Jump to content

GER 10T Goods Van announced!


Garethp8873
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

I am concerned going by the cattle truck...

 

Has anyone managed to work out which D&S kit it "replaces" assuming there is a direct correlation? DS101 is a 10T unfitted van (with DS102 the fitted version), DS110 is a 10T outside frame van.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

 

 

But, frankly, Oxford is not known for its research capabilities, so who knows!

 

 

Where is the evidence for that statement?

If you had written that Oxford is not well regarded for the accuracy of its execution I would agree.

In fairness they are improving with each model, at least as far as locomotives go.

This GER van is an interesting move for Oxford and if they do produce a reasonable model I would certainly be interested. As it I or as a basis for adaptation.

Bernard

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Where is the evidence for that statement?

If you had written that Oxford is not well regarded for the accuracy of its execution I would agree.

In fairness they are improving with each model, at least as far as locomotives go.

This GER van is an interesting move for Oxford and if they do produce a reasonable model I would certainly be interested. As it I or as a basis for adaptation.

Bernard

 

From what you go on to say, I suspect there is little if any genuine difference of view here.

 

In answer I might ask if Oxford Rail is known for its research capabilities?  First I've heard if it is. If Oxford has a research department, much evidence to date suggests it is either has not been listened too or perhaps should have been doing rather better. For the present purposes, I'm not sure it greatly matters which.

 

But in any case, isn't what I said simply another way of saying much what you did, that Oxford is not well regarded for accuracy?

 

I did commend Oxford on its decision to produce this van.  It's a great choice. Up to the Warwell, which I think was pretty OK (but not really my period of interest), it is entirely fair to say that Oxford made serious errors on all its steam-era stock.  But, if we accept the Warwell as an improvement and we note the N7 down as a pretty solid effort (again, too modern for me to have looked at very closely, but I'm not aware of any significant issues), then we are in with a reasonable chance that this van model will turn out well.

 

So, as usual, I will remain optimistic and reserve judgment until something appears.  

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bucoops said:

I am concerned going by the cattle truck...

 

Has anyone managed to work out which D&S kit it "replaces" assuming there is a direct correlation? DS101 is a 10T unfitted van (with DS102 the fitted version), DS110 is a 10T outside frame van.

I’d say that it’s DS101 and if they extend its reach to cover a fitted version, DS102 as well. DS110 was the timber, outside framed van which if I remember right was shorter in both length and wheelbase.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MarkSG said:

 

I think someone has already said upstream in this thread that Oxford have stated that 32109 is a typo in the publicity material and the released version will have a correct number.

 

I'm not too bothered about which actual GER diagram it is so long as it's a reasonably accurate model of it. What would be even nicer is a rake of three with different numbers.

 

Yes I asked the question yesterday and the GER number they told me was a typo error and the correct number is in the catalogue :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Where is the evidence for that statement?

 

Practically every model they've made so far. It's evident on many of them that the "accuracy of its execution" is down to poor research.

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

20 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

Practically every model they've made so far. It's evident on many of them that the "accuracy of its execution" is down to poor research.

Without further detailed knowledge of the research, design and tooling production on a per model basis, how's it possible to know any error is down to "poor research"?

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

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Londoner said:

Without further detailed knowledge of the research, design and tooling production on a per model basis, how's it possible to know any error is down to "poor research"?

 

Proper research would have given us a LNER 6 plank open with brake shoes on one side only and linked levers. Proper research would have meant that NRM didn't have to send OR off to revise many incorrect details on their Dean Goods, such as the shape of the cab side cut-outs. Proper research would not have given us an AA13 Toad with a window where a wooden hatch should be. The latter is clearly from copying a preserved example that has been modified much later in it's life, rather than researching how they originally left the works.

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

  • RMweb Gold

I would have thought the 10 ton van would have gone anywhere. I'd assume that on the LNER, they'd put the older wagons straight into the common user pool, knowing full well that they would have to be repaired by some else's railway repair shop. Flour,cement bags, sugar, bagged sugar beet, bagged corn, bagged wheat, ironmongery, bicycles, furniture. In fact, anything that a common carrier was required to carry. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Londoner said:

Without further detailed knowledge of the research, design and tooling production on a per model basis, how's it possible to know any error is down to "poor research"?

 

Res ipsa loquitur

 

44 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

 

 

 

I didn't get hold of the outside framed kit.  Was it ever manufactured?

 

 

 

As in the 1920 19' van? Never seen a kit of one.

 

11 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

I would have thought the 10 ton van would have gone anywhere. I'd assume that on the LNER, they'd put the older wagons straight into the common user pool, knowing full well that they would have to be repaired by some else's railway repair shop. Flour,cement bags, sugar, bagged sugar beet, bagged corn, bagged wheat, ironmongery, bicycles, furniture. In fact, anything that a common carrier was required to carry. 

 

 

 

Once pooled during WW1, I would think, yes, the unfitted vans could have turned up anywhere. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
23 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

they'd put the older wagons straight into the common user pool, knowing full well that they would have to be repaired by some else's railway repair shop. 

 

I don't think that's quite how it worked...

 

Remember that the majority of wagons were in the pool - 60% of LNER wagons at grouping (LMS 70%, GW 75%, SR 80%). Those not in the pool were chiefly wagons for specialised traffic - the Southern, which served little heavy industry, had the smallest proportion of such wagons and hence the fraction of its wagons in the pool was highest. The LNER figure is the lowest owing to the influence of the North Eastern, which had the largest wagon stock of any pre-grouping company - 45% of the stock the LNER inherited - as a consequence of the way the Northumberland coal traffic was worked, using the company's own specialised hopper wagons which did not go into the pool. 

 

The large numbers of open and covered goods wagons built in the 20s and 30s went straight into the pool, replacing withdrawn life-expired pre-grouping types.

 

As I understand it, each company remained responsible for the maintenance of its own wagons - as long as design details continued to differ, it would be their repair shops that had stock of components. 

Edited by Compound2632
Sentence re. Southern rewritten for clarity.
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I don't think that's quite how it worked...

 

Remember that the majority of wagons were in the pool - 60% of LNER wagons at grouping (LMS 70%, GW 75%, SR 80%). Those not in the pool were chiefly wagons for specialised traffic - that fraction is the lowest for the Southern, which served little heavy industry. The LNER figure is the lowest owing to the influence of the North Eastern, which had the largest wagon stock of any pre-grouping company - 45% of the stock the LNER inherited - as a consequence of the way the Northumberland coal traffic was worked, using the company's own specialised hopper wagons which did not go into the pool. 

 

The large numbers of open and covered goods wagons built in the 20s and 30s went straight into the pool, replacing withdrawn life-expired pre-grouping types.

 

As I understand it, each company remained responsible for the maintenance of its own wagons - as long as design details continued to differ, it would be their repair shops that had stock of components. 

 

Fully agree.  Generally, as you say, only stock dedicated to specific traffic was not pooled.  The GW marked these "Not Common User".

 

General merchandise wagons, non-mineral opens and many covered wagons, were almost by definition common user types, and, as Stephen said, built by the Big Four for the pool.  Famously this is taken as why the GW stopped building Opens with sheet rails. Why bother when the other companies, who like as not would be using you wagon, didn't? 

 

1 minute ago, jwealleans said:

Some of these vans were either built or converted for banana traffic as well.

 

And the GE gave fitted ones red panels on the outer ends of the sides.  Oxford has chosen a long-lived wagon with many livery options, some quite colourful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 22/01/2020 at 18:48, 57xx said:

 

Practically every model they've made so far. It's evident on many of them that the "accuracy of its execution" is down to poor research.

The research has been very good.

Not sure about the Adams Radial but the Dean Goods was an inspired choice.

If not how did they obtain the correct information and then get it wrong in the execution?

The NB mineral, the Dean Goods, the cattle wagon. They had the right idea and they had the information. Sadly things then went downhill.

I remember an ancient cartoon of a childes swing that went through the various stages between the UK design and the Chinese execution.

I take it you never worked in multinational production  engineering. 

They are the new kids on the block so I am prepared to cut them some slack.

Particularly as they are heading in an East and North East direction.

Bernard

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎21‎/‎01‎/‎2020 at 18:24, truffy said:

If these could've made their way to the SR, I may well have a couple.

Or even a trainload?

3 hours ago, jwealleans said:

Some of these vans were either built or converted for banana traffic as well.

A hundred built as Banana vans by the LNER immediately following grouping; and then a significant number of LNER Banana vans were temporarily transferred to the SR in the 1920s, when some proportion of the traffic switched to landing at Southampton. (All this from the usually reliable Tatlow volumes, apparently the transferred vehicles carried SR livery until they came home.)

 

Whether some of the transferred vans were of this type is a whole other question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 22/01/2020 at 12:58, Bernard Lamb said:

Where is the evidence for that statement?

If you had written that Oxford is not well regarded for the accuracy of its execution I would agree.

 

3 hours ago, 57xx said:

Proper research would have given us a LNER 6 plank open with brake shoes on one side only and linked levers. Proper research would have meant that NRM didn't have to send OR off to revise many incorrect details on their Dean Goods, such as the shape of the cab side cut-outs. Proper research would not have given us an AA13 Toad with a window where a wooden hatch should be. The latter is clearly from copying a preserved example that has been modified much later in it's life, rather than researching how they originally left the works.

 

39 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

The research has been very good.

Not sure about the Adams Radial but the Dean Goods was an inspired choice.

If not how did they obtain the correct information and then get it wrong in the execution?

The NB mineral, the Dean Goods, the cattle wagon. They had the right idea and they had the information. Sadly things then went downhill.

 

The chances are that it's a combination of factors. Even if the research is bang on, there's something going on downstream in the tooling QA that causes the fubar. And even if the tooling QA/production is bang on, it doesn't matter if the research is flawed.

 

As far as I can see, we don't have that information to tease out where problems may lie, and they may lie in different places for different models:

 

5 hours ago, Londoner said:

Without further detailed knowledge of the research, design and tooling production on a per model basis, how's it possible to know any error is down to "poor research"?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

Proper research would have given us a LNER 6 plank open with brake shoes on one side only and linked levers. Proper research would have meant that NRM didn't have to send OR off to revise many incorrect details on their Dean Goods, such as the shape of the cab side cut-outs. Proper research would not have given us an AA13 Toad with a window where a wooden hatch should be. The latter is clearly from copying a preserved example that has been modified much later in it's life, rather than researching how they originally left the works.

Poor design, CAD, and/or poor tooling, and/or poor quality control may have been responsible. Without more background information it's impossible to know. Anyway, what difference does it make and what's the value of this speculation? These are not marketed as super scale top line models with the corresponding cost penalty, they're marketed, and priced, as budget models. I think they're good value for money. If you don't think they're worth the money, don't buy them. They're clearly targeting a mass market and not specialists who demand perfection whatever the cost. In any case, it seems to me the errors you mention, other perhaps than the Great Way Round engine, can be corrected by the purchaser with minimal effort or skill. I bought their N7, in two guises,  for well under £100 each. I'm not completely without knowledge of LNER engines, but some of the criticism of them on this web site, over extremely minor, individual engine details, is extremely difficult to determine and ridiculous in an engine that costs less than £100.

  • Agree 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 23/01/2020 at 21:12, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Or even a trainload?

A hundred built as Banana vans by the LNER immediately following grouping; and then a significant number of LNER Banana vans were temporarily transferred to the SR in the 1920s, when some proportion of the traffic switched to landing at Southampton. (All this from the usually reliable Tatlow volumes, apparently the transferred vehicles carried SR livery until they came home.)

 

Whether some of the transferred vans were of this type is a whole other question.


There is a little more on this topic in this thread:

 

// Simon

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

Pool general merchandise vehicles tended to be the unfitted ones, and fitted vans were usually chased up by their parent company, as well as any specialised vehicles.  As for repairs, it would presumably depend on the nature of the repair.  A pool vehicle that had failed in traffic and been red carded would have to be repaired to at least green card condition in situ in order to be returned to it's own railway, and one assumes that if the vehicle was incapable of being lashed up to that condition it would either be scrapped or repaired by a local workshop.  Don't forget that not all wagons were repaired by railway workshops, and some were dealt with by private industry wagon repairers and builders, though these may have been obliged to obtain parts from the originating railway's workshops.

 

It's almost a shame that I really can't justify more than one of them on my 1950s WR BLT!  It's got a lot of character, and I like that door frame.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

British Sugar ended up with a fleet of these, those at Cantley we’re the last survivors and most went to the NNR along with some NE hoppers in about 1979. I’d be pretty sure they were internal users though, I don’t think they ever ventured out on to BR metals.

  • Informative/Useful 3
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...