Much doodling at Earlswood

[ArthurK]

Sorry to add a small (?) criticism but the D20 tender is not the same as that on the C7. The former has 3940 gallon capacity whilst that of the C7 was 4125 gallon. The side sheets of the bigger tender were 6" higher. Cut away coal rails were used on the 1917 builds of Q6s and some of these did in fact pass on to C7s as they were the self trimming variety. The D20 was not self trimming as you photos show.

I might add that the NER tenders are a minefield for the unwary. There were at least three variations of the 4125 gallon tender and that doesn't include variations in the coal rails.

ArthurK

[earlswood nob]

G'day all

The tender used is from the DJH D20, which to my humble eye is the same as the DJH C7. The sidesheets are the same height as the drawings that I have for the C7. However, the tender front is different to the one in the drawing.
I understand that the early C7's had non-self trimming tenders, these were replaced by self trimming tenders from Q6's and two of those later moved to the J39/3's.
The tender from Q6 No.2220 was fitted to C7 No 2166. This was later fitted to J39 No. 1471.
The only pic that I've found of that tender has coal rails cut short.
I believe that the D20 tender was the same as the B13, so I may well pluck the courage to attempt one of your etched brass tenders, when I get around to building it. It will not be a simple build as the DJH D20 smokebox is wrong.

Earlswood nob

[Pebbles]

Please forgive me. I originally only wished to point out potential incompatibility between some DJH tenders and the 52F chassis. As far as I am concern everyone to their own after all this is supposed to be a hobby. As Arthur has pointed out NER tenders are a minefield although, I should add, possibly not as bad as GNR tenders. To the point, whatever tenders used by D20s I can find no photos of a D20 paired with a tender having frames with oval cut outs.

[mick b]

The DJH Tender is abysmal . Much better choice is the Alexander version with the 52F chassis or a etched kit such as Arthurs.

[earlswood nob]

G'day all

No problem, Pebbles, I appreciate people bringing things to my attention. I would much sooner people say what's on their mind. I may find use for their thoughts.

I couldn't agree more, Mick b, I have checked my C7 and B16/1 and they both have the same tender as the D20. However, I don't want to waste the tenders, which possibly subconsciously caused me to look for somewhere to use the tender from the D20 as it's completely wrong.

In some ways railway modelling can be like playing golf on a challenging course, where problems arise because of your position, and you have to think of ways to combat them.

Earlswood nob

[Danby Wiske]

In some ways railway modelling can be like playing golf on a challenging course, where problems arise because of your position, and you have to think of ways to combat them.

In the case of the DJH tender, a 6 iron should do the trick...

[mick b]

Or a Bazooka , I sold mine on fleabay covered at least half the cost of a decent version.

[earlswood nob]

Afternoon all

You must have been lucky, Mick b, finding someone who wanted a DJH tender.

Earlswood nob

[drmditch]

It is possible to re-work a DJH tender, at least to a limited standard. My attempt is ...here...
From what I remember, (its packed away at the moment.) there is an internal frame bent up from brass and drilled for the wheel bearings.

[john coffin]

So Pebbles why do you see GNR tenders as a minefield, just interested to find out what you see the problem is?

[mick b]

Afternoon all

You must have been lucky, Mick b, finding someone who wanted a DJH tender.

Earlswood nob

I agree, there isn't much you cant sell on flea bay !! I got rid of two (D20 and C7) without problem.

[Pebbles]

Well Paul I'm not sure whether you wish to publicise Malcolm's book, but I already have it. As I understand it from Terry's foreword there remain issues to be resolved, and I'm sure we all look forward to any "Photographic Appendix Volume". It is possible that the more that is established inevitably raises more questions.

[john coffin]

NO mate, it was not an attempt at publicising that book, or indeed the possible photographic appendix, rather trying to get
an idea of what else people want to know and in what way we can achieve that.

Since the book was produced, I have been looking carefully at the early stuff and find that there is lots we do not know
nor can we easily find out, but certainly the tenders produced post 1896, that is much clearer, although it is still troubling
that there are so few GA's, not only in the Sturrock and Stirling times, but also in fact with the Ivatt and Gresley tender modifications.

The times between a number of different tender drawings are suggesting that there must have been drawings done in
another office than the main drawing office, ie the Works, and maybe many of those did not and have not survived making it difficult to tell the whole story.

The sad thing is that too many people in the days when this would have been easier, even 50 years ago, ie before the Doncaster Drawing Office shut. thought of tenders as a necessary evil, not a vital part of any train or locomotive, so they did not ask the questions, nor keep the documents.

Rather like the whole furore about tender 1002 and No1. Too many people chattering about things they neither know nor understand. Not least that the old tender is one designed by Stirling, NOT Sturrock, so relevant to any Stirling locomotive, because it pre dates the Single.
paul

[Danby Wiske]

Or a Bazooka

Remind me never to play golf with you, Mick!

[earlswood nob]

Good morning all

Thanks for all the interesting replies.
I looked at DRM's adventure with a DJH Q7, and it made me feel guilty as mine needs same treatment.
If I was offered another DJH tender, I would tend to use a 7-Iron, over a 6-Iron carry. I think a basooka would be too drastic, as my aim isn't too good and if it ended up in the car-park as some of my golf shots did, it might make me unpopular.
This forum has improved my modelling tremendously, but does make a lot of extra work. I now need to "improve" the tenders with my C7,B16, and Q7.

Earlswood nob

PS. I have just looked at my old Wills A4, built over 40 years ago, and the tender is incorrect on that as it has a fire-irons tube on the LHS, and this must be wrong as they were LH drive. A modeller's work is never done.