1911 Midland - Kingswear through carriage identification

[Compound2632]

In a post elsewhere, I've asked whether it is possible to identify a particular type of Great Western carriage used for through workings from Bradford and from Manchester London Road to Torquay and Kingswear (and return) in the summer of 1911 from the information given in a Midland Railway carriage marshalling document, viz.:

 

Corridor composite brake with two first and four third class compartments, seating 10 and 28 respectively and weighing 26 tons (rounded to the nearest ton).

Edited January 4, 2018 by Compound2632

[Miss Prism]

Sounds like a Toplight 56' or 57' Bars I, diagram E82, E85, E86 or E87, all of which fit the two 1st and four 3rd compartments description.

 

Although how two 1st class compartments add up to '10 seats', and how four 3rd class compartments add up to '28 seats' is a distinct oddity.

Edited January 4, 2018 by Miss Prism

[Compound2632]

Sounds like a Toplight 56' or 57' Bars I, diagram E82, E85, E86 or E87, all of which fit the two 1st and four 3rd compartments description.

 

Although how two 1st class compartments add up to '10 seats', and how four 3rd class compartments add up to '28 seats' is a distinct oddity.

 

Interesting. Relatively new carriages, so probably still chocolate and cream, unless very new, in which case all-over brown? I'm not at all knowledgeable about Toplights, but weren't they 9' wide over the waist panels? When the Midland first started building 57', 9' wide carriages a few years later, doorhandles were in recessed panels to keep the overal width down to 9'3", so I wonder if the Toplights would have cleared the Midland structure gauge? Perhaps they were OK on the lines they traversed - certainly there doesn't appear to have been any problem with the LMS standard carriages of 1923 on and the LNWR had carriages of the same dimensions by 1911. 

 

A Midland Bain corridor carriage would have four seats in a first class compartment and six in third (compared to six and ten in non-corridor compartments), presumably a contemporary Great Western carriage was the same. Ten first and 28 third seats could correspond to a non-corridor carriage with two first class compartments either side of a pair of lavatories, two thirds ditto and one third for the strong of bladder. Could it be that such a carriage was used in earlier years and the marshalling book wasn't fully updated?

Edited January 4, 2018 by Compound2632

[Nick Holliday]

I would agree with Compound2632 that it sounds more like a non-corridor coach. I am no expert on GWR carriages, but what Russell describes as a Falmouth coach, page 118 in volume one, almost fits the bill. The type he illustrates is lot no. 697, with three first class compartments with individual toilets, reducing seating to 5, and four smaller compartments, three connected to a side corridor to two toilets, and the fourth, possibly intended for second class passengers, was arranged similarly to the firsts. I am not sure how the third class numbers work out, but if the layout was slightly different as Compound suggests, with pairs of thirds sandwiching toilets, then they might seat four on one side and just three on the other, to allow for the door, although that does seem somewhat luxurious for the time.

I am not sure a new Toplight would have been allocated to such a service at the time, and there would be little point in having a corridor coach unless the Midland provided similar stock.

[Compound2632]

there would be little point in having a corridor coach unless the Midland provided similar stock.

 

The carriage marshalling instructions indicate that that the trains in which these through carriages are marshalled are "corridor expresses"; reinforced by an X against each individual corridor carriage, including the Midland carriages which ran through to Plymouth attached to these GW vehicles for Kingswear. The West-to-North route had probably had corridor expresses for about five years by this date, large numbers (by Midland standards) of Bain's 54' clerestory corridor carriages having been turned out from 1903 onwards.

 

My reconstruction of the non-corridor lavatory layout was based on how a Midland carriage with that number of seats would have been arranged. There would have been no call for second class accommodation on a carriage working through to the Midland (no ticketing).

[Miss Prism]

A Midland Bain corridor carriage would have four seats in a first class compartment and six in third (compared to six and ten in non-corridor compartments), presumably a contemporary Great Western carriage was the same. Ten first and 28 third seats could correspond to a non-corridor carriage with two first class compartments either side of a pair of lavatories, two thirds ditto and one third for the strong of bladder. Could it be that such a carriage was used in earlier years and the marshalling book wasn't fully updated?

That is a distinct possibility. There were a few oddball Dean Clerestory things, non-gangwayed, but with corridors either side of class lavatories, which would account for odd seat numbers, but I don't think any were classed as a 'corridor composite brake' in the normal understanding of that description. Bradford/Manchester to Paignton etc was a fairly well-established traffic pattern, and as far as I know, the route would not have had a problem with the 'go-anywhere' short Toplights (8'11" over body, 9'5" over handles).

 

In 1911, E82s would still have been in b&c, with E85s, E86s and E87s in brown.

[Edwardian]

I have a couple of problems with this.  The first is the seat numbers.  One possibility is that this is potentially explained by access to lavatories via compartments, yielding an odd number, but I have not yet found a coach with these numbers, and, of course, this potential solution tends to fall away if we are dealing with a through corridor coach.

 

The second issue is that, certainly in the Dean era, when non-corridor/semi-corridor stock of the Falmouth coupe ilk was built, the GW brake composites were generally tri-composites.  IIRC, the GW did not abolish Second Class until 1912. Miss P to shoot me down if I've misremembered that!

 

A good example of the non-gangway/semi-corrodor Falmouth Coupe type is E45.  It has 1.5 1st class compartments, one 2nd and 4 3rds (the Falmouth Coupes had only 3 3rds).  I cannot make these compartments equate to 10 1st class and 28 3rd class seats, however. 

 

It is interesting that Russell says of the E45 "these vehicles found excellent service in 'through' coach working - workings to Cardiff, Birkenhead, Plymouth, Manchester and in later years a similar coach worked right through from Penzance to Aberdeen".  

 

I think that the coach is more likely to be a corridor/gangwayed vehicle by 1911.

 

If we are looking at a full corridor/gangwayed Dean clerestory type, then something like E48 might serve.  This has 2 1sts and 4 3rds.  Again, the seat numbers cannot be made to agree.

 

The best match I have found thus far is an F10 58' clerestory slip coach. As a slip it is non-corridor.  It is a tri-comp, but if you use the 2 2nds as 3rds, you end up with 4 compartments and 28 seats!  Guess what, you also have 2 1st compartments totalling 10 seats! 

[Miss Prism]

IIRC, the GW did not abolish Second Class until 1912. Miss P to shoot me down if I've misremembered that!

 

Earlier than that. 2nd class began to be abolished in 1905 (the Dreadnoughts were two-class only), and the last reference I can find to a tri-compo is the E83 Toplight of late 1907.

 

The E48s were I think kept in their Milford Haven sets.

[Nick Holliday]

Re-reading Harris, he notes that Lots 759/814, Diagrams E.44/52 were first- and third-class only, ..."which suggests that they may have been built for through working on to Cambrian or Midland metals, the only two railways to have abolished second-class accommodation at that date." He also notes that the earlier diagram had a side corridor to the third-class compartment, similar to the design I noted from Russell, whilst the later had lost one lavatory, and by inference the corridor. Hence E52 could have four third-class compartments seating seven, and two firsts seating 10, although Harris doesn't actually enumerate the number of each class. There are two flies in this particular ointment, however, since Harris describes them as having observation windows, which might compromise the seating numbers, and they were not, at least when built, gangwayed.

[Compound2632]

Thanks all. See also wagonman's response re. Dean carriages - apologies for messing things up by posing the same question in two places.

 

Wouldn't the Great Western have wanted to use its most up-to-date carriages for these through workings, advertising its superiority to the long-distance travellers of Lancashire and the West Riding? I like the idea of the Manchester London Road - Birmingham train, headed maybe by a Precursor 4-4-0, maybe a plum & spilt milk arc-roof full brake, then a brown elliptical-roofed toplight, a crimson lake clerestory, and then the usual LNW hotch-potch of roof outlines - a reminder that to the operating department, it was the interior accommodation that mattered, not the external appearance.

 

EDIT: hogwash deleted - see erratum below.

Edited January 4, 2018 by Compound2632

[billbedford]

Sounds like a Toplight 56' or 57' Bars I, diagram E82, E85, E86 or E87, all of which fit the two 1st and four 3rd compartments description.

 

Although how two 1st class compartments add up to '10 seats', and how four 3rd class compartments add up to '28 seats' is a distinct oddity.

 

 

Five seats in first class and seven in third. ie there were three lavs each serving two compartments. Hence they were non-corridors.

Edited January 4, 2018 by billbedford

[Compound2632]

Five seats in first class and seven in third. ie there were three lavs each serving two compartments. Hence they were non-corridors.

 

Which is reasonable, except that they're marked as being corridor. Here's a photo of the original document:

 

 

On the cover of the book is the note: "The vehicles marked X are Corridor and Lavatory, and those marked [with an obelisk] contain Lavatory accommodation in certain compartments."

 

The Plymouth through coaches, Midland composites, are also posing problems as their accommodation is identical to that of vehicles listed as brake composite but with a luggage are rather than brake compartment; I can't find a good match for this. But that's not a Great Western problem.

[Edwardian]

Five seats in first class and seven in third. ie there were three lavs each serving two compartments. Hence they were non-corridors.

 

Indeed, hence my suggestion.  With Miss P's clarification regarding the discontinuance of Second Class, we here end up with 28 Third Class seats in 4 compartments, as well as 10 seats in two First Class compartments.

 

You don't get this in the semi-corridor non-gangwayed Falmouth Coupe types, and you don't get it in through corridor gangwayed coaches.  Rather, you need a coach in which every compartment has access to a loo from the compartment itself.  As here:

[Compound2632]

I've realised I've made a mistake (one of several today): the 10:55 am from Derby is in fact the same train as the 8:15 am from Bradford, with additional carriages added at Derby (from Manchester and York, plus a restaurant carriage). So there's only one GW carriage in each direction, not two. Manchester London Road didn't come into it - that was the next train listed, the Bournemouth express (fore-runner of The Pines Express), which had a through portion from Manchester London Road attached at Birmingham with carriages for Bournemouth and Southampton - the latter detached at Cheltenham and going forward via that Midland proxy, the M&SWJR.

 

Fortunately that doesn't affect the discussion of the identity of the GW carriage, beyond only needing two of them rather than four.

Edited January 4, 2018 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

I've realised I've made a mistake (one of several today): the 10:55 am from Derby is in fact the same train as the 8:15 am from Bradford, with additional carriages added at Derby (from Manchester and York, plus a restaurant carriage). So there's only one GW carriage in each direction, not two. Manchester London Road didn't come into it - that was the next train listed, the Bournemouth express (fore-runner of The Pines Express), which had a through portion from Manchester London Road attached at Birmingham with carriages for Bournemouth and Southampton - the latter detached at Cheltenham and going forward via that Midland proxy, the M&SWJR.

 

Fortunately that doesn't affect the discussion of the identity of the GW carriage, beyond only needing two of them rather than four.

 

So what was the working of the GW coach?

[Compound2632]

The Plymouth through coaches, Midland composites, are also posing problems as their accommodation is identical to that of vehicles listed as brake composite but with a luggage are rather than brake compartment; I can't find a good match for this. But that's not a Great Western problem.

 

The only match for this I'd found among Bain's 54' carriages was D472, ten of which were built to Lot 686 of 1909, but I've realised they could equally well be Clayton square-light 50' composites to D468, built in 1899/1900 for the M&GSW joint stock, ten of which were transferred to Midland ownership in 1906. The M&GSW joint stock had less call for composites than the M&NB joint stock: Midland Scotch expresses via the Waverley Route conveyed through carriages for a multitude of highland destinations whereas on the 'Sou West Glasgow and Stranraer were the only destinations.

 

Apologies for polluting this area of the forum with Midlandry. The Great Western enthusiasts will be seeing red...

So what was the working of the GW coach?

 

Bradford - Leeds - Derby - Bristol - Torquay - Kingswear and return.

[wagonman]

Edwardian's suggested (ex)-slip coach definitely has the right number of seats. It also has a good supply of loos. But it doesn't have a gangway which would be inconvenient if any of the passengers wanted to make use of the restaurant car – not unlikely on such a journey. That makes me think it might have been a E48 even though the number of seats – the diagram implies 3-a-side in 1st class (total 12) and indeterminate number in the other compartments. Was it 4-a-side in 3rd and 3-a-side in former 2nd class compartments. That would give 28 seats.

 

Just how much say did the MR have in relation to the number of seats provided in GWR through coaches? Did they just take whatever figure the GWR provided – and were rather casual/dilatory about keeping the figure up to date if the carriage used was changed? In other words are we over-egging this? Just a thought...

[billbedford]

Edwardian's suggested (ex)-slip coach definitely has the right number of seats. It also has a good supply of loos. But it doesn't have a gangway which would be inconvenient if any of the passengers wanted to make use of the restaurant car – not unlikely on such a journey.

 

 

There wasn't a restaurant listed for this train.

[billbedford]

The only match for this I'd found among Bain's 54' carriages was D472, ten of which were built to Lot 686 of 1909,

 

 

D472s seem to have been used on the Bournemouth expresses.

[wagonman]

There wasn't a restaurant listed for this train.

 

 

The table you published has a 30-seater restaurant car from Derby to Bristol...

[Compound2632]

D472s seem to have been used on the Bournemouth expresses.

 

Interesting - is that from photographic or other evidence? The 1911 North & West marshalling book has carriages with this 2 first seating 8/3 third seating 18 accommodation listed for Bradford and Newcastle to Bournemouth by various trains, as single through carriages, but the principal through train, the "Bournemouth Express", doesn't include one: from Nottingham, it was made of a couple of square-light non-corridor lavatory carriages, brake third (D499) and composite (D508) running as far as Templecombe, then a 54' corridor brake third, either square light (D475) or round light (D476 or D477); a composite restaurant carriage seating eight of each class - probably another square-light vehicle (D444); and three more 54' corridor carriages, a composite (D469 or D593), a third (D560 or D473), and a brake first (D467, D576 or D561) - the latter two originating from York. To this was attached at Birmingham three 54' corridor carriages from Manchester London Road: a composite and brake third for Bournemouth and a brake composite for Southampton. This last was of the type that might be D472 or D468 but was as mentioned detached at Cheltenham. In the return direction, the Templecombe carriages are absent (not worked back by an express train) and the restaurant carriage is shown as being attached in front at Bath, so presumably had worked back from Bournemouth as ECS.

 

The table you published has a 30-seater restaurant car from Derby to Bristol...

 

30-seat restaurant carriages are commonplace on the North & West expresses; the marshalling instructions require six of them. it can be deduced that these were 60' Clayton square-light carriages of D499, ten of which were built in 1900. Although fitted out as third class, they seem to have been operated as common, or possibly with two bays reserved for first class passengers.

 

Just how much say did the MR have in relation to the number of seats provided in GWR through coaches? Did they just take whatever figure the GWR provided – and were rather casual/dilatory about keeping the figure up to date if the carriage used was changed? In other words are we over-egging this? Just a thought...

 

Very likely - the compiler of the marshalling book, working in his office at Derby, probably knew about as much about Great Western carriages as I do. It might be necessary to know the number of seats for reservations? If the Great Western supplied a carriage with more than the agreed number of seats - e.g. by providing a corridor toplight in lieu of the previous non-corridor carriage, that wouldn't be a problem.

 

Apologies again for this Midland hijack of what started out as a seemingly simple Great Western question - but I've come to learn that nothing is simple where the Great Western is concerned, except their express passenger engines.

[bécasse]

Which is reasonable, except that they're marked as being corridor. Here's a photo of the original document:

 

1911 North & West marshalling extract.JPG

 

On the cover of the book is the note: "The vehicles marked X are Corridor and Lavatory, and those marked [with an obelisk] contain Lavatory accommodation in certain compartments."

 

I think that you are misinterpreting this note in respect of the X marking, if I were to add the implied word "vehicles" several times as below with the added words in italics, I think that you can see that all the X means is that every seat has access to a lavatory (as opposed to those vehicles marked with an obelisk where only some seats have access to one).

 

 "The vehicles marked X are Corridor vehicles and Lavatory vehicles, and those vehicles marked [with an obelisk] contain Lavatory accommodation in certain compartments."

[Compound2632]

 

I think that you are misinterpreting this note in respect of the X marking, if I were to add the implied word "vehicles" several times as below with the added words in italics, I think that you can see that all the X means is that every seat has access to a lavatory (as opposed to those vehicles marked with an obelisk where only some seats have access to one).

 

 "The vehicles marked X are Corridor vehicles and Lavatory vehicles, and those vehicles marked [with an obelisk] contain Lavatory accommodation in certain compartments."

 

 

I am confident that your interpretation is incorrect. I've been studying these documents closely (not just this particular volume). In almost all cases there is sufficient information, in conjunction with the diagram book, to identify the specific carriage type - seating capacity, number of compartments, brake or luggage compartment, weight. It's generally only with the Bain 54' corridor carriages that there is any ambiguity, where there are several diagrams having the same internal layout but different external appearance: square light, round light, round light with long windows on the corridor side, reduced clerestory height for Metropolitan gauge. (These 8/28 seat composites are an exception!) The point is, there is an exact correlation between the mark "X" in the marshalling instructions and identification as a corridor vehicle by the other information. The vehicles marked with an obelisk are mostly Clayton 48' square light clerestories (of the family represented by the well-known Ratio kits) and a few earlier Clayton arc-roofed vehicles; the Bain 54' non-corridor lavatory carriages don't seem to make it into express trains, unsurprisingly. Besides which, I can't think of a Midland non-corridor diagram where every passenger had access to a lavatory, so the distinction you make is between corridor (or gangwayed) carriages and carriages that did not exist.

Edited January 4, 2018 by Compound2632

[billbedford]

Interesting - is that from photographic or other evidence? The 1911 North & West marshalling book has carriages with this 2 first seating 8/3 third seating 18 accommodation listed for Bradford and Newcastle to Bournemouth by various trains, as single through carriages, but the principal through train, the "Bournemouth Express", doesn't include one: from Nottingham, it was made of a couple of square-light non-corridor lavatory carriages, brake third (D499) and composite (D508) running as far as Templecombe, then a 54' corridor brake third, either square light (D475) or round light (D476 or D477); a composite restaurant carriage seating eight of each class - probably another square-light vehicle (D444); and three more 54' corridor carriages, a composite (D469 or D593), a third (D560 or D473), and a brake first (D467, D576 or D561) - the latter two originating from York. To this was attached at Birmingham three 54' corridor carriages from Manchester London Road: a composite and brake third for Bournemouth and a brake composite for Southampton. This last was of the type that might be D472 or D468 but was as mentioned detached at Cheltenham. In the return direction, the Templecombe carriages are absent (not worked back by an express train) and the restaurant carriage is shown as being attached in front at Bath, so presumably had worked back from Bournemouth as ECS.

 

 

It is input from a customer who has done a good of research on the D&D and wanted to model this leg of the train. His list was D444 (RCK), 449 (RTK), 472 (BCK), 547 (TK) & 576 (BFK).

[wagonman]

I am confident that your interpretation is incorrect. I've been studying these documents closely (not just this particular volume). In almost all cases there is sufficient information, in conjunction with the diagram book, to identify the specific carriage type - seating capacity, number of compartments, brake or luggage compartment, weight. It's generally only with the Bain 54' corridor carriages that there is any ambiguity, where there are several diagrams having the same internal layout but different external appearance: square light, round light, round light with long windows on the corridor side, reduced clerestory height for Metropolitan gauge. (These 8/28 seat composites are an exception!) The point is, there is an exact correlation between the mark "X" in the marshalling instructions and identification as a corridor vehicle by the other information. The vehicles marked with an obelisk are mostly Clayton 48' square light clerestories (of the family represented by the well-known Ratio kits) and a few earlier Clayton arc-roofed vehicles; the Bain 54' non-corridor lavatory carriages don't seem to make it into express trains, unsurprisingly. Besides which, I can't think of a Midland non-corridor diagram where every passenger had access to a lavatory, so the distinction you make is between corridor (or gangwayed) carriages and carriages that did not exist.

 

 

The GWR carriage working books also used an X to denote gangwayed stock so I deduce it may have been standard practice at this time.