Wickham Green

This is the Appleby Frodingham (Scunthorpe) version from BRCW, there were two versions of the lettering as per their Iron Ore Hoppers!

 

These were all pooled during the in September 1939 at outbreak of war and became BR P series wagons after and survived in this livery till they were eventually repainted/renumbered!

 

Mark Saunders

 

af coke lr.jpg

......... by which time they wouldn't have been a very attractive advert for Steel Plates !

As I understand it, loaded cattle wagons were marshalled at the front of trains because that's where the amount of coupling snatch is at its lowest, giving the smoothest ride and minimising any stress to the animals.

 

It had the added advantage that any wagons needing to be detached en-route could be shunted using the train engine with a minimum of fuss.

 

John

...... and, of course, cattle DID have to be detached e-route as they had to be offloaded and watered at prescribed intervals ..... without the Appendices in front of me I'm not sure whether feeding was necessary - nor mucking-out ! ( I suspect the latter was left 'til final destination.)

The Swanage Railway recently rebuilt a LMS Goods Van as a Maunsell Cattle wagon. Whilst the brakegear don't represent the prototypes, it's nice to see a preserved railway representing a traffic that is now long gone.

 

In general Cattle wagons were always placed next to the train so to prevent any stress to the livestock whilst the train was moving.

I think you're confusing yourself with the Mad-Hints rebuild you referred to earlier .......... yes, not very accurate as they left it at 17'6'' long ( Now why does that remind me of a certain family of model cattle wagons with L.M.S. pedigree ? )

Oddly, I've never found any note in the General Appendices about coupling loaded cattle wagons at the head of the train - but it was certainly common ........... cattle wagons did appear further back at times - but were they loaded ? probably not.

Hi Clive,

 

I understand, but on the other side, Bachmann do provide high level updates such as "being researched", "in the drawing room", "In production", "on there way" and so on. These are shown every quarter in the club magazine and even make it on here. There is little point doing more as these are not fast track projects. There are so many factors which enter that predicting which quarter something will appear is already a challenge, let alone which month even towards the end.

 

Below those high level terms is an awful lot of detail. I think it would be unreasonable for them to start saying "production tools set up", "BR batch being assembled" etc..

However  do know from the Kernow O2, that the production process can last from 1 to 3 months depending on numbers, variants etc.

Even once shipped, it has to go through customs, this can be quick (1 day) or very slow (a few weeks). This is one of several things that Bachmann cannot control so overall fixing an exact date of when it will be actually on my layout is impossible.

 

Given all the factors, having slightly more progress detail for us to analyze and anticipate delivery is all a rather futile and pointless exercise, that I feel will only lead to more disappointment. The best estimate from anyone will be a certain month, give or take 1 or 2 months either side.

 

Now that they are in production, we know there is a high probability that we will have them within the next 3 months. So the best advice really is to set aside a budget now. I have 3 of these on order which means I am not dipping into the Hornby Bargains right now which I would have indulged in if there was little or nothing else on the horizon. I know that these, the LSWR coaches and the radials are going to be here by the end of this year (there might be a Kernow thing to consider on Friday too).

 

Rgds John

"In Production" is exactly the sort of report I was hoping for - no more detail's necessary, just confirmation that something's actually happening  ....... so where did you get that valuable info from ? - did I miss a reply to my original question ?

Not sure what that is meant to convey !

 

I was, and remain, merely a little mystified as to why production progress reports seem to be expected in our hobby.

 

As to placating partners; I have found that being open about my financial commitments, plus ensuring that such expenditure is not just one-sided, is most likely to keep relationships on an even keel.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Isn't it fair to expect production reports when the manufacturers choose to announce their goods in advance  -  most non-model-railway products are only advertised when they're actually available on the shelves but this industry doesn't seem to work like that !

{ You'll note that I refrained from saying THREE AND A HALF YEARS in advance ! - er, until now .... oops.)

Saying they will  be manufactured in June, and being shipped, takes a fair while to make these models... sadly not do-able in 14 days, I would expect it will take a month maybe 2 to complete all the variations Model Rail commissioned. I wouldn't expect them to be here till end of Summer.

Didn't expect them to be finished and on the ship half way through the month - but, to my mind, "manufactured in June" means that there should be progress to report by now.

I would expect all the moulds to be ready and the CNC machines fully programmed already so "manufacture" commences when the button - sorry - keypad is pressed ......... and all the bits will be spewed out within a couple of days. THEN the slower processes will commence ( painting / assembly / testing ) - but, with the relatively small volumes involved, it SHOULD be possible to complete within a month if sufficient resources are put into it !

............ I only asked whether there was any news from the factory !

No need to wonder. We're told they will be manufactured in June - that is JUNE 2016. (CJL)

............ well, we're well into June now ......any news from the factory ? - has the ship been chartered ?

it's no good just having enough preserved examples around - you need enough preserved examples capable of making steam loco-like sounds ! ....... and I think that's only one at present : which should be enough !

Latest availability guesstimate was manufacture in June, if i remember rightly ......... so, add a slow boat from China an' you might just be OK for your date in September.

Kernow, like me, are based down here in the Duchy of Cornwall - (the clue's in the name).

 

We're none too sure here which century we are living in - nor do we care much.

 

All this foreign currency transaction fee business seems to smack of government  / big business interference in free trade - no such problems in the old smuggling and wrecking days !!

 

But - and here's the important bit - don't get too worked up about it; as you say, it's not vast amounts of money.

 

The USA tank will arrive dre'ckly, and you'll forget all about these minor hassles.

 

On the other hand, you could always switch to modelling USA prototypes - problem gone !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood - (on Padstow 'Obby 'Oss day).

........ erm .............. isn't it a USA Tank prototype this thread's all about ??!?

A brake van required 3 lights in total. One tail lamp hung on the back plus 1 lamp hung on each side. The side lamps were there so when the loco crew looked back from the engine they had visual confirmation that the guards van was still on the back and the train was complete. The tail lamp was for the use of signalmen and its presence confirmed the train to be complete.

Sorry to hark back to September '14 but I'm catching up with a few things and I think the matter of tail lamps needs a little clarification. What phil-b259 says is perfectly correct ( Rule 120 ) - EXCEPT ON THE SOUTHERN ! : from the 1933 Rule Book ( 1st January ) Rule 120 had a footnote stating "Southern Railway Goods trains must carry on the last vehicle two side lamps only, which will serve as tail lamps, viz., one on each side of the trailing end of the vehicle, each showing a white light forward and a red light at rear." - so from 1933 a third lamp was NOT carried on the Southern. This certainly still applied in 1945 when the Rule Book was reprinted ( my copy ) and may have lasted until the B.R. Rule Book was issued in 1950.

When originally built, these L.S.W.R. brake vans ( and those of numerous other Companies ) carried fixed side lights which shone fore and aft - with a red slide fitted to whichever was aft at the time. Clearly these could not be used as tail lights to denote the rear of the train as a van marshalled in the middle of a train still carried them and they'd look exactly the same in daylight - so a ( third ) tail light WAS carried until the fixed lights were removed early in Southern days ........ and three lamps would have been carried until ALL side lamps had been removed and the Rule Book revised : unfortunately I can't say whether this changed with the 1933 Rule Book or earlier. ( Rule 107 was the equivalent number in earlier Rule Books - the previous edition dating from only 2nd February 1930 : "All copies ..... must be ..... sent ..... to the Waste Paper Depot, Longhedge" ! )

Anyway, to sum up - a) L.S.W.R. and early Southern days ; fixed side lights + tail light : b) transitional period ; loose side lights + tail light : c) 1933 ( or perhaps earlier ) to 1945 ( at least ) ; two side lights ONLY : 1950 ( or, perhaps earlier ) 'til the end of unfitted freights ; loose side lights + tail light. ( Different rules applied to fully fitted freight or passenger-rated trains, of course.)

Well, if Chris is wondering what livery to put on the next batch, Great Western is bound to sell ........... complete with copper-capped stovepipes, of course !!?!

Going back to the Meldon question, for a moment, the General Appendix ( Mine's 1960 edition so was probably current at the time - though details wouldn't have changed very rapidly, anyway ! ) stipulates a 25mph MAXIMUM speed for hauling dead locos in freight trains : I don't think the Southern would have been keen for their nice efficient, fully braked bogie ballast hoppers to be loitering at that sort of snail's pace so transit in the local pick-up goods ( or whatever S.R. terminology was ) would have been far more likely.

Of course nowadays they' not dream of taking it by rail and would stick it on a ( road ) low loader - er, probably at somewhat more than 25mph ! ............ mention of 350HP shunters reminds me of a story of such a beast that was sent from - if I remember rightly - Three Bridges to Selhurst by road not very many years ago ....... and then it went back the same way once they'd filled the fuel tank !

Yes, Bradley say Dec.1962 ....... I don't know about days - more likely weeks running slowly 'cos the driver knew they tended to run hot or weeks sitting around somewhere waiting for repairs 'cos he didn't !

IF 'Gauge Correction' is designed-in at the start there's no reason it should cost ( much ) more than 00 ....... Bachmann MIGHT have realised this with their wagons already : I've just converted one of their ( Southern ) brakevans and the brakes are perfectly aligned for EM without any mods whatsoever ......................... and when you think how many zillion quid 'the trade' have poured into creating decent models rather than the TOYS we used to have to put up with - surely they don't think they're just catering for the kiddies' trainset market any more ??!? - if they do, they ARE grossly overpriced. ( cue Railroad ............... )

No, there isn't a mainsteam EM/P4 market out there - but, like everything else, if you bring it within reach it can flourish ................. think how many coffee shops there were in your local High Street fifteen years ago - now you can't move for them !

( Moderator : can we have a site that accepts the English spelling of realised, please !!?! )

Maybe one day someone will cotton on that there are people out here who don't model 4'1½'' narrow gauge and who really would appreciate a wheel-change facility being designed in .......... I think the first batch of ( Dapol ? ) Austerity saddle tanks actually came with EM wheels though the model was let down by other factors ........................ and then there's Sutton Locomotive Workshop’s Class 24.

Is that 3mm ? ........ there have been some weird 'n' wonderful diameters over the last few years ! - in fact, didn't Bachmann change the size of the dub-dee axle ? ..... or am I thinking of something else ?

In theory Alan Gibson do the right wheels for an EM ( or P4 ) conversion - but probably only with 'bog standard' 1/8'' axles ........ but what size ARE the axles on the Model Rail Yankee Tankee ?

Sorry for the cynicism but I think the latest guesstimate - on one of these parallel threads - was 'First Quarter 2016' and that seems to have joined all its predecessors in the Recycle Bin !

.......... anyway, I shouldn't be complaining : my 'investment' of £114 in December 2012 is theoretically worth £124.95 now - that's almost 10% in 3½ years ......... obviously my USA qualifies for a better rate than my ISA !

" .......... well into the summer ......" of 2017 or 2018, I wonder ....... ? ..........................................