Dia 176 Brake Vans

[Quicksilver95]

With the recent re-release of the former Chivers Dia 120 Pigeon Van under the Five79 brand, I was thinking of acquiring a couple. However, it seems none of the Dia 120s were built for the GN section, at least none are shown having a GN section number according to Tatlow's Historic Carriage Drawings Volume Three.

However, Tatlow does list 5 vans built to Dia 176 at Darlington in 1933, numbered 4140-4. He notes tht they are 3/8" Shorter as they were built on former Howlden underframes, but what isn't clear is whether there were any noticeable differences (for the modeller) between the Diagrams. At 4mm scale the length difference would be unnoticeable, but did the underframes differ significantly?

Failing that, if the Dia 176 is not easily modelled using th Dia 120 kit, how frequently would these vehicles travel between sections - would a Dia 120 likely be seen in the West Riding in the late 1930s?

Thanks in advance,

Joshua

[jwealleans]

I suspect the answer to your second question is 'not regularly'. For the first, the axleguard/spring arrangement is different, I believe roof vents were different, but you may struggle to find underframe details.

Mike Morant shared a picture of what may have been a D 176 recently but it may have been via RMWeb, I can't find it now.

Edit - found it on Facebook here. The closeup in the comments confirms that it's not a D120 but one of the other 3 diagrams - D176, 177 or whatever the other one was.
The body doesn't look significantly different but from that angle it's not easy to see.

[Quicksilver95]

Thanks Jonathan, great photo that certainly clears up a few imediate differences. Looking at that, I wonder if I may be able to get a second set of appropriate springs and fit them outside the w irons on the Chivers kit to give a reasonable representation of the 176. In lieu of any additional photo evidence re the underframe I could go with the dia 120 arrangement, I suppose if the photos don't exist then is anyone going to challenge me?

That just leaves the roof vents, does anyone have any thoughts where I might get hold of some more details on that?

Thanks,

Joshua

[john coffin]

Interesting to note that the first GNR dia 176 was in fact a Gresley design from 1906,being 58ft 6 body, whilst 59ft 11 over vestibules.

About 12 were produced, and most scrapped around 1933, so maybe the LNER re-used the diagram number.
Where in the Vintage Carriage Vol 3 do you find the reference to the dia 176, or 120?

Paul

[Quicksilver95]

Hi Paul,

This is found on page 22 of Historic Carriage Drawings Volume 3. Other than carriage numbers, lengths and the fact that the carriages were built on the ex Howlden stock, very little extra is given. The information is corroborated but not expanded on by Harris in Gresley's Coaches and LNER Carriages. Further sources welcomed!

Thanks

Joshua

[jwealleans]

The other diagram was D170.

There are pictures of a D170 and D177 in David Larkin's BR Parcels and Passenger-Rated Stock Volume 1. Both are fairly low down so they'll help you with undergubbins but not roof vents.

[john coffin]

Checking some files that I had archived and not checked for some time, I have actually found that I have a copy
of LNER diagram 176. Not a drawing, only a diagram, but interesting none the less. I also have both 170, and 120 in
the diagrams.

Not sure if this would help someone wanting to make a 176 from the 120 model without a lot of work.

Paul

[45609]

This is interesting discussion as I have recently re-invigorated my interest in LNER NPCS. I have a couple of bogie vans on the WB but that is another story. I've just ordered myself a copy of the Larkin book as I'm interested to see the visual differences on the D170 and D177. The Mike Morant photo certainly shows that van has springs in front of the axle guards. D.120 springs were behind the axleguard. I've got diagrams for all these 4w vans and have summarised the key dimensions below.

A couple of observations for the modeller would the D170/176/177 vans have a longer wheelbase (It would be 2mm+ in 4mm scale) and very dependant on your sensitivity to such things. My sensitivity on this subject is well known. I make no apology

Other dimensional differences. All D170/176/177 are a little shorter. Probably can overlook that. Similarly the D170 & 176 length is very close to the D120. However, the D177 is quite a bit shorter by more than a foot (12 inches). I couldn't overlook that.

Other things I have picked up from a few minutes online research. Steve Banks points out here that the D120 had opening toplights outboard of the luggage doors. None of the current model offerings (Chivers, Comet, D&S) capture this. So what I hear you say? Well a look at these 2 pictures should highlight the difference between the central (non opening) and outer (opening) toplights. The outer toplights have slightly thicker frames and an individual rainstrip above each window

Preserved example at NNR


Image from Steve Banks page


So, it might not be as easy as you think to produce a truly accurate 4w PLV. I might have a go though...

Cheers...Morgan

[Atlantic 3279]

I sense a round of ultra-detailing coming on.

Aw, go on, go on, go on, you know you want to.......

[manna]

G'Day Gents



manna

[45609]

I sense a round of ultra-detailing coming on.

Aw, go on, go on, go on, you know you want to.......

Ha! Certainly possible. Another little discovery this morning is the GNRS produce a few publications on Howlden coaching stock.

https://www.gnrsociety.com/home-page/sh ... ing-stock/

I'm not a member but I do wonder if it might be possible to determine what GNR vehicle diagrams were used as donor underframes for the LNER D170, 176 and 177 vehicles? Anybody have that information?

Also, thumbing through a few books last night I came across a picture of another MS&L 4-4-0. D7 "5684" at Cleethorpes with probably the same vehicle in the train as the Mike Morant photo. It's a Lens of Sutton photo and available to buy as a digital image. It shows the external springs more clearly.



https://thetransportlibrary.co.uk/index ... =64&page=2

Cheers...Morgan

[Atlantic 3279]

Given enough time I might even be able to supply the engine to match that picture, but probably not in ultra-detailed form.....

[jwealleans]

Given the GNR's fairly fast and loose attitude to diagram numbers (any 6 wheel 5 compartment 3rd is a D245, irrespective of length or other details), that information may have been hard to obtain even at the time. Were I a betting man, my money would be on 6 wheel underframes with the centre set removed.

That's the vague plan I have for my incomplete D120 kit , to be finished with Mike Trice's GNR 6 wheel underframe bits (from Shapeways) and whatever else I can cobble together to make a D17x.

Morgan's photo above also backs up my first impression from the Mike Morant picture, that these vans did not have the opening toplights.

[john coffin]

Sorry, Jonathan,
I am sure you are wrong, the wheel base overall is much nearer to them having been from 4 wheelers, and knowing the parsimonious
nature of both GNR and LNER, I would doubt that they would go to the expense of removing a central wheel set, and then moving
the outer axles.

I also doubt whether or not the frames would have been from ex GNR 4 wheel NP stock,
I am trying to check the numbers in Tatlow against some GNR info I have and will see if we can find more definitive data.

Paul

[john coffin]

More checking, pretty sure that the relevant diagrams are GNR 411, and 441 3rd or 2nd suburbans which have exactly that
wheelbase, and carriage length.
However, tracing those specific carriages which were scrapped is more difficult, since I have not ever found details of the
solebars ever having a related number.

Certainly these were renewals in book-keeping terms for the LNER, but one does wonder why such a number of underframes
would have been lying around at Darlington. Not heard of them scrapping ex GNR carriages,but maybe someone has better data.

As for the diagrams that you have Jonathan, I think that you forget, as many do, that the books that are still around were long-lived
and used in LNER times, hence the red lines and lack of consistent numbering. If you remember in regards to Locos, the classes
of those integrated into the LNER held many sub classes, because of the time constraints, for instance as I know to my costs,
ex GNR saddle tanks. I am pretty sure that the same happened with carriages, it certainly seemed to with wagons.

I believe that the LNER, to speed things up just put for instance, all 6 wheeled 3rd into only a couple of classes, hence dia 245.
I do not believe that this is something that happened during GNR times, since it was not necessary.

Paul