spikey Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 That's what Mrs Spikey's just asked, and I have no idea what the answer is. So ... why did they have one open end and one closed? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spitfire2865 Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 Not only the GWR, but several other companies had one ended brake vans at one point or another, although most seem to have eventually gone for a double ended design. You would think a double ended design would use less wood as youre framing and covering less wall area. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickham Green Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 That's what Mrs Spikey's just asked, and I have no idea what the answer is. So ... why did they have one open end and one closed? Probably something to do with the hand brake being out on the verandah rather than in the cabin where sensible railways put it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted November 9, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 9, 2018 Cos the GWR always had to be different. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted November 9, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 9, 2018 Overseas (and I think here in pre-group times), many railways had fully enclosed brake vans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 I think they got the best of both worlds. Large comfortable van area and a large veranda which had the sandboxes, brake standard and vacuum cylinder (where fitted) and seats for good weather. Long wheel base with a comfortable ride whereas most other railways still had short wheelbase vans. It's no wonder why they were in high demand for Departmental use in relation to ordinary brake vans. Jason 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikey Posted November 9, 2018 Author Share Posted November 9, 2018 I think they got the best of both worlds. Large comfortable van area and a large veranda which had the sandboxes, brake standard and vacuum cylinder (where fitted) and seats for good weather. Yes, but as Mrs Spikey says, surely they must have spent half their life running "wrong way round"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 Yes, but as Mrs Spikey says, surely they must have spent half their life running "wrong way round"? I don't think it was an issue as they had a hatch at the other end. Jason 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 Nothing was ever the wrong way round on the Good Way Round. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikey Posted November 9, 2018 Author Share Posted November 9, 2018 I don't think it was an issue as they had a hatch at the other end. Indeed. But that doesn't explain why they designed it with one "open" end and one "closed" ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMJ Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 It doesn't matter which end is open its a convenient place for the guard to lookout from. I'd fancy an American caboose A's a guard as it's got every comfort you could wish for. Just as long as you have a hand brake control for air vacuum or both plus weather protection you have the bare minimum requirements for the van. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
w124bob Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 I'd always assumed they were to tight to pay the extra for a second set of door hinges and glass. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted November 9, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 9, 2018 It's no wonder why they were in high demand for Departmental use in relation to ordinary brake vans. Jason Thats because they were withdrawn earlier than other contemporary designs due to the lack of duckets. Other types, LMS designs mostly were withdrawn for the same reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted November 9, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 9, 2018 Yes, but as Mrs Spikey says, surely they must have spent half their life running "wrong way round"? But NEVER in a photo of a model layout! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium uax6 Posted November 9, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 9, 2018 But Toad E's were not single ended, but then again they were also not GWR! Andy G 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 It doesn't matter which end is open its a convenient place for the guard to lookout from. I'd fancy an American caboose A's a guard as it's got every comfort you could wish for. Just as long as you have a hand brake control for air vacuum or both plus weather protection you have the bare minimum requirements for the van. Yeah, sure beats rattling around in a brake vanhttp://www.shorpy.com/node/9733 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted November 10, 2018 Share Posted November 10, 2018 GWR vans were not well liked by the guards from other regions, once brake vans became common user under BR. The OPC book on SR wagons (when comparing the different Big 4 designs) describes them as 'hated almost to the point of refusal' or similar. The brake on the veranda wasn't fun to use in poor weather, or if the veranda end was leading with coal dust etc being blown off the wagons ahead of it. There were also union concerns around safety, with only a single exit in the event of a crash. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon A Posted November 10, 2018 Share Posted November 10, 2018 Also as they only had one main door the cabin was less drafty than the double veranda guards vans. Gordon A 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikey Posted November 10, 2018 Author Share Posted November 10, 2018 OK ... some interesting observations, but we're still no wiser about what the theory was when the thing was designed ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted November 10, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2018 You'd have to go back to the late 1880s to answer the question why they were designed that way. There was a quarter-century of development but it's notable that there was no significant design change after the introduction of 16ft wheelbase, 24ft over headstocks vans in 1912, whereas on the Midland and LNWR that date rather marks the beginning of the developments that lead to the standard LMS van - though guard's side lookouts didn't appear until LMS days. (A similar story could, I think, be told of LNER and constituent vans but I'm not sufficiently familiar with the subject.) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted November 10, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 10, 2018 (edited) The usage of a GBV, even before it got on to the drawing board, would (unless it was intended to be turned regularly, and facilities provided for doing so) clearly involve it performing the same task in either direction, so there's no logical operational reason for anything other than a design that's similar at both ends. John Edited November 10, 2018 by Dunsignalling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikey Posted November 10, 2018 Author Share Posted November 10, 2018 (edited) ... so there's no logical operational reason for anything other than a design that's similar at both ends. Quite. Hence the question. Which it looks like we'll never know the answer to. I shall inform Mrs Spikey that the GWR couldn't decide whether to have brake van ends with or without verandah, so it opted for one of each, safe in the knowledge that in times to come, nobody would be able to fathom out why they'd done that. Edited November 10, 2018 by spikey 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted November 10, 2018 Share Posted November 10, 2018 Compound is right. The design developed. The design developed to maximise the area of the enclosed and unenclosed areas. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
88D Posted November 10, 2018 Share Posted November 10, 2018 Well, I know which sort I’d prefer as a summerhouse in my garden! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted November 10, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 10, 2018 A significant difference compared to other late 19th century single-ended designs such as the LNWR D16, is that the verandah end of the Great Western vehicles is open - as mentioned above, there is nothing to protect the guard from exposure to all the airborne detritus etc. On the LNWR vans and also on the Midland single-verandah vans, I believe the verandah was primarily for access - the end windows were deemed to give the guard an adequate view of the train (as at the enclosed end of the Great Western vans). The Midland design does have the additional safety feature (alluded to above) of a door at each end of the cabin - also giving access to the lampirons. Mrs Spikey - the most challenging questions are those asked by those to whom the subject matter is not overfamiliar. Ask him some more! 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now