same shape as the original plans confirmed when we got back to DG's house and compared shots to his plans. There are plate replacements. I took a large no of shots but struggled to get the join lines to show. Just below the arrow you can just make out the distortion where the metals have been joined. Again confirming JimC suggestion, the springs were changed for a type with more leaves but shorter hangers. The hangers have been moved to the top, in line with the main horizontal frame. The original curved piece, where the longer hangers were bolted through have been cut away and replaced with new metal, assumed due to failure of the holes. This shot does show the repair and is on the last axlebox next to the buffer beam and shows what could be a further repair as this is different to the other replacements. Mike Wiltshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted March 11, 2018 Share Posted March 11, 2018 Excellent stuff, thank you very much to both of you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenrash Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 Laying aside the changes for the spring attachments, is this tender turning into another story like 3206, earlier on in this thread? ie a 1950's cobble together. I do not understand why the tender number, stated by JimC, is an A112 tender, when the tank is clearly not! I would assume the number went with the tank, not with the frame. Richard A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 (edited) I do not understand why the tender number, stated by JimC, is an A112 tender, when the tank is clearly not! I would assume the number went with the tank, not with the frame. I think its pretty safe to assume that, as with locomotives, at Swindon the number went with the number! If grandfather's axe needed a new handle it got a new handle, if it needed a new blade it got a new blade. According the the drawings register the tank for lot A112 was the same as the lots before it. I think I'm going to have to shell out on some of the tender drawings that haven't been published. I know the collection has to be financed, but damn, a few drawings soon adds up to real money... As discussed above though the high and long tender sides generally associated with lot A112 aren't recorded in the drawings register (unless I've missed something!). Its a fair assumption that those high sides, lot A112 and personally I suspect others, were produced to cosmetically match the cabs of Castles and Stars. That being the case there would be no reason to perpetuate the high sides once the 4 cylinder locomotives had 4,000 gal tenders. Thus the high sides, being unnecessary, were scattered round the fleet, and any replacements would be done with the standard sides, normally as per the drawing for that lot, which is what we see here. ========= On the subject of intermediate/highsided tender types, I don't have a good collection of Castle photos. It would interest me to see very early (1920s) photos of 4009 as a Castle, and 4076 - 4082 to see exactly what features their tenders had. Similarly lot A11 tenders in those early days, 2222-2229, 2362 and 2363. Edited March 13, 2018 by JimC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 I think its pretty safe to assume that, as with locomotives, at Swindon the number went with the number! If grandfather's axe needed a new handle it got a new handle, if it needed a new blade it got a new blade. According the the drawings register the tank for lot A112 was the same as the lots before it. I think I'm going to have to shell out on some of the tender drawings that haven't been published. I know the collection has to be financed, but damn, a few drawings soon adds up to real money... As discussed above though the high and long tender sides generally associated with lot A112 aren't recorded in the drawings register (unless I've missed something!). Its a fair assumption that those high sides, lot A112 and personally I suspect others, were produced to cosmetically match the cabs of Castles and Stars. That being the case there would be no reason to perpetuate the high sides once the 4 cylinder locomotives had 4,000 gal tenders. Thus the high sides, being unnecessary, were scattered round the fleet, and any replacements would be done with the standard sides, normally as per the drawing for that lot, which is what we see here. ========= On the subject of intermediate/highsided tender types, I don't have a good collection of Castle photos. It would interest me to see very early (1920s) photos of 4009 as a Castle, and 4076 - 4082 to see exactly what features their tenders had. Similarly lot A11 tenders in those early days, 2222-2229, 2362 and 2363. The issue with cosmetic appearance perhaps explains why these tenders were often later seen attached to the Saints, which didn't get 4000 gallon tenders very often? If the number belongs to the tank, then the sides are no more part of that then the frames are. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimC Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Tender variations... I'm just having a session scanning works drawings in Russell, and happened to look a bit more closely at Fig 615 in Vol2, which I had assumed was just an extract from a weights diagram. Looking closer its a bit more detailed than that with some useful measurements. Anyway, its labelled Standard 3,500 gallon tender, Swindon, October 1936. What is drawn from the footplate up is apparently a standard well tank tender tank and gear as per all the 3500 gal tenders built up to the mid 1920s, but the frames are 1936 and later type, with wide hornguides, short hangers and straight springs. So it appears to be representative of what a lot A79-A111 tender might look like being turned out by the works after a major repair and new frames, but not apparently anything that was built new! If I've found the right entry in the NRM list then its a drawing that was prepared for modellers. So the moral is that you even need to be very careful about GWR drawings! If you look at the tenders drawn on weight diagrams (as in Russell again) you'll see a similar assortment of combinations which weren't built new, but may have come to exist after components were mixed and matched in the factory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenrash Posted March 15, 2018 Share Posted March 15, 2018 Hello All, I also noted the weight diagrams do not match with the photographic record, as JimC has said. As to 2818's tender 2376. Is there any stamped numbers on the tender frame? As GWR did on loco parts. The irony of this tender is that it is exactly to drwg 7232, bar spring changes and buffer changes. I suppose the Drawing register does not say "All built with high sides". Maybe this is far fetched. 2376 was attached to 4092 5/1/26 to ? 100A1 ?/1926 to 12/26 4037 12/26 to 6/28 4995 2/3/31 to 25/4/32 according to Sixsmith. Dates a little vague in places. This drwg 72342 from NRM sample section. Also this is the photograph that Mr H Le Fleming used in Part 8 RCTS to illustrate what is an "Intermediate" tender. It comes from Sixsmith Castle book. I think the caption writer went to quite a bit of trouble to try to nail down what is an "A112 Intermediate Tender" I am grateful to JimC in providing the Drawing changes list. Now it the tender number is known I can find the lot number and now know what components should be on the tender, I think that is about as close as one can get in year 2018. From Jim's list only 12 of the drawings are listed on the NRM "Swindon Drawing List" No Axleboxes. Sorry Jim. But I don't think that enough drawings have survived to get any closer. I have purchased Laurence Waters "Hall" book. This is the first book, i have seen, where the author/caption writer has quoted tender numbers where at all possible. May it continue!!!! I purchased this in the hope of finding more Dean 4000 tenders. There is a photograph of 4903 "Astley Hall" taken at Reading 12 March 1948. The Author ascribes the tender as "Dean tender 1459" ie another 4000 gal tender. It has the original frame, no mods and long fender as per a standard 3500 tender. But more of this another time. Richard Ashenden Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenrash Posted March 15, 2018 Share Posted March 15, 2018 Just realised I put a line through 4086 in the caption as the record say the 4086 never had an "A112" attached. Richard A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now