More Pre-Grouping Wagons in 4mm - the D299 appreciation thread.

[Dave Hunt]

On 15/12/2022 at 11:35, Compound2632 said:

They're attributed to "Collection R.J. Essery" so we'll have to wait until that has been catalogued and made available! 

 

Bob's entire collection (or at least those that we found in his study after he died) are now with the HMRS.

 

Dave

Edited December 16, 2022 by Dave Hunt

[drduncan]

On 24/10/2022 at 19:43, Chrisbr said:

Going back to the loading of Deal, two extracts from the GWR General Appendix of 1905 may help.

 

Chris

Very helpful. Thanks.

 

Do we collectively have a view as to the best way of representing ‘Norway pole’ timber in 4mm?

 

Regards,

 

Duncan

[Dave John]

Wooden barbeque skewers , seem to be 2.5 mm dia ish ? 

[drduncan]

1 hour ago, Dave John said:

Wooden barbeque skewers , seem to be 2.5 mm dia ish ? 

That was my first thought too, but wondering if anyone had other ideas.

D

[Compound2632]

Were Norway poles of uniform diameter?

[magmouse]

55 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Were Norway poles of uniform diameter?

 

No. At least not if this clearer version of the picture, from Russell's GW Wagons Appendix, is anything to go by:

 

 

And a close-up:

 

 

These are almost complete tree-trunks, with just the roots and top cut off. The bark has been roughly stripped, leaving some lighter and darker patches, and definite knots where the small side-branches have been removed. Quite a modelling challenge to get something that looks convincing, I suspect.

 

Nick.

[Annie]

1 hour ago, magmouse said:

 

No. At least not if this clearer version of the picture, from Russell's GW Wagons Appendix, is anything to go by:

 

 

And a close-up:

 

 

These are almost complete tree-trunks, with just the roots and top cut off. The bark has been roughly stripped, leaving some lighter and darker patches, and definite knots where the small side-branches have been removed. Quite a modelling challenge to get something that looks convincing, I suspect.

 

Nick.

Carefully chosen twigs from the garden perhaps.

[John-Miles]

For our model of Pencader, we have built several pole barns and for these we used privet or hazel twigs with the bark stripped off.

[Compound2632]

On 10/12/2022 at 17:33, Compound2632 said:

I'm opening a book on which gets here first - yours or CamKits'!

 

Dead heat, @MarcD. Both the Pre-Grouping Railways medium cattle wagon  and the CamKits 1102 Class arrived by today's post:

 

 

I like the mixed-media approach taken by the designers of both kits. The cattle van body is a nicely crisp print; the locomotive boiler / smokebox unit is a resin casting. There are two etched sheets for the locomotive, that for the bodywork being taped to the other side of the blue card. The Mkidland loco number etch is a separate CamKits item, it has plenty of 1s, 2s, and 3s - essential for this class; though not quite enough if one wanted to do 1111A.

[Rowsley17D]

Hmm, I could be tempted by that Class 1102 myself, but they were gone by 1932. Rule 1?

[magmouse]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

it has plenty of 1s, 2s, and 3s - essential for this class; though not quite enough if one wanted to do 1111A.

Curiously, it’s essential for many sets of digits used for making up longer numbers, according to Benford’s Law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford's_law

Creators of artwork for wagon number transfers please take note!

 

Nick.

Edited December 19, 2022 by magmouse
Clarification

[John-Miles]

21 hours ago, Rowsley17D said:

Hmm, I could be tempted by that Class 1102 myself, but they were gone by 1932. Rule 1?

According to Baxter, 1126 (after 1907 1644) survived until 1932. Several lasted into 1931.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, John-Miles said:

According to Baxter, 1126 (after 1907 1644) survived until 1932. Several lasted into 1931.

 

Allocations at March 1930:

1631 - Wigston

1644 - Derby

1647 - Saltley

1650 & 1653 - Carlisle

1657 - Normanton

 

[S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 3.]

Edited December 20, 2022 by Compound2632

[animotion]

On 15/07/2016 at 18:07, Compound2632 said:

Having some time on my hands, I have been working my way through my stash of 4mm scale wagon kits, starting with some pre-grouping examples. As may be evident, my enthusiasm is for the Midland Railway, so first up, a couple of Midland wagons: an 8 ton high-sided wagon to D299 (left) and an 8 ton low-sided goods wagon to D305 (right).

 

 

These are both built from Slater’s kits, nice and straightforward so long as one is aware of the major pitfall with the D299: if the sides and ends are assembled to each other and the floor first, one finds that the solebars are too tall and stick out below the headstocks in a most unprotypical manner. Better to fix the solebars to the floor first; then add the ends, lining the bottom of the headstocks up with the bottom of the solebars. The sides are fixed in place last with some careful fettling of the notches in the ends of the siderails so that the corner plates line up. This does mean that the floor is too high, i.e. the inside depth of the wagon is about 0.5 mm less than it should be but for a loaded wagon that’s irrelevant. The kits for the D342 coke wagon and D357 covered goods wagon have the same issue (but the height of the floor really doesn’t matter unless you want to model a van with an open door…) but oddly, the D305 wagon didn’t seem too. Nevertheless I built it in the same sequence.

 

On the D299 wagon, the right-angle bend in each corner plate is rounded by a mixture of skrawking with the craft knife and gentle needle-filing. There probably ought to be a square of metal overlapping the top two planks of the door on the brake side of the wagon, to protect the woodwork when the door is dropped against the brake gear – I should have photographed the non-brake side!

 

On the D305 wagon, I’ve added the door stops on the ends of the drop sides, carved from 60 thou square microstrip.

 

The solebars have some moulded-on detail which is in the wrong place for most wagons, as far as I can tell from my treasured copy of Bob Essery’s “Midland Wagons” Vol. 1. The moulded numberplate is to the left of the V-hanger whereas photos show it consistently to the right. The builder’s plate is too near the right-hand end; it should be just to the right of the crown plate for the right-hand axleguard. Both these are scraped off; the transfers represent them adequately. (I forgot this on the side shown of the D299 wagon.) The square plate that on the prototype says “TO CARRY 8 TONS” (Essery calls this the ticket plate) is in the right place but the little rectangular spring-clip thing – which I would suppose is the label clip – is too far to the left. I’ve left it as it wouldn’t survive an attempt to relocate it; I don’t think I could make a satisfactory replacement, and something is better than nothing!

Below the solebar, things are what I venture to call pseudo-finescale. I could cut everything off and replace with brass but haven’t quite had the patience. The W-irons are a bit thick compared to some other plastic kits; skrawking the outside edges to make them thinner helps without weakening the structure – most of the material is in the spring and axlebox anyway. Axleboxes are drilled out 2 mm diameter and gently countersunk 3 mm diameter for Gibson bearings. The inner V-hanger is very carefully thinned by skrawking – and then repaired… The outer V-hanger and brake lever are a single moulding. I thin the V-hanger as much as I dare but it’s still the least satisfactory feature on the solebar: over-thick and lacking bolt-heads. On these two wagons I drilled a 0.6 mm diameter hole in the back of the outer V-hanger, through the bottom of the inner V-hanger, and through the middle of the brake gear moulding and used a piece of plastic rod to connect them all together. The final touch – actually done before fitting the brakes – is to cut away the moulded safety loops and replace with microstrip, so daylight shows through.

The 3-link couplings are Slater’s. The wheels are Gibson 00. There is a pretention that one day I’ll upgrade to P4 so the alignment of the brakes is a bit ambiguous. An advantage of modelling this period is that with brakes on one side only, I’ve lots of spare brake mouldings!

 

I painted the D299 wagon Humbrol matt 64 and the D305 Precision LMS goods wagon grey, on a Halfords white undercoat in both cases. In the flesh I can’t tell the difference but the photo shows the Humbrol to be bluer; I think I prefer the Precision colour but the Humbrol is easier to brush-paint. Below the solebar is Humbrol matt 33 – detail stands out better in the flesh than in the photo; some weathering would no doubt help.

These two kits came from the Coopercraft stand at ExpoEM 2014 and so unlike the old boxed Slater’s kits, didn’t include Pressfix transfers. I had long ago bought several sets of the Methfix version that Slater’s used to stock as a separate item. I’ve not used Methfix before. Whilst I’m reasonably happy with the end result, it was a bit of a trial. Things float arounf too much for too long! I started with the recommended meths/water mix, which worked well enough for the large letters though I followed up with MicroSol to get the transfers to bed into the planking grooves. The tare weights were the real nightmare; wandering off all over the place – there’s no backing film to hold the numbers in position relative to each other. I was very glad that on the Midland, painted wagon numbers didn’t come in until 1917!

I finished off (for now) with Humbrol spray-can matt varnish.

 

The Midland built 62,000 D299 high sided wagons between 1882 and 1900 – that works out at 12 per working day (on a five-and-a-half day working week). That’s about half the Midland’s goods stock. For an Edwardian period Midland layout, I reckon every fourth wagon I build should be one of these! (Allowing 50% Midland, 25% PO, 25% other companies – possibly too high a proportion of the latter.) There’s at least one in any early 20th-century goods yard photo – no pre-grouping modeller should be without several. I’ve read the various discussions on here about the current unavailability of these kits and have no wish to start another; the kit has been around for 40 years now and has its defects. Would that some enterprising manufacturer stepped forward to produce an up-to-date version! High-quality kits abound for many obscure pre-grouping wagons – the D299 wagon is the MOST UNOBSCURE item of pre-grouping rolling stock!

 

The low-sided D305 wagons were not as numerous – although still running into the thousands by my early Edwardian period, with more built right up to 1915 – and consequently surviving longer. The dimensions and construction are generic enough that the kit could be used to represent several other companies’ wagons, if I could bring myself to do so from my meagre stock…

 

 

Having just come across this article and being a Midland Railway modeller myself I would like to point out that the wagons also had their numbers painted under the M. The reason for this was so the number of the wagon could still be read when the side door was open which covered the number plate. Why the number plate could have not been placed elsewhere on the underframe I don't know. 

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, animotion said:

Having just come across this article and being a Midland Railway modeller myself I would like to point out that the wagons also had their numbers painted under the M. The reason for this was so the number of the wagon could still be read when the side door was open which covered the number plate. Why the number plate could have not been placed elsewhere on the underframe I don't know. 

 

The number only started to be painted under the M on ordinary goods and mineral wagons from 1917, so isn't appropriate to my 1902 modelling period - see Midland Style p. 139, where it says the decision was taken at a meeting of the Traffic Committee in February 1917 and that initially it was to be at the RH end, being changed to the LH end the following month. I believe the LH end was the end preferred by the Railway Clearing House. I wonder if the decision was related to the introduction of Common User Agreements - pooling of unfitted open wagons between the GW, L&Y, LNWR, MR, and NER was introduced on 2 April 1916 but extended to all companies on 2 January 1917. The change was to be made as wagons passed through the works - so would be well-nigh universal by 1920.

 

I've not come across the explanation that the dropped door obscured the numberplate - and numbertakers had been living with that inconvenience for at least 60 years! (But I've not yet read the original Traffic Committee minute referenced in Midland Style.) What is your source for that nugget?

 

It's true that dropping the door would obscure the numberplate on D299 wagons ans similar, but on wagons built from 1913 onwards, the D-shaped numberplate was placed nearer the LH end of the solebar, clear of the door - but then the tare weight would be hidden by the door:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre item 64058]

 

Of course on a D305 lowside wagon, once the side was dropped down neither numberplate nor painted number would be visible! I don't believe I've seen a photo of a D305 in Midland livery with the number on the side, though the LMS put the number either on the bottom plank to the left of the L of LMS, or at the LH end of the side rail. (The number on the side rail would be visible with the side dropped, I think.)

 

I'm not aware of any similar change around this time by the other major companies. Back in the 19th century, the solebar numberplate was often the only means of identification of both owning company and wagon number. Painting the number on the ends was quite widespread; this was the LNWR and L&YR style right up to grouping. The GWR painted the number on sides and ends but for a long time didn't have cast solebar numberplates. The NER seems to have been alone among the major companies in painting the wagon number very prominently on the side from an early date; I'm unsure when the GC, GE, and GN started doing so. It's an interesting question as to what motivated these different styles. The grouping saw standardisation, even more so the universal adoption in 1936 of small lettering at the LH end, giving company, capacity, and number, leading to the ultimate simplicity of the BR style.

 

On the other hand, the Midland had been putting the wagon number on the sliding doors of covered goods wagons since the early 1890s. There one can see the logic: such vehicles would normally be loaded and unloaded in a goods shed with a raised platform, making the solebar numberplate hard to see.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Compound2632

[corneliuslundie]

And the Cambrian for many years had the numbers only on the plates and on the ends. A real bind when trying to identify wagons in photos, and must have been an issue for number takers. But by not long after 1900 it started putting the number on the side, bottom left. So your suggestion of the RCH being involved is not impossible.

Jonathan

[WFPettigrew]

And (sort of) likewise, the Furness originally only put wagon numbers on a cast plate on the solebar.  At around the turn of the century some wagons had the number painted on the ends, on the left hand side rather than in the centre.  Later the wagon number was painted onto the lower left side sheets. 

 

But despite a lot of searching and comparing of photos with known or estimatable dates, the best guess for when the painted numbers lower left on the sides started to appear was sometime around the Great War: there are photos from 1917 which show wagons thus painted, but photos from about 1910 do not have this.  Somewhere in the middle, maybe before the start of the war, maybe during, they started to do it.  Interestingly the thus painted wagons in 1917 were ore wagons, so that suggests this was not some consequence of the pooling of ordinary  open wagons  in the second half of the war.

 

All the best

 

Neil  

 

 

[Compound2632]

I've been mulling over the allocations of the 1102 Class 0-6-0Ts. I've mentioned that my interest is in Nos. 1129-1131, which were at Saltley in the April 1892 and 1889-1902 allocation lists given by Summerson, 1129/30 being on the duplicate list (A suffix) by the latter date. As 1647 and 1649, the first and last remained at Saltley until withdrawal, but 1130A / 1648 had moved to Upper Bank by May 1908, staying there until withdrawal. There it joined the first twenty of the class, Nos. 1102-1121 / 1620-1639, which had been sent new to Swansea (Upper Bank from 1893) and Brecon - the locus classicus, one might say.

 

The three Saltley engines were from a group of ten, the last five of the Neilson batch and first five of the Vulcan batch, 1122-1131, which were initially allocated to Kentish Town. Six of these were shedded at Hendon, which served the Cricklewood marshalling yards until the opening of the square shed there in 1882. By 1892, these ten engines had been dispersed, the first four leading rather nomadic lives but Nos. 1126-1128 / 1644-1646 settled down at Derby, where they worked in the Litchurch Lane Carriage & Wagon Works.

 

The last ten engines were sent north, with 1132/33 initially at Carlisle, 1134 at Skipton, 1135-1138 at Keighley for the Worth Valley line, and 1139-1141 at Normanton. I think this distribution reflects the fact that these were the Midland's first general-purpose 0-6-0Ts apart from the Kirtley engines for the London area, with shunting generally being done by goods tender engines. The Keighley engines were displaced in 1883 by a batch of 1377 Class 0-6-0Ts with full cabs and vacuum brakes, initially moving to Normanton, but by 1899-1902, Carlisle had five, 1132-1136 - the steady expansion of the Dentonholm yards no doubt increased the demand for shunting engines. The remainder were still at Normanton, excepting 1141 / 1659 which found a long-term home at Carnforth.

 

So, although this class is known as the "South Wales Tanks", only half the class were allocated to the Midland lines west of Hereford and a quarter were distributed around the north of England. 

 

Nos. 1127 and 1128 of the batch sent to London were loaned to the S&DJR in late 1875, to cover a locomotive shortage there. they must have given satisfaction since the first goods engines built by Derby for the Joint Line, the six Neilson-built "Scotties", were pretty much identical except for being built as tender rather than tank engines. (The Vulcan-built "Scotties" were tender versions of the 1377 Class 0-6-0Ts; the principal difference was in the design of the motion.) This does rather beg the question of why tank engines were preferred for South Wales, given that the work being done - goods and mineral train working over a long, mostly single, line, with some heavy gradients - was similar.

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue image of MRSC item 81856.]

 

Compare with a Derby official photo of Vulcan-built "Scottie" in @phil_sutters' Ipernity gallery:

http://www.ipernity.com/doc/philsutters/26350041/in/group/550787.

 

Which prompts the thought, could the CamKits 1102 Class kit be a good scratch-aid for building a "Scottie"?

Edited December 22, 2022 by Compound2632
Grammar failure corrected

[Compound2632]

Here's a photo of a South Wales tank in its native element that I'd not come across before, at Brynamman; especially useful as a rare back view:

 

 

Embedded link to 

https://freepages.rootsweb.com/~cwmgors/history/Railway.html 

where @John_Miles identifies it as 1115; if his reading of the number is correct, the photo must date from before December 1891, when that engine was put on the duplicate list as 1115A.

 

Note the single shackle on the drawhook. I think this does point to an early date, since a photo of 1103A, Essery & Jenkinson, Midland Locomotives Vol. 3 plate 120, clearly shows three-links fore and aft. 

 

In the same volume, plate 119 is a very pretty photo of 1136 at Durran Hill, with additional lined panels - like those on tenders - on tank and bunker, showing that Kentish Town wasn't the only outstation paintshop that indulged in elaborations of the standard livery. On the other hand, plate 121 shows 1139 at Normanton, before 1903, looking a little sad with the rear half of its cab removed, presumably for better all-round vision when shunting.

Edited December 23, 2022 by Compound2632
typo.

[Nick Lawson]

On 18/12/2022 at 22:57, magmouse said:

Quite a modelling challenge to get something that looks convincing, I suspect

We have just installed a small Norway Spruce in our living room. I have a funny feeling that early in the new year there will be an abundance of such trees available for "logging" by modellers!

[magmouse]

1 hour ago, Nick Lawson said:

We have just installed a small Norway Spruce in our living room. I have a funny feeling that early in the new year there will be an abundance of such trees available for "logging" by modellers!

 

A good time of year for the experiment, clearly! Still to be demonstrated is whether the bark will peal off and leave the right texture and colour, and whether you can get the taper without having to carve it specifically. I look forward to fellow RM'ers reporting back after 12th Night...

 

Nick.

 

[Compound2632]

Still mulling over those 1102 Class 0-6-0Ts, I thought it would be interesting to check what other shunting engines were at the sheds to which the class were allocated, using the 1899-1902 allocations.

 

Brecon (5) had just its six 1102 Class engines, half its allocation, the balance being 700 Class 0-6-0s.

 

Upper Bank (6) had thirteen of the 1102 Class but it had gained a dozen 1377 Class and three of the larger 1121 Class, a stud of 28 0-6-0Ts in total, with only three other engines based there, a 2228 Class 0-4-4T and a couple of 1134A Class 0-4-0STs; these presumably worked Swansea docks. 

 

The 1899-1902 list doesn't distinguish allocations to sub-sheds, so some of the Brecon engines may have been at Hereford and some of Upper Bank's at Gurnos.

 

Birmingham had just six of the 1377 Class along with the three 1102 class engines; surprising for such a major traffic centre. One 1377 is seen in photos of Birmingham Central Goods station, and I think also at Lawley Street. Maybe Camp Hill had another. The photographic evidence suggests that tender engines were used to shunt Washwood Heath - and that was certainly the case in Terry Essery's day.

 

Peterborough had just its four 1102 Class engines, as did Normanton. A couple of 1377s had joined Carlisle's five.

 

No. 1141 at Carnforth worked alongside 1377 No. 223.

 

So it does look as if there was at least some attempt at a policy of keeping engines of the same class together, with sheds with smaller allocations having engines of just the one class - notably Brecon, Peterborough, and Normanton.

Edited December 23, 2022 by Compound2632
typo.

[Compound2632]

 

[Midland Railway Study Centre item 18368]

[Compound2632]

As it's Christmas, a couple more pretty photos of 1102 Class 0-6-0Ts.

 

This is the other rear view known to me, No. 1106A, a Brecon engine, on a westbound goods train at Devynock, Neath & Brecon Railway, between late 1891, when Nos. 1102-1115 went on the duplicate list as 1102A-1115A, and late 1907 when it was renumbered 1624:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue image of MRSC item 61763.]

 

Note the gent standing in front of the coupling hook, so we can't see whether there's a single shackle or a three-link coupling! According to the table of 1893-1897 headcodes in Midland Style, the two lamps over the port buffer indicate a stopping goods or mineral train, among other things; presumably the same applied for Midland trains on the Neath & Brecon. 

 

The leading two-plank wagon looks very Great Western-ish. The leading covered goods wagon is a Midland vehicle, one of the early Clayton type, 14' 11" over headstock and with 5' 0"-high doorway, D353 - shorter than the familiar D357 wagon with 6' 0" doorway. The second covered goods wagon is, I think, Cambrian: I hope one of our Cambrian experts can pin it down!

 

Then three dumb-buffered mineral wagons, a sheeted wagon, and a Midland 10-ton brake.

 

I'm even worse on dogs than I am on Cambrian wagons - is that a red setter?

 

The second photo shows No. 2255:

 

 

[Embedded link to catalogue image of MRSC item 61912.]

 

In March to July 1895, Nos. 1121-1130 pregessively went on the duplicate list as Nos. 1121A-1130A but in November of that year Nos. 1121A-1126A were returned to the capital list as Nos. 2253-2258, their numbers being taken by the six engines that came to the Midland when, jointly with the Great Western, it took over the Severn & Wye Railway. The logic here is that the total Midland capital loco stock was increased by six, but the absorbed engines were not deemed to be the most brilliant of acquisitions, so went straight on the duplicate list, releasing places on the capital list for better engines. (Although, once rebuilt, several of the Severn & Wye engines came to look not unlike the 1102 Class.) So this photo was taken between November 1895 and December 1907, when this engine was renumbered 1641. In the 1899-1902 allocation list, No. 2255 is one of the four at Peterborough - is there anything in the photo to confirm that as the location? Originally one of the Kentish Town batch, it was at Gloucester in April 1892 but had moved back to Kentish Town by May 1908. It had gone to Toton, its final home, by April 1914. 

 

My gut feeling about both photos is that they are more late 1890s than early 1900s.

 

[All data from S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 3.]

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by Compound2632

[Mikkel]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

[Midland Railway Study Centre item 18368]

 

Discrete but stylish. Very nice.

 

Merry christmas Stephen, and thanks to you and everyone else for keeping this excellent thread going.