1911 Midland - Kingswear through carriage identification

[billbedford]

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.

 

Yes, but these coaches were GWR, so I wouldn't expect them to fit into the same pattern as the MR stock. I think that bécasse is correct and that the X referred to coaches where all the compartments had access to lavatories. I can't see any other way of getting compartments with an odd number seats except by having a lavatory access.

 

Of course it may be that the clerk who complied this time table assumed the GW coach had gangways because it was to run in a corridor train. 

[NCB]

Could be a mistake. Or rather, a corridor comp brake has replaced a non-gangwayed vehicle, the documents updated accordingly, but someone has forgotten to revise the number of seats, or perhaps they didn't have the information. .

[Compound2632]

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).

 

Likewise Jerry Clifford has gone for a dining pair for his "Manchester Diner". I'm not sure what date he's modelling but 20s I think - post Grouping. I wouldn't dispute anyone's research; my information is only for the summer of 1911, though I note the formation is not so very different in the October 1922 marshalling instructions, though less detail is given: 

 

Summer 1911: BTL/BCL (Nottingham - Templecombe), BTK/RCK/CK (Nottingham - Bournemouth), TK/BFK (York - Bournemouth). CK/BTK (Manchester London Road - Bournemouth), BCK (Manchester London Road - Southampton)

 

October 1922: TK (Lincoln - Bath), BCK (Lincoln - Bournemouth), RCK (Derby - Bournemouth), BTK/CK/BTK (Bradford - Bournemouth), BCK (Manchester London Road - Bournemouth), BCK (Liverpool Lime Street - Bournemouth), BCK (Liverpool Lime Street - Southampton). 

 

In 1911 the restaurant carriage is a centre-kitchen composite, D444, in 1922, it's a 30-seater vehicle, presumed D449 - both 60' 12-wheelers from c. 1899-1901, modified internally c. 1905/6.

 

But here we've drifted right off the Great Western on to the Somerset & Dorset!

 

Back to the Bradford/Leeds - Torquay/Paignton through carriage. By October 1922 this has become a three-coach through portion, departing 10.12 am from Bradford and 9.16 am from Paignton. Southbound, Midland vehicles were used on Mon/Weds/Fri: third brake/third/first brake; and Great Western stock Tues/Thurs/Sat: third brake/compo/third brake; vice-versa northbound. I think this pattern continued right through LMS/LMR days?

[Compound2632]

 

Yes, but these coaches were GWR, so I wouldn't expect them to fit into the same pattern as the MR stock. I think that bécasse is correct and that the X referred to coaches where all the compartments had access to lavatories. I can't see any other way of getting compartments with an odd number seats except by having a lavatory access.

 

Of course it may be that the clerk who complied this time table assumed the GW coach had gangways because it was to run in a corridor train. 

 

 

Could be a mistake. Or rather, a corridor comp brake has replaced a non-gangwayed vehicle, the documents updated accordingly, but someone has forgotten to revise the number of seats, or perhaps they didn't have the information. .

 

I'm inclined to agree that it's a mistake: the answer to my opening question is "no" - it's not possible to identify this GW carriage from the information in the Midland marshalling instructions.

 

Thanks to all for your input!

Edited January 5, 2018 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

I'm inclined to agree that it's a mistake: the answer to my opening question is "no" - it's not possible to identify this GW carriage from the information in the Midland marshalling instructions.

 

Thanks to all for your input!

 

I have found examples of coaches that had been withdrawn identified in GW coach working timetables; sometimes details like that did not get updated.

 

Despite our 'fun with clerestories', by 1911 I'd expect to see a corridor toplight, as Miss Prism originally said, and, in the absence of more specific data, I suggest that it would be a hard choice to criticise. 

[Miss Prism]

Did any LSWR 'brake compos' venture far into foreign territories?

[billbedford]

Did any LSWR 'brake compos' venture far into foreign territories?

 

 

Newcastle.

[Compound2632]

Newcastle.

 

Intriguing. By what route (and starting from where)? The through carriages between Bournemouth (via S&DJR) and Southampton (via M&SWJR) and such northerly points by the Midland route all seem to have been Midland vehicles; Southampton via the DN&S line and the Great Central I would have assumed would be Great Western and/or Great Central vehicles. 

[billbedford]

The `

 

Intriguing. By what route (and starting from where)? The through carriages between Bournemouth (via S&DJR) and Southampton (via M&SWJR) and such northerly points by the Midland route all seem to have been Midland vehicles; Southampton via the DN&S line and the Great Central I would have assumed would be Great Western and/or Great Central vehicles. 

 

 

The Bournemouth - Newcastle trains were GCR and LSWR. The GC built some 56' coaches specially for this train.

 

The LSWR also ran Hull - Southampton immigrant trains, and probably return, but these would not have been in the public timetable. These ran via the Widened lines and the GNR. They used stock constructed to fit the Met loading gauge.

[Compound2632]

The Bournemouth - Newcastle trains were GCR and LSWR. The GC built some 56' coaches specially for this train.

 

Ah! These would be the ones that changed engines at Oxford? That at least gets us back onto Great Western ground for this thread!

[billbedford]

It was the Aberdeen-Penzance that changed engines at Oxford. The Newcastle-Bournemouth and the Newcastle-S Wales changed locos at Banbury and Leicester.

[Miss Prism]

How long did it take to get from Aberdeen to Penzance?

[billbedford]

21 Hours, Aberdeen (10:20am) to Penzance (7:20 am next day). There wasn't a through service in the opposite direction. The service ended at Waverley and the through coaches were worked ECS back to Aberdeen. Both companies used two sets of coaches for the through portion, though that only consisted of a TK and BCK.

[Brassey]

I posed the question on another forum some time ago whether the corridor connections where broken and remade every time through coaches were remarshalled. The answer was probably not; there was little time to do this.  The "corridors" were mainly for access to the toilets.  So the concept of a corridor train as we know it now did not exist.  Often there might be a non-corridor break van in the middle of a formation that would prevent this.

[Compound2632]

I posed the question on another forum some time ago whether the corridor connections where broken and remade every time through coaches were remarshalled. The answer was probably not; there was little time to do this.  The "corridors" were mainly for access to the toilets.  So the concept of a corridor train as we know it now did not exist.  Often there might be a non-corridor break van in the middle of a formation that would prevent this.

 

On those trains with dining facilities, the corridor would give passenger access to the dining car. Despite the notion that the Midland went in for "all the way" seating in the dining car, I don't thnink this applied to many of the North-to-West expresses at this period, which as mentioned above used 30-seat third class kitchen diners to serve both classes. These were often marshalled at one end of the train and added or detached part way through the journey. For example, from the 1911 carriage marshalling instructions, the 9:40 am from Bournemouth to Leeds and Manchester (via LNWR) had a diner attached in front at Bath that came off at Birmingham, and was then put on the front of the following 12:53 pm Bristol to York and Newcastle, but only as far as Derby (presumably serving high tea - there wouldn't have been time for a full dinner). It worked back from Derby the following day on the 2:25 pm Leeds-Bristol. Where the dining carriages were at the centre of the core portion of a train, e.g. the Scotch and Manchester expresses, there would have been all-the-way seating in the dining carriages but nevertheless there seems to have been a definite preference for having all the first class accommodation at one end of the train and all the third at the other; hence the large number (by Midland standards) of 54' four compartment corridor first brakes built under Bain's superintendency. 

 

In any case, on the cover of the marshalling book is written:

 

"Trains conveying Restaurant Cars must ordinarily be marshalled complete with corridor stock. When extra NON-CORRIDOR vehicles are attached to such trains, they must be so placed as NOT to interfere with the corridor arrangement.

 

"Passengers must not be allowed to place luggage in the corridors, and a FREE PASSAGE must be kept through the brake compartments and vans."

Edited January 10, 2018 by Compound2632

[billbedford]

I posed the question on another forum some time ago whether the corridor connections where broken and remade every time through coaches were remarshalled. The answer was probably not; there was little time to do this.  The "corridors" were mainly for access to the toilets.  So the concept of a corridor train as we know it now did not exist.  Often there might be a non-corridor break van in the middle of a formation that would prevent this.

 

 

Of course corridor connection were remade every time the coaches were remarshalled. British standard gangways clipped together, and pullman's were sprung so just coupling the coaches made the connection. The were adaptor plates that could be fitted to BS gangways that allowed then to be clipped to pullman gangway plates.

[Brassey]

Herewith a corresponding document from the Great Western.  This is from the Programme of Working of Coaches in Through Trains for July 1912 showing the Bradford Through Coaches:

 

 

As can be seen, the GW Bk Compo raised in the OP is not listed as Corridor so complicating its identification.

 

Herewith the return working where the carriage oddly is identified as Corridor:

 

 

From Bristol, the Bradford portion is marshalled next to an LNWR Fish Van; obviously non-corridor so no corridor connection made to this van.  Note also the large amount of non-corridor vehicles in the train generally.

[Brassey]

On those trains with dining facilities, the corridor would give passenger access to the dining car. Despite the notion that the Midland went in for "all the way" seating in the dining car, I don't thnink this applied to many of the North-to-West expresses at this period, which as mentioned above used 30-seat third class kitchen diners to serve both classes. These were often marshalled at one end of the train and added or detached part way through the journey. For example, from the 1911 carriage marshalling instructions, the 9:40 am from Bournemouth to Leeds and Manchester (via LNWR) had a diner attached in front at Bath that came off at Birmingham, and was then put on the front of the following 12:53 pm Bristol to York and Newcastle, but only as far as Derby (presumably serving high tea - there wouldn't have been time for a full dinner). It worked back from Derby the following day on the 2:25 pm Leeds-Bristol. Where the dining carriages were at the centre of the core portion of a train, e.g. the Scotch and Manchester expresses, there would have been all-the-way seating in the dining carriages but nevertheless there seems to have been a definite preference for having all the first class accommodation at one end of the train and all the third at the other; hence the large number (by Midland standards) of 54' four compartment corridor first brakes built under Bain's superintendency. 

 

In any case, on the cover of the marshalling book is written:

 

"Trains conveying Restaurant Cars must ordinarily be marshalled complete with corridor stock. When extra NON-CORRIDOR vehicles are attached to such trains, they must be so placed as NOT to interfere with the corridor arrangement.

 

"Passengers must not be allowed to place luggage in the corridors, and a FREE PASSAGE must be kept through the brake compartments and vans."

 

I agree that where a dining car was involved then the adjoining vehicles were likely to be connected.  This can be seen in the example I have posted where the ex-Liverpool GW dining car runs and returns in a fixed formation of 3.  But not so of other vehicles that are added en route some of which are non-corridor.

 

 

Of course corridor connection were remade every time the coaches were remarshalled. British standard gangways clipped together, and pullman's were sprung so just coupling the coaches made the connection. The were adaptor plates that could be fitted to BS gangways that allowed then to be clipped to pullman gangway plates.

 

Bill, I do not doubt that it was technically possible to do this but whether it was actually done on every occasion is questionable.

[billbedford]

Bill, I do not doubt that it was technically possible to do this but whether it was actually done on every occasion is questionable.

 

 

Sorry, but I don't understand what you are talking about. Are you talking about splitting rakes, or just adding through coaches? In general separating corridor coaches was not very more complicated than uncoupling them and unclipping the gangways. There were no other connections. Most coaches didn't get electrical through lighting connections until the 30s.

[billbedford]

I agree that where a dining car was involved then the adjoining vehicles were likely to be connected.  This can be seen in the example I have posted where the ex-Liverpool GW dining car runs and returns in a fixed formation of 3.  But not so of other vehicles that are added en route some of which are non-corridor.

 

 

 Sometimes it was the dining car set that was added or removed from the train.

Edited January 10, 2018 by billbedford

[Compound2632]

Herewith a corresponding document from the Great Western.  This is from the Programme of Working of Coaches in Through Trains for July 1912 showing the Bradford Through Coaches:

 

TC191239.jpg

 

As can be seen, the GW Bk Compo raised in the OP is not listed as Corridor so complicating its identification.

 

Herewith the return working where the carriage oddly is identified as Corridor:

 

TC191238.jpg

 

From Bristol, the Bradford portion is marshalled next to an LNWR Fish Van; obviously non-corridor so no corridor connection made to this van.  Note also the large amount of non-corridor vehicles in the train generally.

 

It is interesting to see the other company's take on this! Northbound, the 2.20 pm departure from Bristol is a Great Western train via the Severn Tunnel, Shrewsbury, Crewe &c., not via Midland metals. The leading two carriages are detached at Bristol and work forward as the leading portion of a Midland Bristol-Bradford corridor train. The LNW fish van only interrupts the corridor connection while the train is on the Great Western; I'll give you that for this portion of the journey there is no dining car - and in fact the train is mostly made up of non-corridor carriages.

 

I agree that where a dining car was involved then the adjoining vehicles were likely to be connected.  This can be seen in the example I have posted where the ex-Liverpool GW dining car runs and returns in a fixed formation of 3.  But not so of other vehicles that are added en route some of which are non-corridor.

 

Your southbound train is a proper corridor express. The non-corridor through carriages are added at either end so as not to interrupt the corridor, just as the Midland instructions specify.