watfordtmc

Just drawing attention to this current issue of Backtrack (Apr 2024), which contains the quite well known John Spencer Gills image of Banstead Goods Yard (Epsom Downs branch) on 24/05/1963. Image shows three 16t minerals, including LNER Dia 188 mineral E272920 (Cambrian). Some replating evident and welded side door visible, along with one LNE and one BR axlebox. Refs Backtrack April 2024, vol 38 no 4 issue 396, p 211. LNER Wagons 4A. Tatlow P, Wild Swan Publications (Didcot) 2012. P70-74 for discussion on steel mineral wagons. Regards TMc 22/03/2024

I don’t know the answer to your question but offer a couple of thoughts for you to ponder over: In an article dealing with Great Western containers, the very reliable John Lewis notes that GW steel bodied container 2179 was ‘written off’ in 1961 (Ref 1). I suspect this means the container had long since vanished, but it took until 1961 to get the accountants to accept the fact and write the asset down. Nevertheless it suggests that these steel bodied containers were still a, small, part of the railway scene as the 60’s dawned. In round numbers BR inherited 19,300 containers in 1948 and built a further 900 - mostly I suspect to Company orders not completed before nationalisation - in that year. But between 1948 and 1959, inclusive, BR withdrew around 14,700 containers. So by the 60’s pre-nationalisation containers were becoming uncommon. Between 1960 and 1962 BR withdrew a further 5,600 containers and in 1963 withdrew 5,200 that year (Ref 2). I would reckon you could wing it with one of these models but more than one, or in the company of anything with yellow paint on the front end and I’d say you’re in Rule 1 territory. But it’s your railway! References 1. Containers of the GWR, Lewis J, Scale Model Trains June 1988, vol 6 no 10, p 270-273. 2. British Railway Wagons, Rowland D, David & Charles 1985. See Table 3 and notes, p 12. (Don used the BTC Annual Accounts as his data source). Regards TMc 18/03/2024

@Hal Nail My local Smith’s still has around 6 copies available - in fact these days I wonder who else buys it apart from me... Next is due out on the 21st so you still have time to take a look at the current issue if you already done so. Pondering your comment on axleboxes this afternoon, I took a look through David Larkin’s Acquired Wagons 5. There about 80 images I thought relevant to your era of which 14 had BR axleboxes. Regards TMc 08/03/2024

Time to draw this post to a conclusion. Like @Steamport Southport and @Halvarras I had wondered if the stripe donated departmental use. But I couldn’t reconcile this with apparent use of the van in revenue traffic - although I would never like to say never on railway matters. However I feel that the observations by @BR traction instructor apply here. The van is being provided for some operational reason but is restricted to local duties only. @Wickham Green too draws attention to the painting of the van. My personal interpretation of the image is that the van has been repainted into BR freight grey, sometime in the 50’s I suspect, which has got extremely weathered. At some, much more recent time, the body each side of the ducket has been repainted, but not the ducket itself or the areas above and below it. The stripe however has been painted over the whole body, grimy ducket and all! Given that these Dia 34 vans were not built after 1929, and the decline in freight traffic by the mid-sixties, I would have expected a thirty year plus, non-standard brake van to have been withdrawn rather than be refettled for further use, even if limited. All rather odd. Thanks to everybody who responded to the post. Regards TMc 07/03/2024

I’be reopened this post to draw attention to this month’s Backtrack - March 2024 - which contains an image of H10 W36690 (Ref 1). W36690 was part of Lot 1494, delivered between February and April 1948 (Ref 2). Judging by the image (Fig 61) in Ref 3 all these were delivered in full GW livery. By the time 36690 was recorded, Oct 1961, it had evidently been repainted in BR livery and had been fitted with LNER pattern rectangular axle boxes - should you fancy customising your model! The wagon is loaded with container A42B, a ply bodied container to BR diagram 3/002 built at Darlington in 1949 (Ref 2). Trying to determine colours from shades of grey is probably foolish ... but as the shade (of grey!) of the container matches that of the conflat body I would say A42B is now painted bauxite/ freight red rather than crimson. References 1: Backtrack March 2024, Vol 38 No 3 (Issue 395), p 173. Image by David Murray-Smith. 2: Wagons of the Early British Railways Era, Larkin D, Kestral Railway Books 2006. Page 28 for brief discussion of container wagons; page 84 for listing of covered containers. 3: A Pictorial Record of Great Western Wagons, Russell JH, Oxford Publishing Co, reprint 1975. Page 34 for image of GW 36692. Regards TMc 29/02/2024 PS: Attached is the best capture I could get of the number

In the current edition of Backtrack (March 2024) one of the colour articles contains an image of a short mineral train just south of Leicester, dated 06/05/1965 (Ref 1). The train has brake vans at both ends. The van coupled next to engine is an early pattern LNER van of the sort that I deduce from Tatlow 4b (Ref 2) to be diagram 34, Toad B, with a wooden ducket. A diagonal white line is painted across the body & ducket of the van from, as you face the van, top right of the body to not quite bottom left of the body. I cannot recall seeing such a thing on a brake van before. Now to be sure the van does have an end opening door, two in fact!, but I don’t think that this is the purpose of the stripe. I have considered if the stripe is in fact sunlight being reflected off something onto the van body but there doesn’t seem to be anything that could make such a reflection, so I’m satisfied that the stripe is painted on. The engine (48687) carries one headlamp over the righthand buffer, as you face the smokebox. I understand this indicates a Class 9 stopping freight train at this date. So does the stripe indicate a brake van restricted to local duties or is there some other explanation for the stripe. Has anyone else noticed something similar on other brake vans, or have any knowledge or memories of such a thing? References 1: An East Midlands Portfolio, collection of Lathlane S, Backtrack March 2024, Vol 38 No 3 (Issue No 395), page 165. 2: LNER Wagons Volume 4b, Tatlow P, Wild Swan Books (Bath) 2015. pages 315-319 for discussion on early LNER brake vans. Regards TMc 23/02/2024

@Hal Nail Whilst I certainly have my views about the GWR they are not strong enough to justify expletives, which I prefer to avoid anyway. If you substitute the name of a well known item of GW Goods stock for the asterisks however ...! Regards TMc 21/02/2024

I think this topic has run its course now. Like @jimwal I had wondered if the sheets were plastic and/or given the location, at the western end of the Swansea District line, associated with the area’s tinplate industry. However the observations by @Cwmtwrch on dating and post WW2 austerity together with @Tony Cane astounding location of a video capture have caused me to revisit LNWR Wagons 2, and I accept that my end date for the image is too late. So I would say that these are late surviving sheets from the war/post-war period, quite possibly still with pre-nationalisation lettering, if only we could see them in close up! I do think though that the colour owes to a synthetic dye rather than natural colouring. @Wickham Green too commented on the early date for a colour image of a freight train. Clearly the image is even earlier than I had imagined. It also has a ‘snatched’ quality to it, as if Huw Daniel was actually just passing the location - which appears to be were the B4296 crosses the Swansea District - and had to seize the moment as it where to capture the sight. An old money OS Grid Reference would be SN 591 024, or not far from where the Swansea District crossed over the old LNWR route to Swansea. @Wickham Green too also enquired if there were any pre-nationalisation liveries visible. The quality of the image doesn’t really allow this to be determined, other than one SR van potentially still in SR brown. I will just mention that coupled next behind the D88 is a low roofed vehicle of indeterminate provenance. I hesitate to use the words ***n **n* so I haven’t but ... Thanks to everyone who responded, and I hope that all those that took a peek got something from the post as well. Regards TMc 19/02/2024

Idly flicking through the current issue of Steam Days in a well known magazine browsing library cum booksellers/stationers, my eye was caught by a striking image of a GW 42xx hauling a substantial train of vans (Ref 1). At least 3 vans had their rooves covered with a RED wagon sheet, when I would have expected the sheets to be black. The published works on BR wagons say nothing about wagon sheets at all, and the standard works on GWR, LMS and LNER wagons all imply black sheets. Southern Wagons 4 however has this to say “... your writer remembers that wagon sheets came in two colours, black or a red-brown colour. The only clue so far uncovered appears in The LMS at War, where there is mention of ‘red’ wartime wagon sheets, ...”. So it seems that red wagon sheets are known, but this is the first time I can recall noticing one (or more). However I would have expected any war time sheets to be out of service by the time I think the image was captured. Dating The image, by Huw Daniel, is undated. The unidentified engine is carrying a large early emblem. The consist includes what I believe to be an LNWR Dia 88 Covered Goods Van, so my guess is that the images dates from somewhere around 1950 to 1955. Colour To my eye the sheets are faded coach crimson... Checking against a couple of colour charts, either Tamika Spray TS18 Metallic Red or Humbrol Acrylic DB0019 Bright Red / DB0174 Signal Red, seem closest in colour but in all cases the sheets seem both brighter and lighter. Does anyone have any knowledge, memories or thoughts on ‘red’ wagon sheets? How common where they and how long did they continue to be used by BR. References Steam Days in Colour 230: GWR eight-coupled tank engines: Cardiff and beyond, Steam Days February 2024, No. 414, Mortons Media Group, p34-35. An illustrated History of Southern Wagons Volume 4, Bixley G, Blackburn A, Chorley R, King M, Oxford Publishing Co (Hersham) 2002, p25. Regards TMc 12/12/2024

A thought. Does the writing - Loco Coal - deceive. Steam Railways were significant users of domestic and industrial coals as well as ‘traction’ coals. Swindon would have had its forges and furnaces, there were the fire devils to keep water columns and tanks warm, coals for station offices and rooms and so on. You wouldn’t use best Welsh steam coal for these purposes, but coals from other coalfields had good reputations for the domestic/industrial properties of their coals. Could this be a situation were the Stores Superintendent had concluded a contract with an off-GW system colliery for a supply of coal or coal product, with a discount if loaded to customer’s own wagons, for which the N series wagons would be the most suitable? In short, are the wagons not actually conveying ‘Loco’ coal at all but some other coal or coal product. TMc 10/02/2024

Loco coal wagons were, it seems, classed as departmental stock until 1952 (Ref 1) so the DW prefix would be appropriate although unusual on this size of wagon - and not very common on the 20/21 ton vehicles either. Livery: I suspect dark grey (including under frame) but it would be a brave person who could really distinguish between weathered dark grey and weathered black from a monochrome image ... The wagon book beloved of Greatwesternistas - GWR Goods Wagons - notes dark grey including the under frame as the standard livery but suggests black as a possibility for loco department wagons (Ref 2). Consider also the interesting suggestion by @bécasse above, also possibly the exigencies of war/post-war austerity. So I wouldn’t discount black subject to any further evidence. If the wagon had received an overhaul/repaint from say, after mid-1948 to early 1952, then BR’s departmental colour was black. An interesting capture, thanks for sharing it. Russell unreliable? Unlike anyone on RMWeb, JH Russell was actually there. Moreover he never set out to be “... a strict historian ...”, but rather his recollections of the wagons of the wagons he “... worked with and amongst ...” Recollections that even then were 30 years old. Which of us can claim perfect recollection of events 30 years ago. References 1. British Railway Wagons, Rowland D, David & Charles 1985. Tables 1 & 2 and notes, p 10. Don used the BTC Annual Reports and Accounts as his data source. 2. A History of GWR Goods Wagons, Atkins A, Beard W, Hyde D, Tourret R, David & Charles 1975, p88. The wording used remained unchanged in the enlarged Torret Publishing edition: Atkins A, Beard W, Tourret R, Tourret Publishing 1998, p64. 3. A Pictorial Record of Great Western Wagons, Russel J, Oxford Publishing Co 1975. See Preface. Regards TMc

Just a reminder that it wasn't just coal that got carried... Regards TMc 31/01/2022

Definitely not a D299 and, as I don’t know the scope of your answer to Ko-Ko, it may be outside the boundaries of your interest, but may I draw your attention to: Wingham BR period however. Regards TMc 31/01/2022

Whilst I note the jibe at the expense of the SEC, I would observe that when REL Maunsell set up his management team at Ashford, as well as Harold Holcroft, he also recruited GH Pearson and Lionel Lynes from Swindon. Pearson, who became Maunsell’s assistant and Ashford Works Manager, had been the Carriage and Wagons Works manager at Swindon, whilst Lynes became Maunsell’s Chief Carriage and Wagon Draughtsman, having held a senior C&W post in the drawing office at Swindon. The ensuing wagons are described as having “details … of Great Western practice…” so perhaps they should be seen, as it were, as the spawn of Satan, err Swindon and therefore worthy of purchase by GW types… Responsibility for any resulting damages to bank balances is disclaimed! Reference An Illustrated History of Southern Wagons Volume Three: SECR, Bixley G, Blackburn A, Chorley R, King M, Oxford Publishing Co (Shepperton) 2000. Regards TMc 28/01/2022

It seems to me that whenever I comment on something ‘Great Western’ it always involves me in extra work! I have reviewed the correspondence in MRC that arose from the original drawing. The consensus of opinion is that there were two observation cars, although I don’t think this is in doubt, each converted from an Ashbury built 5-compartment lavatory third. Neither length nor numbers of the original vehicles was noted, but they were originally built in July 1894. M.E. Morton Lloyd advised that there was a “diagram” of the cars published in the February 1916 issue of Locomotive Magazine, for those wanting a nicely obscure source of information. Mr. Morton Lloyd also noted that after withdrawal the body of one of the cars was sold off, and became a transport café – Mac’s Café - at Aldermaston, lasting long enough for a television to be installed. One correspondent recalled riding in the cars and noted, despite what the headboards said, that the cars did not work through to Machynlleth, but stopped at Dovey Junction “… where … the Coast trains terminated.” This correspondent also recalled seeing both cars at Birmingham Snow Hill around 1927, when newly repainted into GW livery. The cars would be quite a quirky thing to model, but there are some challenges @Prometheus please note. Foremost amongst these is that the underframes were of the sort with the axle guards outside the wheels. The headstocks also followed the line of the bow ends, which meant the buffer stocks, which had four ribs, were an unusual length. I suppose this could mean that the original vehicles were 35’ in length, with the bow ends of the rebuilds giving the 37’7” (or 37’6”) length referred to above. Could the difference between 37’6” and 37’7” be accounted for by whether the measurement was over the headstocks or the beading of the body panels? Judging by the image published in MRC the cars were very open, so an interior would have to be modelled as well. The amended drawing in the April ’65 MRC does not include an interior plan, so reference will need to be made to @corneliuslundie's post for details. M.E. Morton Lloyd (referenced by @Miss Prism) published a very nice set of drawings for some Cambrian six-wheeled stock in the September 1964 issue of MRC. As these give rather better detail of the underframes than the Rush drawing it might be worth getting hold of a copy of this issue as well (Model Railway Constructor, September 1964, vol 31, no 365). Incidentally, Mr. Morton-Lloyd subsequently wrote to MRC to draw attention to an error he had made in his drawings! Even Homer nods…. Perhaps Mr. Rush got to the heart of the matter in his letter, when he noted “…one cannot take anything for granted, particularly with the Cambrian, which was an individualist among railways.” Regards TMc 28/01/2022

There were a number of follow-up letters commenting on the drawing in the November 1964 MRC, culminating in a lengthy letter published in the April 1965 issue which opened thus: “Sir – Referring to the drawings of these vehicles in the November 1964 mrc, it is greatly regretted that those drawings showed several inaccuracies.” The author of this letter was: RW Rush. Mr. Rush went on to note elsewhere in his letter that “… the underframe is entirely wrong.” He did however; accompany his letter with a further drawing of these vehicles, incorporating the amended/corrected detail. This drawing was published at a stated 3mm-1 ft. scale, although measurement of the scale bar included in the drawing suggests that the printed version is fractionally under 3mm-1 ft. Mr. Rush quoted dimensions of 37ft 6in over the bowed ends, and 40ft 10in over buffers. The cars were apparently rebuilt from existing stock – during the First World War which seems rather ambitious - and originally operated Pwllheli – Aberystwyth, via Dovey Junction, in practice it seems, and not via Machynlleth. From 1921 they then operated Pwllheli – Machynlleth until withdrawn in May 1936. It seems the Great Western made some alterations to the bodywork quite early in their ownership which may account for some of the discrepancies noted, along with the erroneous drawing. Mr. Rush concluded his letter by noting “It is deeply regretted that so much detail on the original drawings was incorrect. They were made some three or four years ago, from a bad diagram purporting to have emanated from Swindon and an equally poor photograph – the only one available at the time – which did not show any detail clearly. It was not until new information came into my possession, that the amount of inaccuracy was realised.” He had the courtesy to particularly thank “… Mr Barnes of Colyton…” – this would be PE Barnes I think, a then quite well known commentator on railway matters, and also CC Green of Birmingham, who I suspect as being same person that had one (or more) books on the Cambrian coast line published by Wild Swan. Speaking personally, and, of course, with the benefit of 60 years further understanding; I would today treat an RW Rush drawing with some reservations. Whilst I don’t think Mr. Rush committed the egregious errors of Roche, as his letter demonstrates, he wasn’t working from official General Arrangements or builders drawings or even from personal measurements of his subjects. Reference Letters: Cambrian Railways Observation Cars, Rush R, Model Railway Constructor April 1965, vol 32, No. 372, pp95. Includes amended drawing and an image of GW 4072 (Cam 178). Note: All place name spellings as per the original correspondence. Regards TMc 27/01/2022

Veering back ‘on post topic’ (possibly), may I draw your attention to this: Leek & Manifold. LMS period though. Regards TMc 27/01/2022

There is a very small (50mm x 30mm) image of a 27T tippler - "No 15" no less, to be found in Model Railway News March 1966, vol. 42, No. 495, pp 134. The image accompanied an article by S A Leleux on ironstone railways, and was taken at Desborough. Sydney Leleux is still active within the HMRS, so it might be worth an enquiry through them to see if there is any further information available. There are no images of the 27T tipplers listed in the HMRS photo archive. Regards TMc 20/01/2022

There is also a short note on ‘thirling’ in the Scottish ‘Tatlow’ (see Ref). My reading of this suggests that the arrangement was not a hire, but an agreement by the NBR to purchase wagons, seemingly from the trader initially, and to supply sufficient wagons to meet the traders’ needs during the period of the agreement which could be up to 25 years. In return the NB could use the wagons elsewhere, if not required for the trader’s traffic, and the trader had to undertake to send their whole traffic by the NBR (and not support the **l***n*** …). Peter Tatlow suggests that the only agreements which extended into the LNER period were with Baird’s and Nimmo; Baird’s having wagons marked for Bothwell Collieries as well as Gavell/Kilsyth, and Nimmo for Slamannan, as noted by @Compound2632 in their response. Despite the note suggesting the agreements came to an end in the ‘late 1920’s’ there is an image of an newly painted 8-ton wagon (NB Dia 1) as LNE 746803 marked for Nimmo and stated to be dated 1930, which suggests the arrangements lasted rather longer, as also noted by @Compound2632. Reference LNER Wagons Volume 3; LNER Scottish Area etc, Tatlow P, Wild Swan Publications (Didcot) 2009. pp 5-6 for note on thirling, pp 21 for image of 746803. Regards TMc 17/01/2022

Judging by images of loaded Macaw’s, the stanchions were left in place in nearly every instance. In your specific case, the stanchions would be the only thing that would stop the load from rolling off the wagon as further layers were loaded onto the base layer, and also would keep the load in place until it was chained up. Even once the load was chained in place, realistically no one was going to take the stanchions out and as they themselves seem to have been chained to the wagon you’re going to have to model them somehow. The plastic stanchions will be vulnerable, and the brass ones will damage you… and there’s, apparently, a reason why Masokits* are so named, but on a family website… Regards (& good luck with the stanchions…) TMc 05/01/2022 * and when I ran the spell check on this reply, it wanted to change Masokits to something quite unsuitable for RM Web!

Crikey! That’s a lot of doweling for two models. Geoff Kent, in the third of his wagon modelling trilogy (Ref 1), and faced with a similar challenge; to represent loads (in every sense) of sawn planks, used a plasticard core around which he stuck very thin wood to represent the planks. This gave the appearance of sawn planks without the expense, or tedium, of building the load up plank by plank. I wonder if a similar thing could be done with your telegraph poles. You would have to saw off short sections to represent the ends of the, non-existent, poles which will be tedious, but it ought to be less consuming of dowel. It would need a bit of trial and error to work out the best shape for the core though. Geoff also discusses chaining, in the context of a double bolster, and suggests that you would need a chain around 2mm link size; something between 15 to 20 links per inch. His recommendation was Langley’s. @Miss Prism‘s bible (Ref 2) doesn’t devote a lot of space to the painting of GW wagons. The general principle seems to be: Black below the sole bar, and Grey for the sole bar (& headstocks) and all parts above. I would say that the bolsters will have been painted ‘body’ colour – grey. Looking at the images in Refs 3 & 4, I actually wonder if the stanchions and chains were painted at all. However, if they were it would seem they too were in body colour. Both references have images of vehicles in service, and it appears to me that stanchions, definitely, and the chains occasionally have a rough cast look to them as though they’re dirty and rusty but not painted. Both items would of course be subject to a lot of wear and tear through loading, unloading and general abrasion in service. On this basis, the bogies and trussing should be black, and everything else grey, with the deck of the wagon being unpainted and all of it subject to weathering. References The 4mm Wagon Part Three: Conflats & Containers, Wagons for long loads & steel, Brake Vans and Finishing touches, Kent G, Wild Swan Publications (Didcot) 2004. pp 120 for suggestion on timber loads, pp 57-58 for discussion on chaining loads. GWR Goods Wagons, Atkins A, Beard W, Tourret R, Oxford Publishing Co (Hersham) 2013. pp 64-68 for discussion on livery and lettering. Great Western Wagons Appendix, Russell J, Oxford Publishing Co (Headington) 1974. Figs 26, 29, 100, 224, 226, 227, 239, 240, 298 & 299. Freight Wagons and Loads in service on the Great Western Railway and British Railways, Western Region, Russell J, Oxford Publishing Co (Headington) 1981. Figs 133-161 & 301. I also checked the relevant works on LMS and LNER wagons, which seem to follow the same principles; bolsters etc. were painted body colour, at least for the official photograph, but the stanchions and chains seem well worn in service. Regards TMc 03/01/2022

I took a look at the image of High Brooms goods yard in PO wagons of the South-East (Ref 1), as invited, and offer my thoughts for what they're worth: The metal bodied wagon is a Butterley Co. ‘Patent’ steel wagon, but you’ve read the book so you’ll be aware of that from the discussion about the operator involved, Messrs FW Butcher of High Brooms, further on in the book. The most comprehensive, accessible, treatment of the Butterley wagons that I know of is in David Larkin’s ‘Acquired Wagons of British Railways, vol. 2’ (Ref 2). David states that these wagons were built from 1934, but that is contradicted by John Arkell, who notes that Butcher numbered the wagons by the year of their acquisition – 1931 in the case of the wagon illustrated. With the aid of a glass (magnifying rather than liquid!) it’s possible to make out the registration plate, SR No. 566 of 1931. Butcher is not an operator discussed by David Larkin, but John Arkell says that Butcher acquired three such wagons between 1931 and 1938, and two of them can be seen in the image of High Brooms. The caption describes the image as dating from the late 1930’s and given that Butcher acquired the last of their Butterley wagons in1938, this might tie in with the relatively fresh state of the wagon partly visible in the foreground. The ‘patent’ referred to the arrangement of body panels, whereby it was possible to unbolt the panels and replace them in the event of damage. Butterley built quite a number for their own fleet, and seemed to have found a steady trade in the type up to 1940. I’m reasonably confident the LMS wagon with double end doors is an ex L&Y vehicle; the standard work (Ref 3) on the subject noting: “…the distinctive style (or trademark) for which the L & Y half box would be forever remembered – the double end door wagon.” ‘Half box’ seems to have been the L&Y’s favoured way of describing what others would call a high goods or open. The pattern was introduced during HN Gresley’s term of office; although it’s not clear to what extent he influenced the design. Wagons were then built in this style with two different lengths of underframe, two wheelbases, at least two depths of body, timber or steel underframes and some with vacuum brakes, so I’m afraid on the basis of what little we can see of the wagon, I would not care to venture which diagram it was built to. Finally, you will no doubt have noted the use of wagons with sheet rails for coal traffic in the image at pp 11. From what can be discerned of the wagons, the first three of which have visible sheet rails, and study of the standard work (Ref 4) my judgement is that these are of the type that later became SR diagram 1341, a five plank open with steel underframe, ‘Stone’s patent’ either side brake and Williams sheet rails. Strictly speaking diagram 1341 was considered a coal wagon, but the type, as (SR) diagram 1340 was described as an open goods, which in theory ought to have had a high, round end rather than a sheet rail. However, there were at least four different builders and such images as exist suggest a loose interpretation of the design. References Private Owner Wagons of the South-East {ex SECR}, Arkell J, Lightmoor Press 2016. pp 4 for image of High Brooms goods yard, pp 81-82 for discussion about FW Butcher. The Acquired Wagons of British Railways Volume 2: All steel Mineral Wagons and Loco Coal Wagons, Larkin D, Crecy Publishing Co 2019. pp 15-23 for section on Butterley Co. wagons. Lancashire and Yorkshire Wagons Volume One, Coates N, Wild Swan Publications (Didcot) 1990. pp 165-186 for discussion on double end door ‘half-box’ wagons. An Illustrated History of Southern Wagons Volume 3: SECR, Bixley G, Blackburn A, Chorley R, King M, Oxford Publishing Co (Shepperton) 2000. pp 39-43 for discussion on D1340/1341 wagons. Regards TMc 01/01/2022

Some very nice modelling there. I’ll be interested to see how these turn out. I had a further look at the images to work out what could be seen of the underframe. I managed to count 3 of the queenposts… . Your wheeze makes the underframe look prototypically busy anyway. On the question of width, my suspicion is that Ratio went with the 7’9” quoted on the sketch. However, I believe this is the extreme width, i.e. over the stanchion brackets, not the width over the body. Width over body does not seem to be quoted on the sketch; the nearest thing to it being the width ‘in clear’ between the stanchions when mounted in the bodyside brackets – the 7’3” dimension. I suppose you could slice a bit off one side of the floor mouldings to bring the width down to 29mm, but it would also mean modifying the headstocks and bolsters, and probably have an effect on the bogie mountings as well. All in all, quite a lot of faff for something no one will notice anyway! All of which highlights the perils of using a diagram and not a proper drawing, as @hmrspaul has pointed out elsewhere. Although, I still think I’d rather use a diagram than a Roche drawing. Regards TMc 30/12/2021

Somewhat off the main topic and reverting to brake vans: It would seem that even before the 20th century LNWR and Midland brake vans had regular work that took them onto the South Eastern/SECR systems. One consequence was the adoption; by the SER of what was basically the contemporary Midland brake van – then a six-wheel 20T vehicle – as its own standard brake van, complete with the open balcony at one end. LNWR vans meanwhile have been recorded as far south at Redhill, reportedly working via Reading (?) and presumably Oxford (Ref 1). This reference also contains an image of a LNWR brake van at Grove Park, though I imagine that would be on a cross-London trip working. In return a SER/SECR van worked through to Oxford via Reading, and could on occasions be “…extended as far as Crewe, LNWR.” (Ref 1). I assume this would have been via Wellington and Market Drayton as I’m not too clear whether it was possible to ‘run through’ from the GW to LNW (or vice versa) at Oxford before the changes brought about by World War Two. Not too common an occurrence I would think, but I doubt a SE guard worked all the way through. Likewise I find it hard to think a LNW guard worked through to Redhill. Whilst I’ve also seen the claim that GW brake vans were not favoured by other companies/ regions guards on safety grounds, I’m not convinced that occupational safety, as opposed to operational safety was a material consideration for ‘management’ much before the late 1960’s, which the @The Stationmaster comments bear out. Rather more to the point I think is a comment in Southern Wagons 4 (Ref 2), where the principal complaint about the GW vans, from the Southern guards’ perspective, was the need to go out onto the veranda to look out and/or work the brake. Indeed the Southern itself had fallen foul of this issue in the 1920’s; when the SEC Maunsell pattern vans, with no lookouts, had started to work on the South Western section, where brake vans with lookouts (or duckets) were well established practice. I have seen it suggested that the ‘Not in Common Use’ brand was specifically applied to brake vans without lookouts to limit them to local or trip workings, and that this was brought about by complaints from guards, possibly supplemented by a resolution from the, then, NUR’s traffic grades conference. Perhaps worth bearing in mind that early builds of the BR standard brake van were allocated on a regional basis and early photographs of these vehicles show the regional brand applied (Ref 3). References An Illustrated History of Southern Wagons Volume 3: SECR, Bixley G, Blackburn A, Chorley R, King M, Oxford Publishing Co (Shepperton) 2000. pp 117 for discussion on brake van workings. An Illustrated History of Southern Wagons Volume 4, Bixley G, Blackburn A, Chorley R, King M, Oxford Publishing Co (Hersham) 2002. pp 99 for brief comments on the pros and cons of brake vans. British Railways Brake Vans & Ballast Ploughs, Gent E, HMRS 1999. Regards TMc 29/12/2021

The @Fat Controller hs already responded, but GW Goods Wagons has a diagram (as does vol. 1 of Essery's LMS Wagons) and Tatlow 4b includes two images of different, LNER, pairings as such. I would think it a right pain to load and unload without damaging the vehicles though, which may be why other conversions removed the bodies entirely. References GWR Goods Wagons, AtkinsA, Beard W, Tourret R, Oxford Publishing Co (Hersham) 1998. pp 527 for diagram. LNER Wagons Volume 4b, Tatlow , Wild Swan Books 2015. pp 239-240 for discussion on twin bolster sets. Regards TMc 28/12/2021