Brown vehicles in passenger trains

[WillCav]

Hi all,

I would like to understand better the correct usage of brown vehicles in passenger trains.  Late 1940s in particular.

Single Siphon G vehicles seem to be quite popular between loco and coaches but Siphon Hs haven't appeared in the books I have researched.  Did the Siphon H vehicles not get used in passenger trains? I can't see that the lack of gangway is an issue as the last coach gangway would be locked. Also, why did Siphon Gs have gangways? - not needed for churns.

 

Thanks

Will

[Fat Controller]

38 minutes ago, WillCav said:

Hi all,

I would like to understand better the correct usage of brown vehicles in passenger trains.  Late 1940s in particular.

Single Siphon G vehicles seem to be quite popular between loco and coaches but Siphon Hs haven't appeared in the books I have researched.  Did the Siphon H vehicles not get used in passenger trains? I can't see that the lack of gangway is an issue as the last coach gangway would be locked. Also, why did Siphon Gs have gangways? - not needed for churns.

 

Thanks

Will

One feature of the Siphon G, which might have made them more popular than other vans, was the provision of sturdy folding shelves on both sides; these were the reason they were adopted for use as Newspaper Vans, and why some were specifically allocated to work on the West of England TPO. I had a brief look through 'The Red Dragon and other old friends', which has a lot of photos of trains around the Swansea area taken from the immediate pot-WW2 period onwards, and Siphon Hs are conspicuously absent. Itwas not a problem of gangways, as non-gangwayed Siphon Js were commonly seen behind the loco on passenger servies in the area. Could it be that, there being only 20 Siphon H in total, they were sufficient for their designed traffic and not beyond. In contrast, over 300 Siphon G were built. What is curious is that there seems to have been but one build of the Hs (in 1919), whereas the Gs were built in at least three, widely separated, builds 

[Fat Controller]

Further to my earlier reply, is it possible that the Siphon Hs, having end doors, were of more use on motor-car traffic, if not needed for milk churns? The GWR were not over-provided for in terms of CCT-type vehicles, especially passenger-rated ones, and had two expanding car-plants on their territory. 

[WillCav]

Thanks Fat Controller, 

I didn't think about car traffic. Some of the other brown vehicles with end doors (python monster etc) were also used for scenery which may be an option. I guess I'll have to find pictures of them in use but they are a bit camera shy!

Will

[Fat Controller]

3 minutes ago, WillCav said:

Thanks Fat Controller, 

I didn't think about car traffic. Some of the other brown vehicles with end doors (python monster etc) were also used for scenery which may be an option. I guess I'll have to find pictures of them in use but they are a bit camera shy!

Will

Some scenery vans and CCTs from other companies were known as 'Aircraft Vans', and had high roofs like the Siphon H, suggesting another potential use

[WillCav]

Thanks FC.

I've done a bit more digging and you are right about aircraft traffic - mentioned in Russell's coach book.

It also says about car traffic and notes that there are no chocks for car wheels so not as good as other vehicles.

I think I'll mainly use it in my milk train.

Thanks again

Will

[M.I.B]

Churn traffic was much lower by late 40s.  More likely to have been bulked into 6 wheeler tanks by then.

 

4 wheeler milks were done and gone by the late 40s.

 

No reason why an H can't be at the front of a passenger express - it doesn't need to have a through corridor to be used for extra luggage, or papers or extra parcels.  They were very rare compared to both types of G, but nothing says they couldn't be used as such.  Not all of them were branded and allocated to trains all the time.

[Coach bogie]

or used in parcels/empty stock/mixed trains - 6th vehicle

 

Mike Wiltshire

[WillCav]

MIB and Coach Bogie,

Thanks for all the ideas for using the Siphon H - I've got a few options on what trains to use it in.  I just need to swap the bogies to something better first... I'm thinking that American ones look good.

Will

[The Johnster]

I believe Siphon Hs, as well as G's, had folding down shelves which made them useful for pigeon traffic as well.  Pigeons are all but forgotten on the railway nowadays but were a major source of traffic especially at weekends.  Fanciers associations would charter trains and send baskets of birds to stations for release by the stationmaster at a specific time, a spectacular sight which it is sadly impossible to model!  The Conservative Club at the end of my street still does this, using the same type of wicker baskets, but with road transport these days!  The LNER had vehicles specifically for this traffic, but the GW used NPCCS with folding shelves as did the LMS and Southern to the best of my knowledge.  

 

The baskets, stacked on platforms with the birds awaiting release or empties waiting to be returned to the senders, were a common sight.

[martinT]

I've just acquired a  Bristol Division 'Working of Coaches' book for October 28 1940 UFN, a fascinating document which provokes more questions. There are lots of references to Siphon Gs, but only a pair of references to a Siphon H. The 9.15pm Swindon to York conveyed, at its head, a Siphon H that was making a Neyland to Sheffield journey. It had arrived at Swindon on the 8.48am from Fishguard. The return journey, given as Sheffield to Swansea, was made as last vehicle (behind 2 Siphon Gs from Sheffield to Helston & Penzance) on the 10.5pm York to Bristol. It was worked forward from Temple Meads on the 9.5am departure to Swansea. The provoked questions are of course: 'why a Siphon H? What was the traffic?'

 

Martin

Edited July 28, 2019 by martinT
Refs to Helston & Penzance added

[Nearholmer]

Wasn’t it tobacco products? I remember reading about this somewhere before, although I can’t remember which way the flow went.

[Fat Controller]

31 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Wasn’t it tobacco products? I remember reading about this somewhere before, although I can’t remember which way the flow went.

There was certainly a regular Siphon working from Nottingham to Neyland and v/v, which lasted into the 1950s. This was supposedly tobacco products; why Neyland (Milford Haven's less prosperous neighbour), I don't know.

[martinT]

On 28/07/2019 at 14:30, Fat Controller said:

There was certainly a regular Siphon working from Nottingham to Neyland and v/v, which lasted into the 1950s. This was supposedly tobacco products; why Neyland (Milford Haven's less prosperous neighbour), I don't know.

 

Nottingham certainly makes sense for tobacco traffic & I suppose the lack of corridor connections made Siphon Hs more secure which would have been an important consideration for cigarette traffic, but why does the 1940 Coaches Workings book give Sheffield as the destination? It wasn't a war-time traffic, I've been told separately that the 1937 book has similar workings. The HMRS' Siphons book gives the branding for 1422 & 1432 as 'Neath to Sheffield' with a date of 11/36. (There are no other brandings given).

[The Johnster]

Perhaps as a matter of railway convenience; Neyland, the original Brunel terminus, had a loco shed and better siding facilities. 

[wagonman]

On 28/07/2019 at 13:55, Nearholmer said:

Wasn’t it tobacco products? I remember reading about this somewhere before, although I can’t remember which way the flow went.

 

There was the Wills factory at Bristol...

[Guest Jack Benson]

Hi,

 

just found this excellent thread, it answers a lot of newbie questions.

 

Thanks

 

JB

[6959]

On 5 August 2019 at 23:12, wagonman said:

 

There was the Wills factory at Bristol...

 

Just asked my wife about Bristol connection and she says that Nottingham was Imperial Tobacco but does remember what or why.

[TheSignalEngineer]

Imperial Tobacco at Nottingham was John Player