Guards vans on inter-regional freight trains (British Railways days)

[phil gollin]

.

 

I know that inter-regional passenger trains kept their coaches throughout their journey, whilst changing the guard at a convenient location, but what about goods trains ?

 

I am thinking, in particular, of "block"-type trains trains coming onto the Southern Region, e.g. coal trains, which would continue without shunting (unlike the cross-London inter-regional freights which would go from yard to yard).  Would the guards van be changed at the same time that the loco was, or would the guards van be kept with the train whilst just the guard changed ?

 

Thanks.

 

.

[Fat Controller]

.

 

I know that inter-regional passenger trains kept their coaches throughout their journey, whilst changing the guard at a convenient location, but what about goods trains ?

 

I am thinking, in particular, of "block"-type trains trains coming onto the Southern Region, e.g. coal trains, which would continue without shunting (unlike the cross-London inter-regional freights which would go from yard to yard).  Would the guards van be changed at the same time that the loco was, or would the guards van be kept with the train whilst just the guard changed ?

 

Thanks.

 

.

Can't think I've heard of vans being exchanged at inter-regional change-overs; they'd normally just be put on the return working. There would be exceptions; the Southern were loath to part with their 'Queen Marys', for example, and no-one wanted ex-GWR 'Toads' (at least not on revenue-earning jobs.). The ex-LMS and ex-LNER long-wheelbase vans, along with BR 20-tonners, were common-user, except for those branded for particular traffic, or modified for a specific branch.

[TheSignalEngineer]

There are plenty of pictures of SR Pillboxes in the West Midlands, and even a Dance Hall in the yard at Water Orton.

[jim.snowdon]

Can't think I've heard of vans being exchanged at inter-regional change-overs; they'd normally just be put on the return working. There would be exceptions; the Southern were loath to part with their 'Queen Marys', for example, and no-one wanted ex-GWR 'Toads' (at least not on revenue-earning jobs.). The ex-LMS and ex-LNER long-wheelbase vans, along with BR 20-tonners, were common-user, except for those branded for particular traffic, or modified for a specific branch.

This may be true for the BR era, when everything was owned by the same company, but would the same have been the case for the pre-Nationalisation era? My presumption would have been, since brake vans were not Common User stock, that the brake van would have been changed at the same time as the locomotive, which would normally have been at the next major yard at which the train called.

 

Jim

[The Johnster]

Post Nationalisation, freight brake vans were in principle common user pool wagons which stayed on the train from departure yard to destination yard, but in practice there were exceptions.  As has been stated, GW toads were not liked on other railways and tended to be sent back to the WR with the loco's return working if possible; in any case the WR branded a much higher proportion than the others of it's vans for Restricted Use working.  OTOH, the Southern chased any Queen Marys that escaped it's clutches with enthusiasm, and they rarely strayed off region.  They were keen to dispose of their SECR pillboxes, though, dreadful things which were sent back south asap wherever they turned up!

 

Smaller vans, 16tonners and the like, with shorter 10' wheelbases, were less likely to be used on faster interregional freight anyway, and tended to stay in their localities.  The LNER and LMS 20 tonners which lasted until the end of brake van use were very much 'pool', go anywhere, vans though, capable of 60mph running although to be honest some were frightening at much lower speeds than that!

 

The GW toads were removed from normal service in 1963 because they only had one balcony and the brake was outside the cabin, but also because they did not have lookout duckets, and I believe this to have been the reason for the withdrawal of the Southern 20ton vans as well.   Guards, of course, were relieved en route by other guards at the same time and place as their loco crews by and large, for reasons to do with route knowledge and/or working hours.  You had to be back at your home depot to sign off at least 12 hours before your next turn of duty, as the Board of Trade demanded that you had a minimum of 12 hours rest between duties; this applied to locomen and signalmen as well, and meant off duty; travelling home on the cushions didn't count as rest!

[AberdeenBill]

Some of the earlier BR-built vans were branded with regional allocations (London Midland, Eastern Group, Western, Southern), although photos seem sparse (there is a fine view in one of the Cheona volumes of a brand new 'Western' branded van at Kirkby Stephen East, perhaps en route to its new home from Darlington Works).   Was there any effort made to return them to their home region if they wandered?  

 

Thanks,

Bill

Edited September 23, 2017 by AberdeenBill

[The Stationmaster]

Post Nationalisation, freight brake vans were in principle common user pool wagons which stayed on the train from departure yard to destination yard, but in practice there were exceptions.  As has been stated, GW toads were not liked on other railways and tended to be sent back to the WR with the loco's return working if possible; in any case the WR branded a much higher proportion than the others of it's vans for Restricted Use working.  OTOH, the Southern chased any Queen Marys that escaped it's clutches with enthusiasm, and they rarely strayed off region.  They were keen to dispose of their SECR pillboxes, though, dreadful things which were sent back south asap wherever they turned up!

 

Smaller vans, 16tonners and the like, with shorter 10' wheelbases, were less likely to be used on faster interregional freight anyway, and tended to stay in their localities.  The LNER and LMS 20 tonners which lasted until the end of brake van use were very much 'pool', go anywhere, vans though, capable of 60mph running although to be honest some were frightening at much lower speeds than that!

 

The GW toads were removed from normal service in 1963 because they only had one balcony and the brake was outside the cabin, but also because they did not have lookout duckets, and I believe this to have been the reason for the withdrawal of the Southern 20ton vans as well.   Guards, of course, were relieved en route by other guards at the same time and place as their loco crews by and large, for reasons to do with route knowledge and/or working hours.  You had to be back at your home depot to sign off at least 12 hours before your next turn of duty, as the Board of Trade demanded that you had a minimum of 12 hours rest between duties; this applied to locomen and signalmen as well, and meant off duty; travelling home on the cushions didn't count as rest!

 

1965, not 1963.

 

GWR pattern brakevans were branded 'Not In Common use' in BR days which meant they were outwith the brakevan group for rolling stock balances and therefore should not have been counted in inter-Regional brakevan balancing  (because they shouldn't stray off WR workings.  Some other vans elsewhere were also similarly branded and the same applied to them.  The GWR vans were withdrawn from traffic use on safety grounds because they did not have a means of escape (or rather quick and easy escape) at one end and the ban seems to have followed some sort of incident - probably a collision - but I have never been able to trace any details of it.

 

Incidentally what we knew as 'synchronisation' of Guards and Enginemen's turns was a relatively late process only really getting underway on the Western in the very late 1960s and not universally applied until the early 1970s  the reason for this happening so late was due to considerable differences in Conditions of service plus the fact that Enginemen's turns had effectively been tied to engine working in the steam age plus they still had far longer preparation times than Guards in the diesel age together with often working out of a  different location.  Whereas Guard's working wasn't so closely linked to anything associated with the train and in most cases on passenger work they booked on at the place where the train started so thus had more time available for train working than did Enginemen.  Thus for example on the northern mainline Old Oak Common enginemen didn't go north of Wolverhampton (although they might have worked a bit further in earlier years?) whereas Paddington top link Guards knew the road to Birkenhead - and had worked through to there in Pre-War days and worked through to Shrewsbury on some turns right up to the 1960s.  The same applied with Goods Guards of course because in most instances they booked on duty at the yard where their train started while the Enginemen first had to get there from even a nearby loco depot.

 

Brakevans in common use were all counted in the same group on the Rolling stock return and were balanced as necessary between yards and the Regions as necessary on a daily basis in exactly the same way as any other common user vehicle 

[The Johnster]

I had not heard of this sort of early BR branding.  But I doubt they were returned to their regions unless they carried 'return to' brandings, except of course for Queen Marys.

 

The ride quality of 4 wheeled vans was extremely poor except where it was diabolical, and Queen Marys, which were rated for 75mph and rode like Pullmans, were understandably much sought after.  IMHO BR's decision to adopt the LNER 20ton design as their standard was a bad one, and a new standard should have been designed, with bogies (I'd have liked to see the small commonwealths used on bogie bolsters used) with a plated body to keep out the draughts.  Not only were wooden bodied vans draughty (the very solidly built GW toads were fine in this respect) but the cabins 'worked' looser and draughtier as the van rocked in motion.  Add to that the encouragement of rocking by having the ballast weights mounted outboard of the axles as in the LNER design, and you begin to see why it was a poor choice.

 

Bad riding vans were not just uncomfortable and draughty for those working with them, but dangerous if the rocking got so bad as to shake the lamps out, which it did on some vans.

[br2975]

.......and Queen Marys, which were rated for 75mph and rode like Pullmans, were understandably much sought after.

It may say "Not in common use" on the side of this QM, but behind a Hymek in the depths of Barry Docks can hardly be 'common use'.

.

Note,as with all things GWR a Toad looks on, from on high !

.

( Photographer unknown, usual caveats apply )

[The Johnster]

I only ever rode in one once. summer 1970 , road learning through the Severn Tunnel on a Severn Tunnel Jc-Stoke Gifford transfer freight hauled by a class 22, another only time and two in a day ain't bad.  The 22 died on us at Stoke Gifford and we came back hauled by Warship, in an ordinary BR standard van; this expired in the down reception sidings at the Tunnel and my opinion of North British diesel hydraulics has been coloured by that day's event's ever since!

 

I was very impressed with the Queen Mary, though, comfortable, draught free, and a powerful brake.  The writing was on the wall for brake van operations by then, of course, and it was obvious we'd have just have to put up with the deficiencies of the LNER and slightly better but still very draughty LMS vans until the end of part fitted freight work.

 

There were some BR standard vans fitted with air brakes that had coil spring suspension, and these were a rare treat being RU, but were a very much better ride than the standard leaf spring versions; this may of course be because they were better looked after rather than any inherent superiority in the coil springs.

Edited September 24, 2017 by The Johnster

[br2975]

I only ever rode in one once. summer 1970 ,

 

Me too, but a lot later using the one that had by then gravitated to East Usk and acquired EWS livery........, a 'jolly boys outing' on the Machen Quarry branch, behind the quarry's hired in 'Noddy' D2199 - which, the following week "spilled its guts" in the four foot and promptly disappeared back to Sheffield on a low-loader.

Edited September 25, 2017 by br2975

[asmay2002]

  IMHO BR's decision to adopt the LNER 20ton design as their standard was a bad one, and a new standard should have been designed,

The BR design was in fact based on an RCH standard design.  In 1943 a batch of 4 of these RCH type vans vans were built at Wolverton to LMS diagram 2096 which became LMS 731742, LNER 760948 GWR 35927 & SR 56060.  The BR design followed on from these vans.

[jim.snowdon]

The BR design was in fact based on an RCH standard design.  In 1943 a batch of 4 of these RCH type vans vans were built at Wolverton to LMS diagram 2096 which became LMS 731742, LNER 760948 GWR 35927 & SR 56060.  The BR design followed on from these vans.

Except that the BR design was a direct crib from the LNER one with no significant changes. The RCH design, which was an amalgam of the LMS underframe allied to a shorter body, after the style of the LNER & SR vans, was an evolutionary dead end, possibly hastened by a general lack of interest and impending Nationalisation.

 

Jim

[The Johnster]

Whatever it's origins, it was a p*** poor van; it rocked and was draughty.  One had to prepare for a journey by making sure one had yesterday's newspaper with one, and then, as you got under way and the draughts revealed themselves, you tore off bits to plug them up.  Some places were unfixable, like the window frames.  This would take you most of the way to Gloucester or Hereford (other relief points were available) where you were relieved and somebody else benefitted from your labours...

 

The LMS vans were a little better, but no paragons.  On these, the ballast was mounted centrally between the axles, which made for a better ride (though some were pretty bad) but the cabin door opened inwards, which made the door frame draughty as you rode into a headwind at 40 odd mph.  The bigger cabin took longer to warm up and was harder to keep warm as well.  On both vans draughts would come up through the floorboards and the brake standard, an indication of poor build quality.  Those few actual LNER 20 tonners I came across, which had a different and larger pattern of stove with a removable top, were better built and easier to keep warm.  It was common practice to build the fire as hot as you could in the stove, so that it glowed and many had a little spare tyre around the middle where they'd part melted and settled; this would make the heat in the cabin unbearable when you were stood or moving slowly, but gave you a chance of retaining some small fraction of residual warmth once your were properly under way!

 

You could get some indication of how bad a ride you were going to have by checking the lamp irons when you first got on board.  If they moved, the van was a rocker and you were in for a bad trip, and sometimes things were so bad that you'd be out on the balcony most of the journey constantly relighting lamps that had shaken out.  Another aspect of this was that a rocker's lamps were prone to 'working' and having the lamp blown out by draughts as well, especially the exposed side lamps.  O, what fun we had!

 

But the worst, by a factor of quantum, were the ex SECR pillboxes.  I rode in one of these to Hereford one night and was so alarmed that I noted it's number and reported it, fully intending to 'accidentally' burn the b*****d if I ever came across it again in the overall interests of health and safety.  I advised my relief at Hereford, an old hand Salop man, to fail it if he had any sense, but the response was the stock 'Canton back cab jockeys demanding to be treated like film stars, dunno they're born, shoulda seen what we had to put up with in the old days', and he sailed off happily into the night.  He apologised when I ran into him again a few weeks later, having been, like me, scared out of his wits by the little bu**er.

 

This van still exists I believe on the Mid Hants, proof that I never encountered it again, at least not with a box of matches in my pocket...

 

GW toads had been out of service for over 5 years by my time on the railway, condemned by having one balcony, the brake outside, and no lookout duckets.  According to the old timers, they were the best vans ever in the entire history of the space/time continuum and should never have been scrapped, but then the old timers said a lot of things that didn't bear particularly close examination.  I only worked with one once, on a ballast job, and found it solidly built, gloomy, and a depressing place to work.  They couldn't have been much fun with the balcony leading on a dusty coal train at 45mph, but I liked the well placed and thought out sanding gear.  I suspect their real popularity had to do with the long side benches which were handy for 'resting your eyes' if you were in some loop somewhere for a couple of hours in the dead of night!  They went out of service at around the same time that freight guards were re-assigned to traincrew depots, and vans in general became common user pool vehicles.

 

This inevitably led to an immediate and drastic drop in the standards of cleanliness and general order, as all of a sudden it wan't anyone's job to keep them tidy (or not one that anyone admitted to anyway), which the old timers cited as proof of the decline in standards for which I, as part of a new intake, was to blame, but they were of course the very people trashing the vans they complained about in the first place!  Yards differed drastically in their approach to the van part of train preparation, and we had very few jobs where we were allowed time to prepare, as opposed to examine, the train ourselves, leaving us at their mercy somewhat.  Stationmaster Mike's boys at Radyr were very good; you coupled on and could guarantee that the train was in order and you only had to put a match to the stove to get the fire going in a fully equipped van that had been swept out and the windows cleaned, but at the other end of the scale was Margam, where you were left to fend for yourself and would find your equipment, sometimes the whole van, stolen and making it's way out on to the Down Main heading for Darkest Dyfed if you turned your back for a second!

Edited September 26, 2017 by The Johnster

[The Johnster]

But on the odd occasion that you had a good van, it was a shame to take the money (not that I ever refused).  I went up to Radyr on a winter's afternoon once with a class 47 to take a train Hereford, and the yard foreman apologised for only being able to provide me with an LMS van.  The train, and the van, were immaculately prepped as always, and the lamp irons were rock solid, suggesting the van was a good 'un.  As we got underway, and darkness fell, it began to snow heavily, and the snow piled up on the front of the van sealing all the draughts for me.  Stove burning away merrily, I was out on the rear balcony most of the way enjoying it, the train running in that near-silence that only snow provides.  I rather enjoyed that one, especially after Llanvihangel when the moon came out and illuminated the scene, with snow dust kicked up be the train settling in our wake.  Lovely!

[PenrithBeacon]

A most interesting thread. I've never read anything before about the qualities of brake vans.

Regards

[The Stationmaster]

A most interesting thread. I've never read anything before about the qualities of brake vans.

Regards

 

Just don't get any of us going about the tuppeny ha'penny BR standard monstrosities about which 'The Johnster' has been commendably polite.   The only good thing about the draughts was that they might help the stove to draw instead of putting it out but a well-informed Goods Guard never went anywhere near one without a copious supply of newspapers - they weren't for lighting the stove but for plugging up all the draughty cracks in the things.  Mind you when the stove was working properly it was a  good un - I climbed into a 'van at reading west Jcn one night because I didn't believe what the Head Shunter was saying but I saw for my own eyes the fact that the stove was literally red hot.

 

A dangerous feature was the continuous footsteps and handrails alongside the concreted area as they could be a nasty temptation for Guards to edge out along the steps and try to uncouple (using a shunting pole) from there rather than getting down on the ground - one of my Guards at Radyr nearly got himself injured trying that trick but fortunately I was out in the yard and shouted at him to stop before he really got himself clouted by his own shunting pole.  Old hand Guards never tried that one, they'd probably learnt the hard way.

 

One reason the 'vans were well looked after at Radyr was probably down to the Guards' rep who was very good at making complaints (I mean that in the nicest way - he wouldn't stand for any nonsense) plus we had a full complement of Brakevan Preparers during my time there.  However he always had one big moan we couldn't do anything about - he wanted GW 'vans back; he was another who couldn't stand the Standard 'van and after a journey with him on the night Rhymney trip to go over the working at Pontloyttyn one frosty night I was probably pretty close to agreeing with him.

[The Johnster]

I am probably being 'commendably polite' because I knew no better, though I knew well enough that better was not only possible but very easily achievable!

 

As stated, your boys at Radyr were well on top of preparation, and I'd extend the comment to Llantrisant as well.  At Long Dyke or Tidal/Marshalling things were a sort of normal that you'd find at most yards; you'd turn up on your loco, get down, go into the cabin and the foreman would hand you the load slip and preparation certificate signed by a competent person, your legal authority to take the train, and you'd trot off towards the van to do your examination; 20 minutes was allowed for this, about the right amount of time if there were no problems.  You took with you a bass broom and a bucket containing a milk bottle of lamp paraffin, and swept the van out yourself while checking it's equipment.  They you'd take the bucket on a coal foraging expedition, and about 2 full loads were enough.  You'd fill and trim the lamps, set them on the brackets, and walk back up the other side of the train to the loco, which you would board and hand the driver your slip, signed by yourself, giving him the load, brake force, and maximum speed of the slowest rated vehicle, or 25mph in the case of class 9.  He'd blow the horn for the road, the yard would ring the box for it and call him forward, and you'd make your way back to the van as the train slowly pulled out, giving him the 'right away' tip once you were safely aboard which the driver either acknowledged with his lamp, or the back horn, or didn't bother.

 

You'd chuck the bucket and broom overboard as you passed the shunter's cabin on the way out.  As you got under way, you lit the stove and allowed the train's increasing momentum to draw it; you should have established a decent fire in about 5 minutes after which it was just a matter of topping it up with coal.

 

Margam, well, the less said the better.  Awful sh*thole, larceny in their souls, best closure ever.

 

Under way now, your job is to note the passing times at the prescribed points, and note any delay, usually signals with the number.  It was also your job to keep the couplings tight as the unfitted 'loose coupled' portion of the train descended inclines, not so much to assist the driver to control them as to prevent or at least minimise the 'snatch' when the slack was taken by applying power going up the other side in order to prevent damage to the stock or loads!  This is where your route knowledge came into play, and knowing where you were even out in the sticks on the darkest and foggiest night was essential!  I considered myself rather good at this...  

 

If you went into a loop anywhere to let faster traffic past, you would, if it was a semaphore area, signal the signalman by handlamp that you were in clear so as not to delay the faster traffic, and remove the red shade at night from the side lamp nearest to the running line so that the driver of the overtaking fast traffic knew you were in the loop and not in his way; this also applied to relief or goods line parallel to faster lines.  These side lamps could also be reversed to show a red light forward if you were in trouble and wanted the driver to stop; either he'd look back and see it or a signalman would, or another railwayman who would report it to the signalman.

 

You mostly sat in the ducket seat protected by the shoulder pads from anything sudden if you had any sense, but of course had to get out of it sometimes to attend to lamps.  Hanging on to something in case was always advisable, as things could get a bit rough even with a good driver, and they weren't all as good as they thought they were...

Edited September 26, 2017 by The Johnster

[pete_mcfarlane]

...with a plated body to keep out the draughts.  

 

Is this why some vans (examples I can think of include SR Queen Marys and LBSC 4 wheelers) ended up with steel plating over the wooden sides?

[The Johnster]

Probably not, the plating was simply there to strengthen the van.  The idea that anyone ever considered the guard's comfort would be clearly and obviously ludicrous to anyone who ever worked in a brake van.

[Poor Old Bruce]

I have a 1967 Eastern Region, Great Northern, Freight Train Loads Book with the following reference under "Special Marshalling and Other General Instructions":

 

"Freight Train Brake Vans.

 

The following types of brake vans are stencilled "Not in Common Use" :-

 

(1)  Brakes with a tare weight of less thatn 20 tons.

 

(2)  Brakes not fitted with side lookouts.

 

These brakes should be confined to the Eastern Region. If foreign non-common-user brakes are received they should be worked home as quickly as possible; if this cannot be done, control must be asked for instructions.

 

All other brakes, except those stencilled for certail workings, are in common use."

[The Stationmaster]

Is this why some vans (examples I can think of include SR Queen Marys and LBSC 4 wheelers) ended up with steel plating over the wooden sides?

 

Most likely to deal with worn and rotting timber - the ends of the vertical planking were just the right place to take a beating.  And sheet metal was cheaper to install and repair than the planking.

 

I don't think anyone with the necessary financial clout ever gave a toss about the draughts apart from the poor souls who had to endure them.  We had somespecially modified 'vans at Radyr  (basically 'armour' protection for the lookout duckets to minimise the results of stone throwing up in the'Indian territory'  of certain Valley branches) and although we were on excellent terms with the management and staff at Cathays getting anything more out of them was simply not on - I couldn't even get the 'vans branded 'Radyr RU'.

 

And don't forget we're talking about an era when all wagons repairs were subject to stringent financial limits - in 1973 the limit for a Vanfit was 50p.

Edited September 27, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[roythebus]

We had a guard at Rugby in 1974 who was a bit of a model railway enthusiast, I won't name him..he was a Brummie and a bit on the slow side. 

 

I was working with a drive known as Budgie, another Brummie. We backed a fright train into the down sidings north of Rugby and this guard asked how he could put the fire out in the brake van stove. Budgie says "oh, use the water from the tail lamp". the guard did, and burnt the brake van down to the chassis!

 

Most brake vans had the stove pipes modified in the 1960s; it was possible to raise the stove pipe to shake the soot out of it. This proved to be a bit of a problem under the OHLE, so brackets were fitted to prevent injury or worse.

 

Same guard, early in his career, got told by another driver he could only find white paraffin for the lamps and he'd have to go round the shops for some red paraffin for the tail lamp...

 

This chap was quite keen, and one evening we were waiting at Stonebridge Park to work an part-fitted train north. Our guard went round the train early so we could get away on time, gave the driver the load ticket. then the shunter came in and told us he'd added few more wagons. Guard preps the train again, shunter comes back in and told us there were a few more to put on. Moral of the story was don't prep the train until you're sure it's ready to go!

Edited September 29, 2017 by roythebus

[The Johnster]

We had a guard at Rugby in 1974 who was a bit of a model railway enthusiast, I won't name him..he was a Brummie and a bit on the slow side. 

 

I was working with a drive known as Budgie, another Brummie. We backed a fright train into the down sidings north of Rugby and this guard asked how he could put the fire out in the brake van stove. Budgie says "oh, use the water from the tail lamp". the guard did, and burnt the brake van down to the chassis!

 

Most brake vans had the stove pipes modified in the 1960s; it was possible to raise the stove pipe to shake the soot out of it. This proved to be a bit of a problem under the OHLE, so brackets were fitted to prevent injury or worse.

 

Same guard, early in his career, got told by another driver he could only find white paraffin for the lamps and he'd have to go round the shops for some red paraffin for the tail lamp...

 

This chap was quite keen, and one evening we were waiting at Stonebridge Park to work an part-fitted train north. Our guard went round the train early so we could get away on time, gave the driver the load ticket. then the shunter came in and told us he'd added few more wagons. Guard preps the train again, shunter comes back in and told us there were a few more to put on. Moral of the story was don't prep the train until you're sure it's ready to go!

 

 

A large enamel warning notice telling you not to raise the stove pipe under the 25kv cables was fixed to the brake van wall behind the stove, although I'd have thought that contacting the wire would have helped to get the fire going, and would have certainly got the soot out...

 

One of my regular jobs was making up a fully fitted vacuum braked train at Swansea High Street Goods (NCL in those days); mostly vanfits, and a few conflats and opens and a nice bit of 'proper' railway work to do yourself instead of having a 'Train Preparation Certificate' handed to you and having to assume the work was already done.  This had to be left until the last minute as more traffic would appear throughout the process to disrupt your calculations!

[br2975]

Margam, well, the less said the better.  Awful sh*thole, larceny in their souls, best closure ever.

 

Was once enlightened by a former BR manager with regards to the BR (WR) South Wales freight reorganisation of the late 1960s, brought about by the then inefficient railway operations in the area.

.

The management team involved in the reorganisation engaged with the local union representatives almost from the 'off' - all except those at Margam allegedly took up the offer.

.

The reorganisation brought about 'Blocplan' referred to elsewhere by the 'Stationmaster'.

 

In order to 'rubber stamp' the BR management proposals a final meeting was organised at the Temple of Peace in central Cardiff.

.

The proposals were put to the various union reps and were approved with amazing haste (the meeting lasting but 90mins)...............except by the Margam rep's.

.

The other reps present 'advised' the Margam contingent that they had been given the opportunity to take part in the planning of the reorganisation, but had chosen not to, so their (Margam's) views were now of no real consequence.

.

This brought on an apparent "warm smugness" within the BR managers !

.

Some of the improvements of the reorganisation included 

(i) 95% of coal trains from Monmouthshire Valleys loading points to destinations went without remarshalling, up from 17%

(ii) 83 % of coal trains from Cardiff Valleys loading points to destinations went without remarshalling, up from 2%

(iii) 91% of coal trains from Tondu / West Wales Valleys loading points to destinations went without remarshalling, up from 30%

 

The reorganisation saved 5x 350hp shunters (Cl08), 9x 650hp (Cl.14) and 18 mainline locos.

 

So, it appears, there 'may' have been 'staffing issues' in the Margam area ?

.

Brian R

Edited January 11, 2018 by br2975