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

[Northroader]

The lifting jack is in front of one of the gentlemen in the picture. More recent times you’d have a “stand”, like a sort of welded up goalpost to go under across the nearest end of the wagon. These folks are using a wheelset as a stand, there’s “scotches” (wedges) each side of the wheels underneath, and a “biscuit” (a thin slice of hardwood) on top of the tyre and under the headstock, so it’s fairly stable while you pick up the other end with the jack in the middle under the headstock.

[MrWolf]

The problem with lifting the entire wagon on four jacks at the cross bearers is that unless you are dropping both wheelsets simultaneously is that the weight of the wheelset not being removed would cause the lighter end where the wheelset had been dropped to lift and topple the jacks. 

It's actually safer to keep the unsprung weight on the ground.

[MrWolf]

1 minute ago, Northroader said:

The lifting jack is in front of one of the gentlemen in the picture. More recent times you’d have a “stand”, like a sort of welded up goalpost to go under across the nearest end of the wagon. These folks are using a wheelset as a stand, there’s “scotches” (wedges) each side of the wheels underneath, and a “biscuit” (a thin slice of hardwood) on top of the tyre and under the headstock, so it’s fairly stable while you pick up the other end with the jack in the middle under the headstock.

 

That's true as regards using the wheelset as a stand, but if you lifted the opposite end under the headstock, it wouldn't be possible to roll out the second axle as the jack is in it's path.

It's quite possible, although I cannot of course state it positively, that the axle is out in order to polish up the journal if the bearing has 'picked up' and seized or partially seized before fitting new brasses. 

The square plates on the axle I think would be the backing plate which keeps the bearing aligned and the grease in the box.

[billbedford]

21 hours ago, MrWolf said:

The problem with lifting the entire wagon on four jacks at the cross bearers is that unless you are dropping both wheelsets simultaneously is that the weight of the wheelset not being removed would cause the lighter end where the wheelset had been dropped to lift and topple the jacks. 

It's actually safer to keep the unsprung weight on the ground.

 

Yes, but both wheelsets have been rolled out to support the headstocks as the solebars are horizontal, and there are three visible springs on the ground and presumably another out-of-shot. 

 

It looks like they are changing all four axleboxes, presumably grease to oil. 

[MrWolf]

2 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

Yes, but both wheelsets have been rolled out to support the headstocks as the solebars are horizontal, and there are three visible springs on the ground and presumably another out-of-shot. 

 

It looks like they are changing all four axleboxes, presumably grease to oil. 

 

In that case I would think that they're changing the springs as well as the axleboxes and your idea of changing from grease to oil axleboxes is the most likely. 

I'd been busy considering the logistics of getting one axle out with or without a crane as in how I would do it in the circumstances, but dropping out both axles using four jacks is considerably easier from a point of view of not ending up with a wagon body for a hat. 

Something that could really spoil your day.😉

[Northroader]

If you lift both ends of a wagon with jacks at the same time, the b***** thing shows a tendency to walk sideways.

[MrWolf]

3 hours ago, Northroader said:

If you lift both ends of a wagon with jacks at the same time, the b***** thing shows a tendency to walk sideways.

 

Indeed. Bodging your way through such a likely problem and evening out any tilt is translated to the clean handled observers as a "Controlled lift"...🤣

[jamie92208]

I once had to dispose of a set of tram Jack's.these were designed to lift a tram car body of it's truck.  They consisted of two cross beams with two longitudinals that slotted into them. The ends of the cross beams had sockets for four hand operated Jack's and four men could assemble the whole  thing then lift a body. Very easy to use.  So such things can be done safely. 

 

Jamie

[Compound2632]

11 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

It looks like they are changing all four axleboxes, presumably grease to oil. 

 

That seems questionable to me principally because there are plenty of photos of D299s with grease boxes well into the 20th century so I don't think there was any program of replacement of grease boxes by oil, unlike the Great Western.

[Compound2632]

We're staying in a cottage let attached to The Railway Inn at Acklington. The pub restaurant is closed on Mondays and Tuesdays so this afternoon was the first opportunity to look in. There is some railway themed decoration - as one goes in one is confronted by a large cast iron North Eastern Railway no trespassing sign! The entrance wall art is a large photo of, incongruously, a Webb Dreadnought - I'm all for compounds of course but they could have picked one of the indigenous two-cylinder ones.

 

Acklington station has a full set of original buildings now in private hands, with the goods shed converted to an interesting-looking dwelling.

[Nick Lawson]

On 23/10/2023 at 20:45, Compound2632 said:

That seems questionable to me principally because there are plenty of photos of D299s with grease boxes well into the 20th century so I don't think there was any program of replacement of grease boxes by oil, unlike the Great Western.

Perhaps this was just like-for-like replacement for maintenance? I believe  axleboxes  had whitemetal bearings which needed replacement from time to time. This was a matter of cleaning out; pouring hot metal into the inverted axle box; and, when cold, scraping it into an even surface and ensuring a channel for the lubricant to run onto the axle.

 

 

[Penlan]

OK, I'm going off topic, but in view of the depth of knowledge by contributors to this topic, there may be someone (or more) who may be able to direct myself and a.n.other to perhaps a better understanding as to what the Van shown was used for, in view of it's low roof line.
The photo appears to be post grouping.  

I would think the lettering on the end of the van is 'X & Co', there appears to be a 'logo' of sorts on the door(s) and lettering on the side panels.  I can't readily make out if there is any sort of roof 'door'.
The line of timber (pit props) in the background is 'interesting', I think :-) 
The origin of this photo is obvious - from Facebook.
 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Penlan

[Grahams]

Here is an update on my D305 5 inch gauge wagon. The doors and the door controllers function, the fastenings too, although as Stephen (@Compound2632) discovered at the Great Electric Train Show, they are a bit fiddly.

The ropes under the casks are not crown knotted but when I have a couple of days to spare I might make them. For the moment, those will suffice. 

As there is clear evidence that Charles Wright and Son Ltd of Wirksworth blended and bottled Glenlivet, I found casks labelled 1952 and used similar markings for the casks. The date of the original picture appears to be around April 1919 (see earlier in the thread) so the casks are marked 1908 for 10 year old whisky. 

The wagon was built around 1909 so it had either been left without a full overhaul or maybe had one earlier in WW1. Either way, it looks well-used but clean. I reckon that with salt water, railway and industrial grime in the air, the ironwork would be showing signs of rust through and around the grey. The grey has also darkened and there is evidence of erased chalk marks on the sides. Something light-coloured appears to have been swept out of the wagon and can be seen on the curb rails and the tops of the axleboxes. 

The casks were scaled from the original photo using the profile. Now I have lined up the perspective, it seems they are slightly short and slightly too large in diameter. Whether new casks appear will depend on various things. I already have someone interested in a kit of the wagon so if I make one, I'll redraw the casks. 

Now to the questions:

I need some rope. Does anyone know what colour the Midland had intertwined into their ropes? The sheets had an orange border so in the absence of other evidence, I shall attempt to make some rope with an orange strand running through it. 

What is the black (?) piece appearing within the V hanger on the original photo? It's probably something obvious but not so to me. 

[jwealleans]

1 hour ago, Penlan said:

there may be someone (or more) who may be able to direct myself and a.n.other to perhaps a better understanding as to what the Van shown was used for, in view of it's low roof line.

 

I may be talking completely out of my hat, but this has jogged a memory of reading somewhere about small vans used for tinplate traffic in south Wales?

[WFPettigrew]

1 hour ago, Grahams said:

Does anyone know what colour the Midland had intertwined into their ropes?

 

According to a list in an article by Mike Peascod in - I think - the HMRS Journal (my source of this was a scan of the two pages on the Caledonian Railway Association Forum), which was based on RCH lists from 1874 -1890.  There were the odd change for some companies during those 16 years - the MR being one of them with the scheme below from 1882 - but I don't know whether there were further changes before 1923.  Probably not, but without evidence... 

 

Anyway, to answer your question, Midland Railway wagons had one tarred strand in their ropes - so one black and two white.

 

I am fearing that for a 5 inch wagon, you'll be having to start making your own rope.... 😬

 

All the best

 

Neil 

[65179]

57 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

 

I may be talking completely out of my hat, but this has jogged a memory of reading somewhere about small vans used for tinplate traffic in south Wales?

 

See tinplate van part way down the page here:

https://lightmoor.co.uk/books/private-owner-wagons-a-fifteenth-collection/L8535

 

Previous discussion roughly here:

Simon

[Penlan]

Thank you 65179, I think the van in the mystery photo has a lower roof edge than 5' 6" though.
There are various lines of enquiry going on now, hopefully something satisfactory will be found soon.
The Midland Rly moved a lot of tinplate out of the Swansea area, but as far as can be ascertained this was in the Midland Rly's standard vans and sheeted wagons - source John Miles 👍. 

[Grahams]

2 hours ago, WFPettigrew said:

Anyway, to answer your question, Midland Railway wagons had one tarred strand in their ropes - so one black and two white.

 

I am fearing that for a 5 inch wagon, you'll be having to start making your own rope.... 😬

 

All the best

 

Neil 

Thank you for the colour suggestion Neil. I do wish it had been orange rather than monochrome. 

Well, that's another rabbit hole then 🤣. 

I had already started investigations into a small rope-making machine. After some searching and browsing, I found this 

It looks like a functioning design so I will probably give it a go.

[Chrisbr]

6 hours ago, Grahams said:

What is the black (?) piece appearing within the V hanger on the original photo?

It's the support for the other end of the brake tumbler (loose hanger) - on GW wagons (my familarity) there was a transverse bracket that ran from the solebar to the longitudinal that this was suspended from (loose hanger bracket).

 

 

[Miss Prism]

The GWR had an open diagram O27 designated 'for tinplate traffic'. The diagram didn't get issued until 1930/1, and the lot consisted of just 3 vehicles. They had DCIII brakes, which makes me think they were repurposed older vehicles. They looked like an O24, and had no sheet supporter, which seems very odd for tinplate transportation. I can't find any reference to O27 after a brief perusal of the opens chapter of the bible, but I expect it's buried in there somewhere. And why issue a new diagram? Most odd.

 

Three unsheeted opens was clearly not enough for the tinplate traffic, and I'm sure the GWR would have used normal sheeted ones for such purposes.

 

[MrWolf]

There is a photograph on page 100 of The Wye Valley Railway and the Coleford Branch (Oakwood Press) of "Men loading tinplate into open wagons at Redbook" Both wagons are five plank opens in c1938 liveries.

One is GWR number 63946 (first digit not too clear) and LMS 352380.

 

I'll take a picture if anyone is interested and post up with full credit to Monmouth museum.

[magmouse]

More on rope colour codes, and related topics of interest, here:

 

https://www.crassoc.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1929

 

Nick.

[Grahams]

3 hours ago, Chrisbr said:

It's the support for the other end of the brake tumbler (loose hanger) - on GW wagons (my familarity) there was a transverse bracket that ran from the solebar to the longitudinal that this was suspended from (loose hanger bracket).

 

 

Thanks. I have to get my head round that. I've not seen it on the Midland drawings. 

[Compound2632]

14 hours ago, Grahams said:

Thanks. I have to get my head round that. I've not seen it on the Midland drawings. 

 

The  Great Western arrangement was, as @Chrisbr says, to have a loose link hanging from that bracket to support the inner end of the brakeshaft, presumably taking up the slack if the pushrods had not been perfectly set to compensate for uneven brakeblock wear. Cunning, as one would expect. Midland wagons without continuous drawgear - which includes covered goods wagons and cattle wagons built as late as the 1890s - had a similar arrangement, but in this case the equivalent was a solid piece extending down to the brakeshaft - no flexibility. These wagons had a stout cross-timber on the centreline, in addition to the middle bearers; it was to this that this I-hanger was attached. @billbedford has got this right in his latest kits:

 

 

(This is the Lot 29 8 ton highside. The position of the tumbler and I-hanger are distorted by this being the 00 version.)

 

The more familiar arrangement of a pair of V-hangers attached either side of the solebar first came in in 1882 with Drg. 550 for the standard 8-ton highside wagon (i.e. D299) which had continuous drawgear and bottom doors, both of which meant that the centre cross-timber had to go. Here's the sketch I made for one of my Midland Railway Society Journal articles. This was to illustrate an article on low sided wagons, hence the reference to Drg. 1143 of 1897 - but the continuous drawgear frame plan is the same as Drg. 550:

 

I'm afraid these sketches don't show the brake gear; they're to illustrate the change of frame plan. 

 

The arrangement with two V-hangers was less satisfactory from a mechanical point of view, as the tumbler was on the free end of the brakeshaft rather than between its supports. Maybe that's why the adoption of this arrangement also so the introduction of the short brake lever, to limit the moment the brakesman could apply?

[Miss Prism]

I assume those solebars are 5" thick?