Jump to content
 

The Acquired Wagons of British Railways by David Larkin


Ben04uk
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just noticed this thread, I knew David Larkin in the late 1970s, when he was a signalman, had some interesting visits with him, at that time one of his favorite hunting grounds for wagons was his local yard, Hoo Junction in Kent, I should think a lot of his own photos were taken there, one of his regular duties was as the travelling signalman on the oil trains to the Isle of Grain refinery, apparently the last semaphore signals there are due to be replaced soon. 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • RMweb Gold
  • 2 weeks later...
Guest WM183

Can anyone tell me whether these books have diagrams of the wagons contained therein? Like, could this set of books replace all the various LMS, LNER, SR, and GWR books for a model-maker whose biggest concern is drawings and photos to aid in scratchbuilding?

Thanks much!

Amanda

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • RMweb Gold

It is out, very good, and in stock at the Titfield Thunderbolt bookshop, my take on it is here.

 

As this thread is frequented by wagon aficionados, in my guise as Wild Swan Books I am working on a new title that will cover ex GW wagon types in traffic, which should come out this year.

 

And for your delectation (and as respite from endless mindless and boring wittering on about discounts) here is a gratuitous wagon picture (that appears in neither book).

 

Taken by WA Beard, copyright and part of the David Hyde Collection, now in my possession.

 

948168420_BeardDawlish009.jpg.62e03c85aa437a35adeda8b4e4db8ec4.jpg

 

Can you guess where it is?

 

Simon

 

 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Agreed, very informative. The book is only let down by some formating issues. I assume the next volume will be about Open Merchandise Wagons, since that is the biggest field not covered yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, Daniel W said:

Agreed, very informative. The book is only let down by some formating issues. I assume the next volume will be about Open Merchandise Wagons, since that is the biggest field not covered yet.

 

I'm not sure if the general merchandise wagons are the biggest field remaining  or is it the pre-1923 minerals? I'm sure I've read that these outnumbered the 1923 RCH type at nationalisation. They were also the ones that British Railways were keen to get rid of the most, hence the steel 16T mineral building programme, so perhaps the most difficult to research.

 

Simon

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • 1 month later...
  • RMweb Gold

Publication of volume 5 will leave three more to come based on what Crecy have told me. They have all the material for the remaining volumes so just a case of fitting the production work in among everything else they have planned!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I have volumes 2 to 5 of these books, and the range of photos and information is fantastic.   But I’d agree with others, there’s a number of proof/typo errors that are not necessarily covered by errata.  So just for information purposes here - there are simple things like the wagon data panels being shaded yellow, a panel may be unshaded in error.   I’ve seen paragraphs repeated.   A 6 digit wagon number shown as 7 digits.  These are all things that may go wrong in any book  
Of the steel minerals, the Hurst Nelson batch split UK/France suggests 888 were built, quoting numbers for the UK batch - adding up to 680 - and the French batch were given a range of 308.   Is this a typo? As  by deduction there were 208 wagons

 

BUT a bigger question from me is, are these books meant to be definitive based on available records?    THe steel minerals to 1/100 slope sides do NOT include any reference to the 700 built for Stewart’s and Lloyds, of which Bachmann has produced a model, and there are 1923 spec wooden wagons built in the late 1930s featuring in Bill Hudson’s books which look very much like they should be included (it seems quite unlikely an owner would lose all 50 wagons before 1948) in the appropriate volume but there’s no mention. It would be interesting to know!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, D9012 said:

BUT a bigger question from me is, are these books meant to be definitive based on available records?    THe steel minerals to 1/100 slope sides do NOT include any reference to the 700 built for Stewart’s and Lloyds, of which Bachmann has produced a model, 

 

The 700 all steel 14 ton (uprated to 16 ton) are outside the scope of the book as they are Non Pool wagons and remained owned by Stewarts & Lloyds later BSC till withdrawn when Corby works closed.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, D9012 said:

 and there are 1923 spec wooden wagons built in the late 1930s featuring in Bill Hudson’s books which look very much like they should be included (it seems quite unlikely an owner would lose all 50 wagons before 1948) in the appropriate volume but there’s no mention. It would be interesting to know!!!!

Hi D9012

 

If you read David Larkin's introduction regarding ex private owner wagons there few surviving records, most pre 1962 have been lost for ever. The information of which ex PO wagon was owned by who was held by the RCH and when that was wound up the records went with it. David visited my home back in the early 1980s and I recall him saying he was trying to record the "P" numbers with their previous owners going through withdrawal records. What is in his book is a life times work.

 

I am sure David and the rest of us would happily like to see what further information you have on the subject.

 

2 hours ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

The 700 all steel 14 ton (uprated to 16 ton) are outside the scope of the book as they are Non Pool wagons and remained owned by Stewarts & Lloyds later BSC till withdrawn when Corby works closed.

Hi Mark

 

Further to your post, David has done a couple of books on Non Pool wagons.

https://www.waterstones.com/book/non-pool-freight-stock-1948-1968/david-larkin/9781905505418

https://www.waterstones.com/book/non-pool-freight-stock-1948-1968-privately-owned-and-european-vehicles-including-apcm-dorman-long-esso-and-gulf/david-larkin/9781905505401

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

David visited me as well, and showed me his 'work in progress'. Be assured that, if David is silent on a subject, it's because the records are not available for study / destroyed.

 

It is amazing that such extensive information has been published - David copied records BY HAND - volume after volume of wagon numbers, type descriptions, loads, build details, etc., etc.

 

Such is the wealth of historical information available to us nowadays that some criticise when the specific minutae that they desire is not available; rather than being grateful for the tireless efforts of the authors.

 

CJI.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 12
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mark for pointing out the non-pool answer - such an obvious answer for that one in some ways,  but I’d missed it. 
 

as for Clive Mortimer ,

I am sure David and the rest of us would happily like to see what further information you have on the subject.

please note I have great respect for anyone who publishes a book.    Do you answer all questions in such a sarcastic, ignorant and offensive manner?      I asked a fair question because I DIDN’T KNOW.   That’s what questions are for, to learn from the answers - you sound like a very ignorant and pompous English teacher I had at school. 
 

the rest of you who’ve replied, I thank you all most courteously - it is appreciated.   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 minutes ago, D9012 said:

Thanks Mark for pointing out the non-pool answer - such an obvious answer for that one in some ways,  but I’d missed it. 
 

as for Clive Mortimer ,

I am sure David and the rest of us would happily like to see what further information you have on the subject.

please note I have great respect for anyone who publishes a book.    Do you answer all questions in such a sarcastic, ignorant and offensive manner?      I asked a fair question because I DIDN’T KNOW.   That’s what questions are for, to learn from the answers - you sound like a very ignorant and pompous English teacher I had at school. 
 

the rest of you who’ve replied, I thank you all most courteously - it is appreciated.   

 

 

Being devils advocate, I must admit I thought the general tone of your post was a bit, shall we say, sharp.

 

Mike.

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I disagree.    I think it was balanced to acknowledge points raised, but asks for context “it would be interesting to know”.  In state at the beginning the books are fantastic.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
49 minutes ago, D9012 said:

Thanks Mark for pointing out the non-pool answer - such an obvious answer for that one in some ways,  but I’d missed it. 
 

as for Clive Mortimer ,

I am sure David and the rest of us would happily like to see what further information you have on the subject.

please note I have great respect for anyone who publishes a book.    Do you answer all questions in such a sarcastic, ignorant and offensive manner?      I asked a fair question because I DIDN’T KNOW.   That’s what questions are for, to learn from the answers - you sound like a very ignorant and pompous English teacher I had at school. 
 

the rest of you who’ve replied, I thank you all most courteously - it is appreciated.   

 

"It would be interesting to know!!!!"

 

Why four exclamation marks? I found that a tad insulting towards a person who I know and have respect for. 

 

As for my reply, it was informative as to why many wagons are missing from David's hard work which he has been doing for nearly 60years. The way you worded your post it seemed like you might know some more on the life of the 13 ton wooden bodied mineral wagons built to the 1923 RCH guidelines, hence me asking. In David's book he does mention many of the later built wagons with steel underframes were early withdrawals because of corrosion, that might be why they are not included if no records can be found. 

 

Unlike yourself my user name is my real name, even after 66 years of my name being spelt wrong I still find it upsetting.

  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, D9012 said:

as for Clive Mortimer ,

I am sure David and the rest of us would happily like to see what further information you have on the subject.

please note I have great respect for anyone who publishes a book.    Do you answer all questions in such a sarcastic, ignorant and offensive manner?      I asked a fair question because I DIDN’T KNOW.   That’s what questions are for, to learn from the answers - you sound like a very ignorant and pompous English teacher I had at school.

 

Unfortunately, your question came over as an implied criticism of David Larkin, to the effect that he had been less than thorough in his coverage.

 

Those of us who know David personally may be a little sensitive to such comment - intended or not.

 

We know the monumental effort and total dedication - some might say obsession - that went into the acquisition of the vast volume of information that he has managed to amass and publish for all our benefit.

 

CJI.

Edited by cctransuk
  • Agree 4
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Clive Mortimore 

My apologies that spellchecker got your name wrong. 
and my name is Alan Cooper

that’s one L two Os and one P

I use D9012 here because RMWEB invited me to create a user name, and it amused me to do so, like a great many others on here.  Do you belittle them too?

 

You are not alone in having your name spelt wrong, as me and my wife both know, but I’m not small minded enough to be upset by it, nor to be upset by 3 additional exclamation marks.  
 

But you leapt in with “give us the benefit of your knowledge “  when you could have enquired much more politely whether I had anything else to add, when quite probably, from your association with Mr Larkin, you knew full well that I wouldn’t have such information.    
 

RMWEB is a good resource for people to learn from each other, and I find BOTH your answers distasteful and not in the spirit of theses forums. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Unfortunately, your question came over as an implied criticism of David Larkin, to the effect that he had been less than thorough in his coverage.

 

Those of us who know David personally may be a little sensitive to such comment - intended or not.

 

We know the monumental effort and total dedication - some might say obsession - that went into the acquisition of the vast volume of information that he has managed to amass and publish for all our benefit.

 

CJI.

Oh good grief

 

did I not say at the beginning that they are fantastic books?

Edited by D9012
Spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...