pull-push trains

[Nearholmer]

Just re-read the relevant sections of the GWR General Appendix to the Rule Book (August 1st 1936) and it has nothing at all to say about whether the smokebox or the bunker should face the "auto-car".

 

My reading is that either is perfectly permissible, as indeed happens when the loco is in a sandwich between cars, so that whatever was most convenient would be done.

 

An important convenience would be the location of water columns in relation to signals, and whether facing a particular way made is easier to water without needing to arrange with the signalman for the train to poke out beyond a starting signal.

 

Kevin

[kevinlms]

Just re-read the relevant sections of the GWR General Appendix to the Rule Book (August 1st 1936) and it has nothing at all to say about whether the smokebox or the bunker should face the "auto-car".

 

My reading is that either is perfectly permissible, as indeed happens when the loco is in a sandwich between cars, so that whatever was most convenient would be done.

 

An important convenience would be the location of water columns in relation to signals, and whether facing a particular way made is easier to water without needing to arrange with the signalman for the train to poke out beyond a starting signal.

 

Kevin

I was under the impression that on lines with a steep incline, it better for boiler management purposes, that the chimney was at the uphill end.

 

Whether that has any significance on a short train, such as a Pull - Push, I'm not sure.

[The Johnster]

So where did the 'turnover' point occur, above which the investment In the additional equipment for p/p operation was not justifiable, the job just as well done by running the loco round the train at journey ends? (Obviously enough if the regular loading was too great for the number of vehicles that the mechanical linkage would reach over, then p/p was a non-starter.)

 

Was p/p mostly short distance, so that a run round each end took up too much time from a briskly operated shuttle schedule? Or was p/p a method for simplification of signals and track, no need for run round loops and the signalling installations?

 

I don't think there was a turnover point as such, and matters on the ground depended quite a bit on local traffic conditions and on daily stock circuits.  Things were not that finely organised and efficient in the days before everything was run by our real Lords and Masters, the computers that we only live to serve...  You could save time at a terminus with an auto by not having to run around, but in fact very few termini used by auto trains were simple in and out dead ends designed for them or railmotors; most had run around facilities used by loco hauled normal stock passenger trains and the daily pickup as well as autos.  Clearly, under the GW system, if you wanted more than 4 coaches on your train you could not use an auto anyway.  

 

Auto work tended to be shorter distance branch, suburban, or main line stoppers, and no auto trailers had toilet compartments, which would (I believe) have restricted them to use on journeys of no more than 2 hours in total, but there's short distance and then there's short distance.  Abercynon Auto diagram JB, for instance, ran light engine to Pontypridd, worked to Cardiff Clarence Road along the Barry Railway main line via Church Village, Creigau, and St Fagan's Junction (the 'St Fagan's Pullman), did 2 return trips from Clarence Road to Penarth, back to Pontypridd via St Fagan's at lunchtime for crew relief, then a repeat of the morning's performance with a fresh crew in the afternoon before the final light engine run to Abercynon and dispose of engine, which must have been with an empty coal bunker on some days, a working day for the loco of over 14 hours and a mileage that would have been creditable on many main line turns, I make it about 150 miles per day including the light engine runs; some suburban auto work was a bit intense!  This was usually a 64xx (photos always show 6438) and two trailers behind the bunker, loco at the Pontypridd end.  A bigger engine with hauled coaches might have been less out of it's comfort zone banging along the SWML flat out trying to keep out of the way, but the time saved in turnarounds at Clarence Road and Penarth in the rush hours, especially at Clarence where there was only one platform, was clearly the paramount consideration here.

[The Johnster]

I was under the impression that on lines with a steep incline, it better for boiler management purposes, that the chimney was at the uphill end.

 

Whether that has any significance on a short train, such as a Pull - Push, I'm not sure.

 

The size of the train is not the determining factor in this respect, it is the level of water in the boiler, which must be kept above the level of the fusible plug at all times that the loco is in steam.  This gives an advantage on a gradient with the smokebox facing uphill, and was the normal method of working in the South Wales Valleys for all trains, autos included.

[asmay2002]

One simple factor in favouring chimney end away from the trailer would be that when the train was being driven from the loco the driver would not have to keep turing round to operate the regulator, reverser and brake.  Other considerations (e.g needing to keep the firebox crown covered on uphill routes) might favour the other configuration but it would be less convenient and comfortable for the driver.

[Nearholmer]

Indeed.

 

I'm slightly surprised to observe that neither the Kemp Town nor Dyke branches out of Brighton seemed to observe this, because both were steep, but there are very well known photos of locos, including on motor trains, working smokebox first downhill. The Brighton was fairly obsessive about locos working smokebox first and this seems to have applied with motor trains, unless sandwiched, too.

[chrisf]

Johnster, I'm so glad you mentioned the legendary JB!  This was a favourite photographic subject of my late friend Alan Jarvis and on 14th June I had the pleasure of viewing a selection of his slides at a show in Radyr.  In addition to the extensive day's work set out above, JB also did a fill-in move from Penarth to Coryton and back mid morning.  This ended in the economy cuts of 30th June 1958, after which JB sat and simmered at Penarth for an hour and a half instead.  One does wonder where the economy was in that.

 

Chris

[The Johnster]

Johnster, I'm so glad you mentioned the legendary JB!  This was a favourite photographic subject of my late friend Alan Jarvis and on 14th June I had the pleasure of viewing a selection of his slides at a show in Radyr.  In addition to the extensive day's work set out above, JB also did a fill-in move from Penarth to Coryton and back mid morning.  This ended in the economy cuts of 30th June 1958, after which JB sat and simmered at Penarth for an hour and a half instead.  One does wonder where the economy was in that.

 

Chris

 

Good grief.  I supposed if they'd shoved a broom up where the sun don't shine (Port Talbot?) the driver could have swept the platforms as well...  My WTT is 1960 and I had no idea of the daily Coryton adventure!

 

The economy may have been in the loco being able to make it back to Abercynon with some coal dust in the bunker; Penarth-Coryton and return puts my guesstimated milage nearer 165/70!  Is this a record for an auto, or a record for a booked pannier tank duty (some of the Newport-Brecon turns must have put some mileage in as well), I wonder?   At least the WCML and ECML distance record breakers used pacifics with big tenders and water scoops...

 

JB was a sort of legend to it's punters, though, and a sad loss when it was dispensed with.  I am delighted that you are as much a fan as I am!

[Poor Old Bruce]

Before 1954 or thereabouts the [G]WR used the expression "auto" in the WTTs.  When the format was changed, and passenger services put into separate books from freight, the expression "rail motor" was revived, despite the last rail motor having run in 1935.  No, I don't know why!

 

Chris

 

The LMS booklet (dated January 1946) I have is entitled "INSTRUCTIONS Respecting the Working of RAIL MOTORS and MOTOR TRAINS".

 

Their definitions are:

 

"A "RAIL MOTOR" means a vehicle witha self-contained non-detachable engine." This included steam (ex LNW and ex L&Y) and the Leyland diesel units 29950-2.

 

and

 

""MOTOR TRAIN" means a train consisting of detachable engine with specially fitted coaches capable of being driven from either end of the train."

 

There is also a listing of "Sections of the line authorised to be worked over by rail motors and motor trains" which, in some cases but by no means all, defines which end of the train the engine should be.

[Joseph_Pestell]

One of the books that I bought on Sunday at Wells was about Plymouth railways.

 

Apart from mentioning the GW Saltash shuttles, there are several pictures of push-pull trains (LSW gate stock) on the Turnchapel service. Loco facing in either direction relative to the train.

[DCB]

I have read that GW 48XX (14XX) had a cord connecting the Auto trailer controls to the Loco whistle chain when attached bunker to trailer, I read it in a fireman's reminiscences about the Faringdon branch where the loco left the trailer to do some shunting and the fireman forgot to disconnect the cord resulting in the whistle going "peep"... I will try to find which book.  Didn't see anything about smokebox end.

[The Johnster]

I think I remember this story in Harold Gasson's book; he was an ex Didcot fireman.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... JB also did a fill-in move from Penarth to Coryton and back mid morning.  This ended in the economy cuts of 30th June 1958, after which JB sat and simmered at Penarth for an hour and a half instead.  One does wonder where the economy was in that.

All the consumables cost money, and on analysis on a direct revenue basis, if there wasn't the income to pay for the incremental consumption of running instead of standing...

[Andy W]

In addition to the extensive day's work set out above, JB also did a fill-in move from Penarth to Coryton and back mid morning.  This ended in the economy cuts of 30th June 1958, after which JB sat and simmered at Penarth for an hour and a half instead.  One does wonder where the economy was in that.

 

Chris

It wasn't unusual in the nationalised railway and bus industries for decrees to come down from high that mileage must be cut by a given percentage in a particular area. Of course what the people issuing the directives meant was to cut costs. Given the primitive systems available for allocating costs and revenue, mileage was perhaps the only thing that could be measured accurately. Local management would respond by cutting timings that did the least damage to the fewest people, since they at least had access to passenger counts. This gave the Board and the civil servants applying pressure to them what they had asked for, but not what they really wanted.

If economy cuts were needed (and by 1958 they probably were) then removing a complete day's work for loco, stock and associated crews, reducing signalbox opening times, destaffing stations were all effective methods, but most local (Divisional level) managers did this routinely, having survived the 1930s when this was standard practice. Of course while on-train ticket issuing was nothing new to the (G)WR, as soon as two autocoaches were coupled together it became impossible since there were no corridor connections. And they still hadn't learnt this lesson in 1958 - non-corridor DMUs! Mind you, South Wales today sees lots of paired Pacers...

[Oldddudders]

The industry was also rather good at giving the Civil Servants what they wanted but limiting the damage. So when Marsham St decided to target Southern empty stock mileage, the Region obediently reduced it. By turning former ECS moves into passenger trains. So you might find an 08.34 Charing Cross to New Beckenham, probably fast from London Bridge to Ladywell (i.e down the fast lines) which after terminating at New Beckenham simply ran round the corner to berth at Beckenham Junction, as it always had......

[The Johnster]

It wasn't unusual in the nationalised railway and bus industries for decrees to come down from high that mileage must be cut by a given percentage in a particular area. Of course what the people issuing the directives meant was to cut costs. Given the primitive systems available for allocating costs and revenue, mileage was perhaps the only thing that could be measured accurately. Local management would respond by cutting timings that did the least damage to the fewest people, since they at least had access to passenger counts. This gave the Board and the civil servants applying pressure to them what they had asked for, but not what they really wanted.

If economy cuts were needed (and by 1958 they probably were) then removing a complete day's work for loco, stock and associated crews, reducing signalbox opening times, destaffing stations were all effective methods, but most local (Divisional level) managers did this routinely, having survived the 1930s when this was standard practice. Of course while on-train ticket issuing was nothing new to the (G)WR, as soon as two autocoaches were coupled together it became impossible since there were no corridor connections. And they still hadn't learnt this lesson in 1958 - non-corridor DMUs! Mind you, South Wales today sees lots of paired Pacers...

 

2 auto trailers coupled together between Clarence Road and Penarth, all stations staffed, would not have been an issue and compartment stock was often used.  Where stations were unstaffed, stops were frequent enough for the guard to hop between vehicles and sell tickets in open saloon auto trailers, or even sell the ticket out on the platform before the passenger boarded the train if there was time.

 

Many of the Cardiff Valleys stations were unstaffed as an economy measure in 1964, at which time the class 116 dmus had corridor connections fitted and doorways cut in the saloon dividers.  Nowadays most of the Valleys stations are staffed at least part time and/or have ticket machines, and again the guard can hop between sets at one of the stops.  And staff are available to buy tickets from at the 2 major destinations, Cardiff Central and Queen Street, at the barriers if he's missed you out

Edited August 18, 2017 by The Johnster

[chrisf]

It was later than 1964 - more like 1968.  I only looked this up the other week and I've forgotten already!  I do recall that the introduction of conductor-guard working was delayed until sufficient gangwayed dmus were available.

 

What I was going to say was that the timing of the economy cuts was a bit odd.  The 1958 ones came three weeks into the summer timetable and in a very thick supplement.  Those in summer 1962 coincided with the start of the summer timetable but were not shown in it, so another supplement had to be printed. I wonder how much of the supposed economy was dissipated in staff time for rediagramming?

 

Oh dear, we have strayed quite a way from pull-push trains ...

 

Chris

Edited August 18, 2017 by chrisf

[br2975]

  And staff are available to buy tickets from at the 2 major destinations, Cardiff Central and Queen Street, at the barriers if he's missed you out

 

More likely to serve you with a 'fixer' (penalty notice) than sell you a ticket.

.

But then, your train needs to turn up first, and you need to be able to get into it, and hope it's not caped part way ( e,g, Ninian Park ) before you face the staff at the Central / Q.S. barriers

[Happy Hippo]

More likely to serve you with a 'fixer' (penalty notice) than sell you a ticket.

.

But then, your train needs to turn up first, and you need to be able to get into it, and hope it's not caped part way ( e,g, Ninian Park ) before you face the staff at the Central / Q.S. barriers

Brian, you old cynic. (True though it may be!)

 

Not push me pull you trains, but I recall buying a single from Cardiff General to Grangetown and using it repeatedly for a few weeks.

 

When it was finally removed from me by the ticket collector at Grangetown (I was 12 at the time) I protested, because the ticket clearly stated valid for three months, and in my innocence I thought I'd been issued a season ticket.

 

I don't think that argument would work these days