Dapol OO 'Air Ministry' 14T tank wagons

[Wickham Green too]

= 7'2'' or thereabouts as it should be. ( Bachmann please note ! )

[MarkSG]

12 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

= 7'2'' or thereabouts as it should be. ( Bachmann please note ! )

 

Is the Bachmann tank too small?

[Wickham Green too]

It's presented on a 10'0'' chassis so SHOULD only represent an Air Ministry type or immediate predecessor ........... the tank might be OK mounted on a 9'0'' chassis as a 1927 type wagon.

[Dunsignalling]

56 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

 

Is the Bachmann tank too small?

 

There's more than one kind of Bachmann tank wagon, but my impression is that, on the most recent (the anchor mount type) they "averaged" the proportions of Class A and B tanks and ended up with something of a hybrid.

Edited June 13 by Dunsignalling

[Pteremy]

8 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

There's more than one kind of Bachmann tank wagon, but my impression is that, on the most recent (the anchor mount type) they "averaged" the proportions of Class A and B tanks and ended up with something of a hybrid.

 

Bachmann's  cradle mounted tanks scale to 6ft diameter tanks. For Class A you have to go back to RCH 1907/1911 for tanks that small, although photographs suggest that some slightly later 10T (rather than 14T) tanks have small barrels. 6ft is more acceptable for Class B, both RCH 1927 and the few hundred Air Min built ones (Fidczuk p35). 

 

The anchor mount tanks scale to 6ft 6ins. Again this is too small for Class A but acceptable for Class B. The other complication though is that some of the models have 20T liveries on a 14T tank body.

 

 

 

[markw]

50 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

It's presented on a 10'0'' chassis so SHOULD only represent an Air Ministry type or immediate predecessor ........... the tank might be OK mounted on a 9'0'' chassis as a 1927 type wagon.

It looks better on the 18', 10' 6” wb Oxford underframe.

[Cwmtwrch]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said:

It's presented on a 10'0'' chassis so SHOULD only represent an Air Ministry type or immediate predecessor ........... the tank might be OK mounted on a 9'0'' chassis as a 1927 type wagon.

The sources seem to suggest that the change to 9ft wb was quickly seen as a retrograde step and most were built on 10ft wb chassis.

[markw]

Completed a couple of re-liveries of these. Using Cambridge Custom Transfers sheets BL15 and BL21.

[gwrrob]

My two have come this morning and credit where due to Dapol as they are superb models with a feel of quality due to the weight [74g] and added detail. I must also mention that I like the reduced packaging now offered which reduces the space needed for storing.

[ullypug]

Sadly, the tanks are not easily convertible to EM or P4 on first inspection.

The sprung cradle seems to be encased in a housing which clashes with correctly spaced wheel sets making a wheel swap impossible, even with Exactoscale. Axles are 1.5mm parallel end, 23.9 mm long.

I shall see if I can disassemble one of the two I’ve bought and investigate further. Initial thoughts are trying the Dave Bradwell sprung carrier sitting in the existing W iron, one of Rumney Models’ chassis kits or trying to fit individual Bill Bedford units as I have with other open framed wagons.

[ullypug]

On 12/06/2024 at 16:12, markw said:

The underframes are plastic, there is a large 2 part weight inside the barrel.

The springing is similar to bill Bedford's arrangement using a piece of wire as the spring, but they have plain axle ends running in a plastic bearing so are not the freest running wagons.

The class B versions have the steam manifold in one end along with the welded panel where the heating coils were inserted.

There are three different arrangements of the tank top details in this release, I would like to see the long catwalk and ladders on a class B tank in a future release.

I was able to remove the dashes either side of the BP by lightly scraping with a scalpel blade.

Comparison photo of the relative sizes of Oxford, Bachmann and Dapol tanks.

And finally one I dis-assembled and stripped the livery off using brake fluid.

How did you get the tank off Mark? Is it just the 2 screws and loosening the 4 retaining straps? Or do the ends need to come off too? They appear to have spigots fitting into the end of the tank

 

[Cwmtwrch]

57 minutes ago, ullypug said:

The sprung cradle seems to be encased in a housing which clashes with correctly spaced wheel sets making a wheel swap impossible, even with Exactoscale. Axles are 1.5mm parallel end, 23.9 mm long.

It appears from your photo that moving the brake gear to allow for wider wheelsets is also something of a problem?

[phil gollin]

On 14/06/2024 at 15:28, markw said:

Completed a couple of re-liveries of these. Using Cambridge Custom Transfers sheets BL15 and BL21.

.

 

Nice.

 

There is scope for Dapol to produce more class A silver tank wagons, in different company liveries.

 

.

[2750Papyrus]

A super model.  My timeframe is actually pre-war but I couldn't resist the Berry Wiggins livery. However, the finish is highly glossy and I need to get the matt varnish out.

[markw]

2 hours ago, ullypug said:

How did you get the tank off Mark? Is it just the 2 screws and loosening the 4 retaining straps? Or do the ends need to come off too? They appear to have spigots fitting into the end of the tank

 

Yes I removed the 2 screws then levered the ladders and diagonal stays out from the solebar, then put a scalpel blade between end beams and barrel and twisted to break the glue bond of the spigot into the barrel, then I was able to bend the end stantion out enough to release the spigot from the barrel and lift the barrel out.

The end stantions are separate parts with two spigots glued into the buffer beam so that may be an alternative way to do it.

[Pteremy]

On 13/06/2024 at 12:17, markw said:

It looks better on the 18', 10' 6” wb Oxford underframe.

 

You are clearly right, not least because it matches a large filler cap with straight stanchions - but is it that different to the Oxford original? There should only be a mm or so difference in tank diameter?

 

Possibly the most valuable Class B hybrid would be a Bachmann small 1927 filler cap tank on a Dapol underframe?

Edited June 17 by Pteremy
Spelling correction

[markw]

43 minutes ago, Pteremy said:

 

You are clearly right, not least because it matches a large filler cap with straight stantions - but is it that different to the Oxford original? There should only be a mm or so difference in tank diameter?

 

Possibly the most valuable Class B hybrid would be a Bachmann small 1927 filler cap tank on a Dapol underframe?

There is about 3mm difference in diameter which is very noticeable.

[Pteremy]

54 minutes ago, markw said:

There is about 3mm difference in diameter which is very noticeable.

 

Well that is more than I was expecting - but I still think that I would prefer to simply rebrand an Oxford tank for a large filler cap version.

 

On a different topic I wonder if anyone will have a go at doing a Bitumen conversion of the Dapol Model? Not something I need myself, but they are very distinctive. I know it would need other changes, including an anchor mount, but the fact that the Dapol tank ends are separate fittings makes it easier to contemplate.

[Cwmtwrch]

1 hour ago, markw said:

2 hours ago, Pteremy said:

There should only be a mm or so difference in tank diameter?

There is about 3mm difference in diameter which is very noticeable.

Class B tanks were also used for, for example, heavy fuel oil, or some tars, all of which have a flashpoint above the range for class B liquids. There were also tanks for lubricating oils and electrical oils, also with flashpoints higher than class B, but 'cleaner', so that their liveries could sometimes be something other than black. 14T class A tanks could have diameters of 6'3", 6'7¼" or 7'2", and 14T class B tanks 5'10½, 6'3" or 6'7¼", all dependent on what type of load the design was intended for. [Info from Tourret.]

 

49 minutes ago, Pteremy said:

On a different topic I wonder if anyone will have a go at doing a Bitumen conversion of the Dapol Model? Not something I need myself, but they are very distinctive. I know it would need other changes, including an anchor mount

There were saddle mounted lagged and heated tanks as well as anchor mounted ones. However, the loads involved would mostly be dense enough to require a smaller diameter tank to stay within the load limit, whether 14T or 20T. They also commonly had considerably more extensive heating arrangements than the type Dapol have modelled.

 

Edited June 16 by Cwmtwrch
wrong word

[Gilbert]

A DEMU impulse purchase all KD'd up and playing out on Lockdown Fen...the NEM pockets work well with KD 19s...(the KD on the J70 is a little high but works!)

Edited June 16 by Gilbert

[Wickham Green too]

WOT - no barrier wagon !!?! 🙄

[Gilbert]

10 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

WOT - no barrier wagon !!?! 🙄

I'm banned.....

[MarkSG]

5 hours ago, Gilbert said:

A DEMU impulse purchase all KD'd up and playing out on Lockdown Fen...the NEM pockets work well with KD 19s...(the KD on the J70 is a little high but works!)

 

I'll be able to take a very similar picture when my Regent tank arrives!

[Adam]

On 15/06/2024 at 15:24, ullypug said:

Sadly, the tanks are not easily convertible to EM or P4 on first inspection.

The sprung cradle seems to be encased in a housing which clashes with correctly spaced wheel sets making a wheel swap impossible, even with Exactoscale. Axles are 1.5mm parallel end, 23.9 mm long.

I shall see if I can disassemble one of the two I’ve bought and investigate further. Initial thoughts are trying the Dave Bradwell sprung carrier sitting in the existing W iron, one of Rumney Models’ chassis kits or trying to fit individual Bill Bedford units as I have with other open framed wagons.

Interesting. And what with those horrible springs (the cosmetic ones) it looks to be on the cusp of full kit building being a more viable option from a value for money point of view. Obviously, time is a factor too, but how many done you really need? I wonder whether the crude option of removing the springing and rigging plain pinpoints might be easier? Obviously the brakes are also a challenge, but that’s always the case. Rigid wagons apparently do work in P4, since I work in EM it’s not an issue for me.
 

NB: The Rumney chassis is currently £17.50, the Dapol tank on discount is what? £33? You’re already north of the price of the full Rumney kit (£48 - which seems a lot until you open the box and consider the quality of design: yes I am building one, its super, and could be fairly sold for a lot more). Wherls and transfers extra, of course. These are all options, it depends what you want and how you want to do it.

 

Adam

Edited Saturday at 12:34 by Adam

[ullypug]

1 hour ago, Adam said:

Interesting. And what with those horrible springs (the cosmetic ones) it looks to be on the cusp of full kit building being a more viable option from a value for money point of view. Obviously, time is a factor too, but how many done you really need? I wonder whether the crude option of removing the springing and rigging plain pinpoints might be easier? Obviously the brakes are also a challenge, but that’s always the case. Rigid wagons apparently do work in P4, since I work in EM it’s not an issue for me.
 

NB: The Rumney chassis is currently £17.50, the Dapol tank on discount is what? £33? You’re already north of the price of the full Rumney kit (£48 - which seems a lot until you open the box and consider the quality of design: yes I am building one, its super, and could be fairly sold for a lot more). Wherls and transfers extra, of course. These are all options, it depends what you want and how you want to do it.

 

Adam

A straight wheel swap is impossible in P4 and I suspect EM. The cradle housing (as highlighted) supporting the spring clashes and will need to be removed. At that point a number of options will be available.

I bought two tanks hoping they would be an easy conversion. Sadly not.