drduncan

The Empire Mills project's next phase is, as I may have blamed Gareth for in the past, back-dating the china clay dries to the Edwardian period, which means it needs a new set of china clay wagons. I managed to find an interesting picture of what appeared to be a line of china clay wagons which had peaked ends and a solid roof - rather like salt wagons. Gareth, clearly in a mood of contrition, found a drawing of such a wagon belonging to the West Of England China Clay company. It looks like it was an ex broad gauge wagon converted to standard/narrow gauge in 1892. Now I had no excuse not to try to make them - blast the helpful chap. I decided that a batch of four would be a good start, on the basis that marking out four wouldn't take much longer than doing one. I used 40 thou sheet and marked out four sets of ends, sides and floors, and then scribbed the planking on the sides (the ends appear to have been covered in sheet steel - possible as part of the conversion to standard/narrow gauge). after this it was a matter of moments to snap out the components along the lines scored with a scalpel. With the components for the bodies ready, they were assembled with plasticweld. Finally solebars were added. However, there are still a lot of things that need to be done: Corner plates and door strapping have to be added Brake gear has to be made as the wagons have a 9'6" wheelbase, worse luck All the solebar and rivet detail has to be added The buffers have to be sourced and fitted. Anyone know where I can get self contained buffers for BRCW wagons that are possibly pre RCH standardisation? The roofs have to be constructed and fitted W irons, springs and axles boxes (grease) have to be added Painting and lettering And of course the AJ coupings need to be fitted. As always, I'll keep you posted with any progress. drduncan

The Empire Mills team have had a busy day. Les has been hard at work first replacing the highly temporary loading platform that Gareth had to cobble together to show the BBC - who then cancelled the day before the shoot. The new loading platform will be stonefaced toward the track, with the ground falling away gently on the platform side. While the papiermache was drying Les then had a crack at placing the cosmetic chairs - a job that everyone had been working very hard to avoid doing over the last few months. Meanwhile, Chris was working on the platform that sits in front of the very large china clay dry. This involved cutting lots of sections of ply to face the platform before covering it in randomm stone plasticard. The inset sections in the platform face will have ladders fitted in them in due course. Gareth wasn't idle either; he was busy working on his boggy bit at the front of the layout. The unkind (and unhelpfully observent) will notice I haven't said what I was doing....well I was busy making wagons for the layouts outing at Alexandra place in 2015 (which isn't that far away now - glup.) the progress of which can be seen on drduuncan's workbench. We also had an opportunity to start thinking about the next phase of the layout - the production of the coal mine option. To this end Les had brough in a couple of his Loco's to test priot to them being EM'd at some point in the future. As they are not the correct shade of green, I profess total ignorance about what they are! But Les says black is the new green, apparently - or at least it will be on the coal mine option! drduncan

Thanks! D

Excellent! Many thanks. Now, does somone out there have a drawing of this rather camera shy wagon, or the principal dimensions? drduncan

Ah, but that suggests an earlier change over date, or else there eouldnt be any grey wagons to comment on, the red being the survivors from the early/mid 1890s awaiting repainting! Isn't history wonderful? The more ambiguity the longer we can debate!!!!! D

For me its the fuss the GWR makes about getting the style of the 25" lettering right (there are appearance trials for various styles of lettering), with no mention of a simultaneous change in livery that clinches it. To me, if they were changing the livery at the same time as going over to 25" someone would have commented, but its seems that no one did, therefore the lettering change wasn't seen as such a big deal, why? I think because the wagons were already grey. First one to the National Archives (or the NRM at York) and who finds conclusive documentary evidence wins. D

And I'm also very aware that under the above reasoning my model of O5 44600 should be red not grey (it has a left hand G.W.R), but the facts about the actual date of the GWR going to grey wagons is so opaque I can live with it....at least for now!

Hmmm, maybe not. According to the evidence cited by John Lewis on the GWR modelling website, there are a number of conflicting sources for the date of going to grey. It could be any time from the 1880s to 1904 (and even this might not be that accurate). On balance I feel that an early to mid 1890s date for the changeover is acceptable (to me anyway) and thus cast plates and right hand G.W.R lettered wagons would be grey, but left hand G.W.R would be red.

Here are some snaps from the latest outpourings from the Wagon and carriage workshop (or workbench...). First are a pair of GWR V6 iron minks. They are Ratio kits, but the very dirty 37508 has grease axleboxes while the reasonably recently out-shopped 69721 has oil 'OK' axleboxes. Both are in the GWR 25" lettering for the period after 1904. Its my intention to build at least another three - 2 in the pre-1904 G. W. R livery, again with oil and grease axles boxes photographic or documentary evidence permitting (I may even do one in red, but very faded, - just to keep up with Gareth). The third will be the vac fitted Iron Mink with 3'7" wheels for passenger/express rated goods. Don't believe me that such a thing existed - look at the HMRS book on Iron Minks (by John Lewis, I think). Second are a pair of O4 5 plank opens, box with sheet rails, but one has been fitted with 'cast' number plates (from Masokits). These were in use during the late 1890s and early 1900s, until the 25" lettering came in to use in 1904. Both are Coopercraft kits, with ABS DC1 brakegear (once you notice the swan-neck behind the w irons I think its absence is extremely noticeable. Its a shame that so many good plastic kits (not just Coopercraft) are let down by the poor quality of the brakegear. Then there is this is an O2 7 plank wagon (Coopercraft, with ABS DC 1 brakegear), the only real difference between this and the O10 in the previous post is that the O10 is vac fitted. Finally, here is a work in progress - an Open C, built from a David Geen kit. However, it has an MJT inside bearing rocking unit - I'll compare its performance on Hope and Empire Mills with the uncompensated Python and let you know. Some of you may be wondering if the Locomotive shop is on strike as there have been no updates on 2811 or 788. There have been a few bumps in the path to happiness, which I will explain in due course. Having just previewed the post - and tried to sort out the images - I can only apologies but the computer refuses to put them where I want them.

Gareth has been pointing out for a while that a loading dock was a good idea. I had been resisting this on the grounds I didn't think one was needed what with two china clay dries on the layout. However, Gareth unfairly used both logic and prototype knowledge to undermine my case for glorious inactivity. He noted that post WW1 sack traffic if moved by closed van (as was wont to happen in the BR period) couldn't be loaded as the dries platforms would be too high to allow the doors to on many closed vans to open. It was also pointed out that there was a great deal of photographic evidence for cask traffic to be loaded from a loading dock (although casks could also be loaded from some dries). As can be seen in the picture of the Blackpool dries, casks are in the loading doors awaiting shipment. If this wasn't enough, Gareth also pointed out a loading dock would also be useful for inwards stores for the China clay works - and maybe a lock-up for some description. Clearly Gareth had been preparing well for his offensive. Clearly all I could do was give ground and try not to let the sulking be too obvious. Anyway, having granted Gareth permission to sing the 'I was right song'. We then had to decide how high the loading dock should be - the photographic evidence showing a large variation. In the end, after consulting many books (as a historian this is my default setting) the need for closed vans to be loaded or unloaded won out and we decided on sole bar height. The area for the new dock was marked out and then carefully cut with a Stanley knife. After repeated attempts to get the Stanley knife through the scenery (God knows what we did to it when we put it down, the bloody stuff was almost bullet proof) we resorted to first a small chisel and gentle taps of the hammer, to a bigger chisel that was smote mightily with the hammer. Eventually we got down to bare baseboards and then started filling the whole back in with foam board to make the carcase of the new platform and ground contours. Hopefully at the next work session we'll be able to finish roughing out the platform and get it fixed in place ready for painting and reinstating the scenery.

Having forgot to pack the weathered O13s when I headed off to the club yesterday evening, I thought I'd best photograph something I did have in the stock box - some POs that have just had their final coat of varnish. One of the problems with modelling PO wagons in Cornwall (and pre-1914 to boot) is the lack of photographic evidence. So, in order to keep the Empire Mills china clay dries and the industries on my own slowly gestating layout supplied with coal, I have made a few assumptions which I hope are logical. First use wagons from companies for which photographic evidence exists - like the Renwick Wilton wagon which was photographed at Bodmin. Second, use wagons from coal merchants/factors who are based in Cornwall or west Devon who would be likely to be found in Cornwall - like the Plymouth Coal Company. Third, china clay dries used a lot of coal, so I think it is reasonable to assume that the china clay companies would buy in bulk from collieries to get the best price. To this end I will be making short rakes from a variety of collieries which can then be used on the layout(s). As to which collieries? Well I'm assuming that those in Somerset, the Forrest of Dean, South Wales and Severn Valley would have the lowest transport costs within their total price and thus might have a lower price overall than those from the coalfields in the Midlands and further north. Of course, if anyone knows different and has information on the merchant/factor/colliery wagons seen in Cornwall pre-1914, liveries (and dates), running numbers and which company built the wagons (and a drawing too would be perfect) I'd be delighted to hear from them...

Thanks. As I'm constructing a rake of almost identical O13s, I want to inject variety in the overall look of the finished train by having very different weathering finishes. On other wagons I'll also be trying to darken the base coat of GWR freight grey. Duncan

Nick, Off the top of my head the photo reference is one of the GW Study Groups's 'Pannier' journals. As to china clay, I was intending to load it with casks not bulk china clay. Photos of pre 1914 cask china clay traffic suggest the GWR were quite happy to use almost any 4/5 plank open wagon. Bulk or loose china clay was of course transported in end door wagons like the ex-CMR tipplers or the later O13 china clay wagons. Duncan

These are the wagons I'm interested in. From the solitary poor photo I've seen they are iron bodieddrduncan

HI Adrian, Thanks for the info, but you are quite right its almost all late grouping and BR. I shall continue the hunt! Regards Duncan

Dear all, In many pictures of GWR 'Toad' brake vans a depot name is clearly visible on the wagon side. Can anyone shed light on which brake vans were allocated to which depots? I'm very interested in the 1900-1914 period, especially those brake vans (Diagram number and running numbers) that were allocated to Cornwall. The MRC's new EM gauge China Clay layout 'Empire Mills' will need several and any help you might be able to give will be much appreciated. Regards drduncan

Dear all, Does anyone have any information about GWR standard gauge 'tilt' wagons? Pictures, drawings, dimensions, running numbers and in-service dates would be very helpful. I'm looking to scratch build (or even commission a kit is there is enough detailed info on the prototype and modelling interest) for use on the MRC's new EM gauge China Clay layout 'Empire Mills.' Many thanks for any help or advice you can give, Regards drduncan

Thanks! I'll try to pose them on Hope on Thursday to get a better picture. I think thr important bit in the top layer of weathering is vertical brush strokes to simulate the impact of rain streaking the dirt.

It's no fun if you don't rise to the bait.... D

Yes, it helps a lot. Thank you,. Duncan

A while ago I posted some pictures of wagons that were being contructed for china clay traffic, both GWR and PO. Amongst the images were a pair of GWR O13 china clay wagons, painted, lettered, but not weathered. I dedcided that I would weather one (92971) quite lightly, the other (94100) more heavily. To weather wagons, I tned to dry brush and use acryilic paints. First, 'light rust' was lightly dry brished over the underframes using a mop headed soft brush. Then 92971 was lightly dry brushed with white paint, while 94100 had slightly heavier treatment, again using a soft mop headed brush. The it was time to swap to a much stiffer brush to apply heavy streaking to 94100; areas around doors, and the underframe beneath the side and end doors got especially heavy treatment. Then finally the interior of 92971 was dry brushed with a moderately heavy hand, and 94100 received a reasonably heavy wash of white to represnt the much havily staining it was supposed to have suffered in service.

You don't fancy doing a couple of 1076 Buffalo chassis as csb and split axle do you? You mentiied best practice is to do multiples!!!!! D

I don't suppose you have any info on the position or length of the rainstrips? D

As kits go, this one was not that filled me with joy - hence my enthusiasm for off-loading it to poor Gareth - which is a shame because I love the GWR's outside framed locos. First among the problems was the fact that the drawings were not of the same type of boiler/smoke box as represented in the kit - the drawing showed a raised smokebox coming through the pannier top - just like the later 57xx - only the boiler/tank top was flat in the model. Second, without the correct drawing the fact that the tank end had the wrong sized smoke box door completely passed me by. Third, I have found the Alan Gibson sprung hornblocks extremely fiddly and a good way to lose interest in the hobby, so the decision was made to convert it to a flexichas. Fourth, I found that the tank sides were longer by an appreciable margin than the tank top and bottom - something which did not fill me with confidence and meant a lot of filling. I could go on, but it would be unfair to do so as of course, this kit is very old in design terms and has had a serious makeover since it was first issued by M & L ( I should confess I passed an original cast version of the GWR 850 to Gareth and he professed to be quite underwhelmed by it - he told me to contact Alan Gibson and get the **** etches like he'd done for his one, but I digress...) Here in lies the problem, I think - it was a make over, replacing some cast parts with etched versions and I suspect it was not a complete re-design as such. Of course, the view from the cheap seats as someone who has never designed a kit is very different from the view from the kit designers position. Compromises are inevitable (if only in the weight of the kit v the real thing - I don't think we'd be able to lift a tank engine if its weight was reduced at a scale of 1:76!), but while the Alan Gibson revisions are a distinct improvement in individual item quality over the cast parts of the original M & L (with the exception of those dammed sprung hornblocks), I feel more attention was needed during the redesign to the construction of the kit as a whole, for example building in methods to easily facilitate the use of sub-assemblies which would ease painting and lining as well as the general integration of the new etched components with the existing cast parts like the tanks and boiler assembly. But, moans apart, its better to have a kit, even one that is not quite perfect, than have to scratchbuild it, and its worth emphasising that this kit - even post Alan Gibson (the original one, not Colin) redesign - is an old kit. I had this example since the early/mid 1990s if memory serves.... That said, I have the saddle tank version sitting in my 'to be built' drawer at home and I think that using a CSB chassis might avoid many of the admittedly self imposed snags with the kit's chassis. As for the rest, we shall see.... drduncan

Well for me, it was the need to accurately predict the finished weight of the model (until Gareth undertook the mammoth and thankless task of explaining hard sums to a historian aka beating it into me with a heavy object at the MRC a few weeks ago). However, I am tempted to give it a go (or stand behind Gareth looking over his shoulder while making enthusiastic, if uncomprehending noises of approval while he does it) as I have yet another Alan Gibson 1076 lurking in the 'to be built' drawer - only this one's a saddle tank. drduncan