Annie's Virtual Pre-Grouping, Grouping and BR Layouts & Workbench

[Edwardian]

On 03/03/2023 at 04:08, Annie said:

Afternoon GWR Cheer Up Picture:  Bugle station c.1910 with a train for Newquay.  Another source says it's c.1920, but I don't think so.

 

 

1907 OS map.

 

23 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

What was that word you used earlier? Re-education.

 

I think we have:

1. U27 31 ft luggage tricomposite T/S/Lug/F/T with the first class compartment further from us; note the unequal panel spacing and deep eves panels. 
2. D? A bogie brake third with two sets of luggage doors and five compartments, that I can't find at http://www.gwrcoaches.org.uk/index.html!
3. U29 31 ft luggage tricomposite, also T/S/Lug/F/T but note shallower eves panels over the quarterlights, though the deep panels for the door ventilators have been retained.   
4. V5 28 ft passenger brake van - it's a 4-wheeler and shorter than the U29, so not V8 / V10 / V11 I think...

I saw a very nice photo the other day of a U27 in a LNWR train bound for Manchester at Stockport, with roof board suggesting it had come via Worcester but probably originating from somewhere beyond:

 

 

[Embedded link to L&NWR Society Facebook group.]

 

The Bugle photo has an interesting wagon in the yard - looks like black lettering on a lighter-coloured body, which usually suggests buff or off-yellow of some sort, and stone or lime rather than coal.  T. J. SHAR(P?) & Co.

 

I've seen Annie's Bugle picture listed for sale as "before 1910", photographer unknown.

 

That makes sense to me. 

 

It is not possible, I think, with an image of this nature to distinguish btween pre-1908 and post-1922 lined chocolate and cream. However, I am not seeing on any of the coaches any trace of the large garter transfer applied adjacent to First Class compartments from 1906, and which would also be found in the 1920s version of the livery.

 

This picture of a U29, borrowed from GWRcoaches.org, shows where the Garter would be applied on U27 and U29. 

 

 

I don't glimpse it either on the second coach - not a diagram D Van Third, but a 50' Brake Tricomposite to diagram E40 - where it would be placed by the last compartment before the brake section.

 

So, I don't think the appearance of the coaches is decisive, but tends, IMHO, to pre-1906 livery, so a "before 1910" attribution makes sense.

 

The Metro tank on the train, however, looks typical of the 1900s appearance of such locos. I don't think any particular detail is decisive - S4 boilers were fitted as replacements from the 1890s - but to me has the classic look of these locos around the turn of the Century with all late Nineteenth Centry mods I'd expect like Dean chimney and cab, and the blanked coal rails.  

 

It's really how the loco is turned out that suggests the period to me. I think the dome is polished brass - though that's always hard to tell - and the smokebox ring and handles are burnished. Neither of these features would I expect to see in the 1920s. Further, I think there is lining discernable on the side tanks, and, if so, that makes the picture pre-Great War and, therefore, pre-the transition to 1908 brown coach livery. So, before 1910.

 

 

[Annie]

This is a follow up to me mentioning canals for Trainz earlier in the thread. the original 'Middleton for laptops' (TANE) was specially developed so that it would run on a low end laptop.  All the models used were made to have a minimal memory footprint and were simplified in order to achieve this.

A further development of this layout was 'Middleton with Canal' which with its simple approach to the subject makes a better job of it than some very busy and complex canal layouts for Trainz that I've seen.

For some strange reason I had a lot of difficulty with getting enough of a reasonable video clip to show you as the screen capture software kept on pausing and juddering.

 

 

[Annie]

12 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

 

I've seen Annie's Bugle picture listed for sale as "before 1910", photographer unknown.

 

That makes sense to me. 

 

It is not possible, I think, with an image of this nature to distinguish btween pre-1908 and post-1922 lined chocolate and cream. However, I am not seeing on any of the coaches any trace of the large garter transfer applied adjacent to First Class compartments from 1906, and which would also be found in the 1920s version of the livery.

 

This picture of a U29, borrowed from GWRcoaches.org, shows where the Garter would be applied on U27 and U29. 

 

 

I don't glimpse it either on the second coach - not a diagram D Van Third, but a 50' Brake Tricomposite to diagram E40 - where it would be placed by the last compartment before the brake section.

 

So, I don't think the appearance of the coaches is decisive, but tends, IMHO, to pre-1906 livery, so a "before 1910" attribution makes sense.

 

The Metro tank on the train, however, looks typical of the 1900s appearance of such locos. I don't think any particular detail is decisive - S4 boilers were fitted as replacements from the 1890s - but to me has the classic look of these locos around the turn of the Century with all late Nineteenth Centry mods I'd expect like Dean chimney and cab, and the blanked coal rails.  

 

It's really how the loco is turned out that suggests the period to me. I think the dome is polished brass - though that's always hard to tell - and the smokebox ring and handles are burnished. Neither of these features would I expect to see in the 1920s. Further, I think there is lining discernable on the side tanks, and, if so, that makes the picture pre-Great War and, therefore, pre-the transition to 1908 brown coach livery. So, before 1910.

 

 

Thank you very much James.  The lack of garter transfers on the 6w Tri-comps had me puzzled and even when I enlarged the image I couldn't see a trace of them.  With me generally liking Tri-composites it was good to have the mysterious brake coach identified as a E40 Brake Tri-comp.  (I wonder if I can persuade Steve Flanders to add one of those to his range of late 19th century coaches.) Nice to see that photo of the U29 Tri-comp.  It's a pity that there were so few of them as I can only really justify the single one I've got.  From what I've seen in other photos Cornwall had a liking for Tri-comps.

The well turned out appearance of the Metro tank is what had me immediately convinced that it was a pre-WW1 photo even before I looked at anything else.

 

From what I could see on the OS map the area around Bugle would make a fascinating model with all those branches running off everywhere; - not that I'm going to try doing it what with how often I'm falling asleep lately.  

 

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

I've seen Annie's Bugle picture listed for sale as "before 1910", photographer unknown.

 

That makes sense to me. 

 

To be clear, I wasn't seriously suggesting a post-grouping date as the date of 1910 or earlier seemed secure enough on other grounds. I'm getting quite good at spotting Dean-era wagons and carriages but engines remain a bit of a mystery to me.

 

But I give you the E40:

 

 

Where I was casually assuming a pair of luggage doors you rightly saw a first class compartment with one quarterlight obscured by the guard's ogee, as a ventilator and hinge-count confirms. I also spot the destination board in the eves panel.

Edited March 4, 2023 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

53 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

To be clear, I wasn't seriously suggesting a post-grouping date as the date of 1910 or earlier seemed secure enough on other grounds. I'm getting quite good at spotting Dean-era wagons and carriages but engines remain a bit of a mystery to me.

 

I quoted both Annie's post and yours. It was Annie who mentioned that the picture has been alternatively attributed to the 1920s, though I do not think any of the 3 of us have ever felt that likely.

 

I posted because I felt we could derive enough from the picture to discount the suggestion.

 

53 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

But I give you the E40:

 

Very generous, I'm sure.

 

53 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

 

Where I was casually assuming a pair of luggage doors you rightly saw a first class compartment with one quarterlight obscured by the guard's ogee, as a ventilator and hinge-count confirms. I also spot the destination board in the eves panel.

 

 

1 hour ago, Annie said:

Thank you very much James.  The lack of garter transfers on the 6w Tri-comps had me puzzled and even when I enlarged the image I couldn't see a trace of them.  With me generally liking Tri-composites it was good to have the mysterious brake coach identified as a E40 Brake Tri-comp.  (I wonder if I can persuade Steve Flanders to add one of those to his range of late 19th century coaches.) Nice to see that photo of the U29 Tri-comp.  It's a pity that there were so few of them as I can only really justify the single one I've got.  From what I've seen in other photos Cornwall had a liking for Tri-comps.

The well turned out appearance of the Metro tank is what had me immediately convinced that it was a pre-WW1 photo even before I looked at anything else.

 

From what I could see on the OS map the area around Bugle would make a fascinating model with all those branches running off everywhere; - not that I'm going to try doing it what with how often I'm falling asleep lately.  

 

 

I might add that cabs with back plates tended to be fitted on Metros in the mid-'20s, with Collett bunkers from 1924 and these changes are not seen. Also from 1906 number plates were moved from the centre of side tanks to the rear of the tanks or to the bunker on larger tank engines. While this was progressive, again, a typical '20s Metro would have repositioned number plates and "Great Western" on the side tanks.

 

Although it's not clear, what I think I am seeing is a loco with a brass dome, lining and, perhaps, lined Indian Red frames. I also think I'm seeing pre-1906 Chocolate and cream coaches (because no Garter). IIRC, the Dean low-roof E40s were built around 1895 and the Cornwall Minerals Ry taken over in 1896, which give earliest dates. So, if I had to commit I'd say turn of the century/early 1900s and, therefore, before 1910.  

 

I wondered if there were any changes at Bugle in 1910 that might explain why it was thought the unknown photographer captured the scene earlier?

 

One possible source of published info is Bennett, Alan (1988). The Great Western Railway in Mid Cornwall. Southampton: Kingfisher Railway Publications. ISBN 0-946184-53-4, a volume I do not possess.

 

Also, I wonder if those with PO books and registers could get anywhere with the T. J. Sharp wagon?

 

There was a Dapol fake, using what looks like a modern RCH 1923 wagon, but I wonder if there was a photograph of the original 8 ton wagon from which the livery detail on the model was derived?

 

 

 

Apropos the enamel signs, Ceylindo Tea, BTW was a brand of the International Tea Co., which was founded in 1878 had shops across Southern England such as to make this roll call of shops:

 

Smooth down the Avenue glitters the bicycle,
Black-stockinged legs under navy blue serge,
Home and Colonial, Star, International,
Balancing bicycle leant on the verge.

 

 

 

Edited March 4, 2023 by Edwardian
spelling

[Annie]

37 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Where I was casually assuming a pair of luggage doors you rightly saw a first class compartment with one quarterlight obscured by the guard's ogee, as a ventilator and hinge-count confirms. I also spot the destination board in the eves panel.

It's a nice bit of detective work all round for which I'm grateful.

 

I realised I was being silly over weeping the odd tear into my tea because I couldn't have a nice GWR Cornish layout, - because I've got one already!  It's my 1930s Penzance to Camborne layout I started working on ages ago in TRS22 not long after the beta release of TRS22 became available.  Yes it's all a bit of a compromise in places due to the right bits and pieces not being available; - And parts of it are a horrible mess still because it's a rebuild of a Cornish layout that had an awful lot of mistakes everywhere because it was based on modern day Gaggle Earth images, but at least most of it is my mess now and I can sort those if I take it one bit at a time.

 

 

[Annie]

26 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

I wondered if there were any changes at Bugle in 1910 that might explain why it was thought the unknown photographer captured the scene earlier?

The 1888 6 inch to the mile map looks much the same as the 1905 map apart from its generally nicer draughtsmanship.  The only other map on the NLS site is dated 1938 and the row of miscellaneous sheds behind the the T.J. Sharp wagons in the photograph have now disappeared.  My own library is very slender when it comes to Cornwall.

 

43 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

I might add that cabs with back plates tended to be fitted on Metros in the mid-'20s, with Collett bunkers from 1924 and these changes are not seen. Also from 1906 number plates were moved from the centre of side tanks to the rear of the tanks or to the bunker on larger tank engines. While this was progressive, again, a typical '20s Metro would have repositioned number plates and "Great Western" on the side tanks.

 

Although it's not clear, what I think I am seeing is a loco with a brass dome, lining and, perhaps, lined Indian Red frames. I also think I'm seeing pre-1906 Chocolate and cream coaches (because no Garter). IIRC, the Dean low-roof E40s were built around 1895 and the Cornwall Minerals Ry taken over in 1896, which give earliest dates. So, if I had to commit I'd say turn of the century/early 1900s and, therefore, before 1910.  

All useful information and good detective work James.

 

44 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Also, I wonder if those with PO books and registers could get anywhere with the T. J. Sharp wagon?

 

There was a Dapol fake, using what looks like a modern RCH 1923 wagon, but I wonder if there was a photograph of the original 8 ton wagon from which the livery detail on the model was derived?

It would be very nice if a member of the parish could turn up a photo.  The Dapol version is a howling fake, but they must've copied the signwriting and colours from some recognised source or another.

[Compound2632]

4 hours ago, Annie said:

It would be very nice if a member of the parish could turn up a photo.  

 

Not in Joe Greaves' index nor HMRS photos. Setting aside the monstrosity that is that Dapol wagon qua wagon, 10 ft wheelbase steel underframe an' all, the signwriting shows such a lack of prototype literacy that i'm inclined to think the whole thing is a poor guess based on this very photo:

 

 

I'm not entirely convinced by the white outline to the black lettering, which could just be down to contrast between the darker and lighter areas, though I admit the lettering does look a bit skinny. The sides look about 3 ft deep from floor level, or maybe a bit less, and the layout of the lettering suggests four 8 in or 9 in planks; the end, though, might be three 11 in or 12 in planks, going by the position of the owner's plate and a hint of horizontal shadow lines. 

 

Cambrian kit C53 could be a good starting-point for a model in 4 mm scale. This wagon and the wagon next to it look to conform to the 1887 RCH specification. The thing that makes me suspect that there is another photo after all is that the Dapol model has Load 8 Tons on its side-rail; the wagon if anything might pass for and RCH 1923 specification 12-tonner. The tare given is more applicable to that, as is the commuted charge sign, which is way out of order for "before 1910".

 

But now it's the wagon on the right that has caught my notice - much shorter wheelbase, around 7 ft, and sides going straight up from the solebar, possibly sloping outwards - certainly the end does. Is this an iron-bodied hopper wagon? Is it a hang-over from the CMR? And what is the flap thing projecting below the solebar?

 

What is the load? It looks too diffuse to be coal - is it culm, which was local?

 

Paging @wagonman!

 

Edited March 4, 2023 by Compound2632
sp.

[magmouse]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

I'm not entirely convinced by the white outline to the black lettering, which could just be down to contrast between the darker and lighter areas, though I admit the lettering does look a bit skinny.

 

Sharpening of the digital file - possibly applied automatically at the time the negative was scanned - adds contrast to light/dark boundaries, and is often over-done. The compression techniques used to squash down the file size can have similar effects. Look at the wavy edge of the roof above the left-hand wagon - definite signs of sharpening and/or compression artefacts in the image there.

 

The apparently skinny lettering may be a victim of the same effects, since we are at the limit of the digital resolution (and possibly the analogue resolution of the original negative).

 

I'm constantly frustrated by the poor quality digitisation of these types of historic photos. Having done some 'archeology' on negatives and colour slides as part of my theatre research, I know there is often a great deal of detail that can be recovered with the right techniques from analogue photographs, including that which is not visible to the naked eye looking directly at the negative or slide itself, let alone a poorly digitised copy.

 

Nick.

[simonmcp]

The resolution at which old photos are scanned is usually far too low. It is done to save time and file size of course. I never scan to JPEG, always to TIFF and usually at 600 LPI for large prints, and the maximum the scanner will handle for slides, (DPI refers to output of Dots per inch, visible in old newspapers which were often lower than 100 DPI).

[Compound2632]

58 minutes ago, magmouse said:

I'm constantly frustrated by the poor quality digitisation of these types of historic photos. Having done some 'archeology' on negatives and colour slides as part of my theatre research, I know there is often a great deal of detail that can be recovered with the right techniques from analogue photographs, including that which is not visible to the naked eye looking directly at the negative or slide itself, let alone a poorly digitised copy.

 

The photochemical reaction in the emulsion is at the molecular level, so in principle on the original plate there is information at the sub-micrometre level. When I was doing my doctorate, several of my colleagues were using film to record XUV and X-ray spectra, which was then digitised. One of them became dangerously obsessed by the structure in this data...

 

But in the case of this Bugle image, I note that it is said to be from an old postcard, so the principal information loss occured well over a century ago.

[magmouse]

4 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

But in the case of this Bugle image, I note that it is said to be from an old postcard, so the principal information loss occured well over a century ago.

 

Yes, but...

 

Exhibit A:

 

 

(From the top-right of the digital file above)

 

The light and dark patches that look a bit like worms or bacteria seen through a microscope are compression artefacts. Whatever fine detail may have been there in the postcard (or the original, uncompressed scan) has been obscured.

 

Exhibit B:

 

 

[A very small excerpt from my scan of a black and white photo reproduced in a printed book - scanned at 2400 dpi]

 

Here we can see clearly and in detail the screen used to create the different sized dots that give the impression (when viewed at the correct size) of continuous tones, as used in half-tone printing. In this case, I can absolutely know that I have the maximum detail available, without accessing the original negative or a high-quality photographic print made from it.

 

Assuming (!) that the scan of the postcard was intended for any kind of archival or 'serious' purpose (rather than 'hey, look what I just picked up on eBay!'), then it should have started at this level of detail. If you can clearly see the half-screen dots, you know you have as much information as the postcard can offer. You can then choose how much to throw away, knowing that once you have thrown it away it cannot be recovered - at least, only imperfectly (some clever technologies will do a good job of interpolating data to recover, up to a point, 'lost' detail).

 

So, I fully accept your point that in this case there was information loss when the postcard was created from whatever the original image source was. My frustration is not with that - a postcard is made in a particular way, for a particular purpose, that does not include meeting the needs of railway enthusiasts 100+ years later. My frustration is with people who go to some trouble and expense to make that material digitally available (which I applaud), but who then limit its value because they didn't go to just a bit more trouble and expense. The frustration doubly applies to museums, archives and such organisations that purport to be custodians of our collective heritage, are funded as such (albeit often inadequately), should have the expertise needed, and should have an understanding of their potential users and their current and possible future needs. Sometimes they succeed - witness the stunning scans of MR wagon drawings available from the MRSC - but too often the best that can be had is a scan 1000 pixels across of a 5"x7" glass plate negative that would need at least ten times that before getting to the scale of the silver grains that make the image.

 

....

 

Sorry - rant over...

 

I am actually deeply grateful we live in a world where 100-year-old pictures of railway wagons, stations, goods yards and whatnot are available to view from the comfort of my own home. It's just that it could be... better.

 

 Nick.

[wagonman]

On 04/03/2023 at 12:53, Compound2632 said:

 

Not in Joe Greaves' index nor HMRS photos. Setting aside the monstrosity that is that Dapol wagon qua wagon, 10 ft wheelbase steel underframe an' all, the signwriting shows such a lack of prototype literacy that i'm inclined to think the whole thing is a poor guess based on this very photo:

 

 

I'm not entirely convinced by the white outline to the black lettering, which could just be down to contrast between the darker and lighter areas, though I admit the lettering does look a bit skinny. The sides look about 3 ft deep from floor level, or maybe a bit less, and the layout of the lettering suggests four 8 in or 9 in planks; the end, though, might be three 11 in or 12 in planks, going by the position of the owner's plate and a hint of horizontal shadow lines. 

 

Cambrian kit C53 could be a good starting-point for a model in 4 mm scale. This wagon and the wagon next to it look to conform to the 1887 RCH specification. The thing that makes me suspect that there is another photo after all is that the Dapol model has Load 8 Tons on its side-rail; the wagon if anything might pass for and RCH 1923 specification 12-tonner. The tare given is more applicable to that, as is the commuted charge sign, which is way out of order for "before 1910".

 

But now it's the wagon on the right that has caught my notice - much shorter wheelbase, around 7 ft, and sides going straight up from the solebar, possibly sloping outwards - certainly the end does. Is this an iron-bodied hopper wagon? Is it a hang-over from the CMR? And what is the flap thing projecting below the solebar?

 

What is the load? It looks too diffuse to be coal - is it culm, which was local?

 

Paging @wagonman!

 

 

Sorry. Had my hearing aid turned off.

 

Sharp wagon no.43 was a 10-tonner registered by the GWR in August 1900 (their 846). I don't know the builder. The wagon on the far right is indeed an exCMR wagon. These had iron bodies on wooden frames and an end door for tipping. They had been built by the Swansea Wagon Co in 1875, and often turn up in pre-WW1 photos of mid Cornwall.

 

The photo is a detail from a commercial postcard of, I think, Bugle station in the Edwardian era. I'm pretty sure I have a copy somewhere but it's not been scanned. At the moment I'm up to my eyeballs in Devon coal merchants and have rather neglected the Cornwall end. Mañana.

 

As for the cargo, whatever they used to fire the kilns at he dries...

 

 

Richard

Edited March 5, 2023 by wagonman

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, wagonman said:

The photo is a detail from a commercial postcard of, I think, Bugle station in the Edwardian era. I'm pretty sure I have a copy somewhere but it's not been scanned. 

 

Thanks - a scan of the postcard was posted upthread, followed by a vigorous discussion of the resolution at which such things should be scanned.

 

I don't think the number of the wagon in the postcard can be made out; my feeling is that it looks earlier than 1900 and 8 tons rather than ten tons, so there must be some other photo of No. 43. But now it's an even deeper mystery why Dapol put Load 8 Tons on their travesty.

 

[wagonman]

On 04/03/2023 at 12:53, Compound2632 said:

 

On 04/03/2023 at 12:53, Compound2632 said:

But now it's the wagon on the right that has caught my notice - much shorter wheelbase, around 7 ft, and sides going straight up from the solebar, possibly sloping outwards - certainly the end does. Is this an iron-bodied hopper wagon? Is it a hang-over from the CMR? And what is the flap thing projecting below the solebar?

 

 

I have found a couple of photos with exCMR mineral wagons in them. You can see that the sides and ends are vertical. Unusually they have dumb buffers at the door end and sprung at the other.

 

 

Here's a couple at the foot of the Newquay Harbour tunnel

 

 

A few more in a familiar view of Fowey station this time loaded with barrels of clay.

 

 

Richard

 

 

Edited March 5, 2023 by wagonman

[Compound2632]

4 minutes ago, wagonman said:

A few more in a familiar view of Fowey station this time loaded with barrels of clay.

 

That Fowey view is evidently reasonably after 1908 (no cream upper panels on the carriages) so these old wagons presumably survived in use up to the Great War. The dumb buffers at on end ought to have led to their condemnation just before the war but, I wonder, did they linger on in local use?

[wagonman]

Somebody who has consulted the Wagon Registers could probably tell us their condemnation dates – that person is not me – but I would assume they had all gone by the end of 1913.

 

The GWR was busy building replacements at that time.

Edited March 5, 2023 by wagonman

[magmouse]

36 minutes ago, wagonman said:

I have found a couple of photos with exCMR mineral wagons in them.

 

The wagon in that first picture seems to have GWR grease axle boxes - presumably replaced by the GWR (retaining the open spoke wheels)?

 

Nick.

[Caley Jim]

1 hour ago, wagonman said:

... Unusually they have dumb buffers at the door end and sprung at the other.

That seems to have been common practice in S Wales.

 

Jim

[wagonman]

19 minutes ago, Caley Jim said:

That seems to have been common practice in S Wales.

 

Jim

 

Except that in South Wales the sprung buffers were always at the door end...

 

[wagonman]

On 04/03/2023 at 08:42, Annie said:

This is a follow up to me mentioning canals for Trainz earlier in the thread. the original 'Middleton for laptops' (TANE) was specially developed so that it would run on a low end laptop.  All the models used were made to have a minimal memory footprint and were simplified in order to achieve this.

A further development of this layout was 'Middleton with Canal' which with its simple approach to the subject makes a better job of it than some very busy and complex canal layouts for Trainz that I've seen.

For some strange reason I had a lot of difficulty with getting enough of a reasonable video clip to show you as the screen capture software kept on pausing and juddering.

 

 

 Annie, where did you get the R B Pullin wagons from? Ralph Bertrand Pullin was a Torquay based coal merchant active from around 1924 using a fleet of ten Gloucester built 12-ton wagons numbered 50-68 (even numbers only). They were built to 1907 design/dimensions. If you have other information about them I would love to hear it!

 

 

Richard

[Annie]

37 minutes ago, wagonman said:

 Annie, where did you get the R B Pullin wagons from? Ralph Bertrand Pullin was a Torquay based coal merchant active from around 1924 using a fleet of ten Gloucester built 12-ton wagons numbered 50-68 (even numbers only). They were built to 1907 design/dimensions. If you have other information about them I would love to hear it!

 

 

Richard

 

Hello Richard,  the R.B.Pullin wagon was made by a member of the creator group I belong to back in 2016 and as with other PO wagons he made they were based on photographic artwork of a GWR open wagon and a fairly basic wagon body mesh so they are essentially representational only and aren't accurate models.  I'm fairly sure he was getting his information from one of the readily available series of PO wagon books as the description notes for the wagon are fairly sparse and only mention that the prototype was built to 1907 RCH specs.  So i'm afraid I can't really help you with any more information than that.

 

[wagonman]

1 hour ago, Annie said:

 

Hello Richard,  the R.B.Pullin wagon was made by a member of the creator group I belong to back in 2016 and as with other PO wagons he made they were based on photographic artwork of a GWR open wagon and a fairly basic wagon body mesh so they are essentially representational only and aren't accurate models.  I'm fairly sure he was getting his information from one of the readily available series of PO wagon books as the description notes for the wagon are fairly sparse and only mention that the prototype was built to 1907 RCH specs.  So i'm afraid I can't really help you with any more information than that.

 

 

Ah yes, that is from the Glos official photo of the last one built and is accurate, except that the '12 tons' should be on the right hand side. 

 

 

 

 

Why the f**k has it come out with a red screen?

 

 

 

Edited March 5, 2023 by wagonman

[Compound2632]

27 minutes ago, wagonman said:

Why [-] has it come out with a red screen?

 

There was some discussion of this on another thread. It has to do with certain combinations of browser, file type, and compression software.

 

Looks normal b/w to me! 

[MikeOxon]

54 minutes ago, wagonman said:

Why [] has it come out with a red screen?

I get the red screen when viewing on my iPhone but not on my PC.  It's the same with some of my own posts too.