GWR branchline coach operations

[Karhedron]

The comments with the photo state that this is the 3.20 p.m. mixed train from Marlow on the 24th May 1954. A quick check of the WTT should show if this service included passengers or not. Does anyone have the 1954 WTT for the London Division?

[Miss Prism]

I've got the Marlow branch book somewhere, so not sure whether it addresses the matter.

 

[TomJ]

Whatever the actual designation of that train it makes a nice subject for a model

[Miss Prism]

11 minutes ago, TomJ said:

Whatever the actual designation of that train it makes a nice subject for a model

 

Note the loco and autocoach are facing the junction. If facing the branch end, it would need generous space beyond the loco release to do a traditional runround.

 

[The Johnster]

4 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

The Marlow pic makes me wonder whether the train is actually a goods train, the autotrailer being present because staff couldn't be bothered to detach it from the loco. Understandable, bearing in mind the Marlow to Bourne End journey was a matter of a few minutes.

 

Unfortunately the front of the loco is too out of focus to determine the position of the headlamp.  It is not in the smokebox top ordinary passenger position, but some branches allowed the use of the centre buffer beam bracket for autos.  A good number of droplights are open, which suggests the presence of passengers to me, but if the weather was dry they might have been left like that.  

[The Stationmaster]

On 02/10/2019 at 10:40, DavidCBroad said:

Good answers above.     I believe the essential difference between a Mixed train a passenger with tail traffic is a Mixed has no vacuum brake on the goods wagons so has to have a brake van on the rear.,  I expect speeds had to be limited as per a similar part fitted freight, but many of the branches had a lower speed limit than an unfitted freight..    Tail traffic had to be vacuum fitted, with four wheel vehicles this usually limited the speed pf the train to 60 mph did not need a brake van on the back. I believe only XP rated wagons could run as tail traffic in BR days.

 

Coaching stock was either the same coaches for years like Culm Valley, or six different sets per day  (eight if you include the through trains) on the Kingham branch from Cheltenham.

 

Through coaches  and slip coaches (pre ww 2) were fascinating, as they seldom went straight back, often returning as part of a slow train when they arrived as part of an express, and not always by the same route.  I have a wild Swan book of GWR Carriage workings 1930 and though it just skims the surface it is very interesting. 

 

If you model a sleepy branch and have cash burning a hole in your pocket you could always buy several identical coaches and load them with different passengers to represent different services.   I am never likely to have that issue but I can always dream of winning Euro Millions, though that would need a miracle as I never buy a ticket

I must try to find my earlier (several years earlier) post regarding tail traffic as things changed a little over the years.  At all times in the post 1880 era tail traffic on passenger trains had to have vacuum brakes although in some instances piped vehicles could be used subject to various conditions but generally vehicles conveyed as tail traffic would be fitted with an operative automatic brake of the relevant type (i.e.  vacuum brake or Westinghouse brake) and tail traffic could be conveyed at either end of the passenger vehicles subject to various conditions and Instructions - for example in some cases it had to be marshalled next to the engine - but it was still called tail traffic.

 

Basically any passenger could convey tail traffic but - gradually changing over the years - many freight and NPCCS vehicles were subject to restrictions of speed and it gradually became teh case that some some trains were not permitted to convey 4 wheeled vehicles or 4 wheeled vehicles with a wheelbase under a particular - but you can forget that for branch lines where such restrictions were never applied except in respect of certain trains on lines such as the Kingswear branch.  The XP marking and relevant dimensional etc requirements were introduced in the late 1930s so well before BR days.

 

The essential recognition feature of a Mixed Train conveying freight vehicles was that there would be a freight brakevan at the rear of the wagons.  No freight brake on teh back then it isn't a Mixed Train so don't be misled by numerous incorrect photo captions where tail traffic has been credited as a Mixed Train.

On 02/10/2019 at 11:36, Miss Prism said:

The Marlow pic makes me wonder whether the train is actually a goods train, the autotrailer being present because staff couldn't be bothered to detach it from the loco. Understandable, bearing in mind the Marlow to Bourne End journey was a matter of a few minutes.

 

Because of the various restrictions on conveying long passenger vehicles in freight trains that photo is ptretty certainly one of a Mixed Train - particularly so bearing in mind that there were Auto Mixed Train workings on the Marlow Branch.

[The Stationmaster]

On 02/10/2019 at 16:16, The Johnster said:

Unfortunately the front of the loco is too out of focus to determine the position of the headlamp.  It is not in the smokebox top ordinary passenger position, but some branches allowed the use of the centre buffer beam bracket for autos.  A good number of droplights are open, which suggests the presence of passengers to me, but if the weather was dry they might have been left like that.  

You're not actually suggesting that someone on that branch would bother to change the lamo position are you?

[The Johnster]

Why, whatever are you suggesting, sir.  You’ll be saying that Sometimes they didn’t bother connecting the auto gear next... 

[DCB]

On 02/10/2019 at 11:36, Miss Prism said:

The Marlow pic makes me wonder whether the train is actually a goods train, the autotrailer being present because staff couldn't be bothered to detach it from the loco. Understandable, bearing in mind the Marlow to Bourne End journey was a matter of a few minutes.

 

It could be the coach was returning ECS as part of the goods.   Might be worth checking the timetable for two passengers inn the same direction without a return trip between.

Does anyone have a picture of a post GWR Railcar or DMU on a similar train?

[The Stationmaster]

19 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

It could be the coach was returning ECS as part of the goods.   Might be worth checking the timetable for two passengers inn the same direction without a return trip between.

Does anyone have a picture of a post GWR Railcar or DMU on a similar train?

DMUs would have been pretty hard pushed to work a Mixed Train as single power cars were limited to a tail load of 35 tons in the very best of circumstances so basically no more than one wagon and a brakevan.  Interestingly there were no Instructions in respects of DMUs working Mixed Trains - but there were Instructions for them taking tail traffic and the original letter issued in June 1957 is very restrictive in respect of tail traffic and the type of vehicles which were permitted to be conveyed.  These restrictions were later, some time in the early half of the 1960s, eased to a simple tonnage formula.  DMUs of course regularly conveyed tail traffic in the days when there was still plenty of it about.

 

As Mixed Trains were subject to the  normal Incline Instructions I cannot see how they could have worked with a diesel car on a steep gradient.  I can't incidentally find any Instruction which authorised GWR diesel cars to work Mixed Trains.

 

Incidentally the Marlow branch STT I have previously quoted detail from shows a light engine returning from Bourne End to Marlow after working the freight to Bourne End indicating that the trailer was not conveyed on the freight train (officially that is, what happened in practice is probably known only to those who were involved at the time).

[The Johnster]

35 tons is 6 tons short of a single fully loaded mineral and a 20ton brake van, bearing in mind that the collieries didn't like sending them out anything other than fully loaded, and by the time dmus were in service there wasn't that much 'mixed' unfitted traffic about besides minerals.  With almost everything else fitted and 'XP' rated, I imagine tail traffic was much more common than anything needing a brake van!

[dibber25]

Tetbury branch mixed trains lasted right into BR days and possibly right up until the introduction of railbuses, which could not haul tail traffic of any sort. When the mixed train was required to shunt wagons at Culkerton, presumably the carriage remained attached and any passengers remained on board. Calne branch passenger trains frequently had 'siphons' attached for Harris perishable traffic and  some of these worked through to/from places far as far afield as Newcastle. 'The Titfield Thunderbolt' contains some delightful mixed train scenes with a cattle van and an unfitted 'Toad' but there are elements of movie interpretation.  (CJL)

[The Stationmaster]

50 minutes ago, dibber25 said:

Tetbury branch mixed trains lasted right into BR days and possibly right up until the introduction of railbuses, which could not haul tail traffic of any sort. When the mixed train was required to shunt wagons at Culkerton, presumably the carriage remained attached and any passengers remained on board. Calne branch passenger trains frequently had 'siphons' attached for Harris perishable traffic and  some of these worked through to/from places far as far afield as Newcastle. 'The Titfield Thunderbolt' contains some delightful mixed train scenes with a cattle van and an unfitted 'Toad' but there are elements of movie interpretation.  (CJL)

It was permissible in some circumstances to shunt the wagons on a Mixed Train without detraining the passengers but in most cases it would have been required to detrain them to comply with the Regulations.  However Culkerton was a long way from officialdom   (It should be noted here that in much earlier times, judging by a lot of the correspondence sent to the station, the Stationmaster at Kemble seemed to have a knack of upsetting officialdom and was found wanting in the handling of a lost umbrella apart from other minor misdemeanours.)

 

Unfortunately I can't find any WTTs online for the Tetbury branch for the period 1951 - 1958 (inclusive) and of course the 1959 service is shown as diesel worked.  The 1950 WTT shows two Mixed Auto from Kemble to Tetbury daily plus one running daily and one SX only returning from Tetbury.  provided the traffic remained to justify the working I don't doubt that Mixed Trains would have lasted until either dieselisation or the end of freight traffic on the branch (there are no freights shown in the 1959 WTT).  As autotrailers were permitted to remain attached to the engine when shunting freight stock there would have been no need to detach it at Culkerton unless there were any particular restrictions in the sidings there.  The 1950 Tetbury branch WTT is at the bottom of this post.

 

 A good many years ago (obviously) I was travelling on a Bank Holiday Monday a DMU from Kingswear to Newton Abbot which attached a loaded Conflat at Churston having to shunt into the dock on the Up side to attach the Conflat.   The train was 'full & Standing' (and then some) from Kingswear so detraining the passengers was hardly practicable.  But arguably no Rules were broken by not detraining us while the shunt move was carried out.  Oddly the only two trains in mainland Britain on which I have travelled which conveyed freight vehicles as tail traffic were in both cases hauling loaded Conflats.   The other was on the Newquay branch and in that case the two Conflats certainly taxed the abilities of a 3 car set to get them up Luxulyan bank.

 

Edited October 7, 2019 by The Stationmaster

[dibber25]

Interesting to see that extract. Judging from the evidence of photographs, properly constituted autotrains were the exception rather than the rule on the Tetbury branch. I'm surprised to see them specified as autotrains but all too often, judging from photos, the branch train was either, an autocoach coupled to a non-auto-fitted loco such as a '57XX', or an old non-corridor coach not auto-fitted. Genuine, working autotrains seem to have been quite unusual. From memory, all shunting at Culkerton had to be by down trains (there being latterly at least, no loop there) the wagons then being taken through to the terminus. Fascinating to see just 4min allowed for this operation. (CJL)

Edited October 7, 2019 by dibber25

[The Johnster]

Photographic evidence of Abergwynfi also shows that auto trailers hauled by 57xx were not uncommon though the WTT specifies them as 'Rail Motor Trains'.  One colour photo on Wikipedia images shows 5756 hauling 3 trailers in crimson livery.  There was, AFAIK, little or no tail traffic here, general goods being sent to Cwmmer Afan only a mile away, and presumably Tondu was short of auto fitted locos.  

 

[The Stationmaster]

21 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Interesting to see that extract. Judging from the evidence of photographs, properly constituted autotrains were the exception rather than the rule on the Tetbury branch. I'm surprised to see them specified as autotrains but all too often, judging from photos, the branch train was either, an autocoach coupled to a non-auto-fitted loco such as a '57XX', or an old non-corridor coach not auto-fitted. Genuine, working autotrains seem to have been quite unusual. From memory, all shunting at Culkerton had to be by down trains (there being latterly at least, no loop there) the wagons then being taken through to the terminus. Fascinating to see just 4min allowed for this operation. (CJL)

And you'll note that the Down Mixed Train was allowed 11 minutes at Culkerton which supports the fact that it was serviced by Down trains.  interestingly the Down RR (Runs As Required) freight isn't even booked to call there.  Another oddity is that while the Up freight is booked to a time at the Stop Board the Up Mixed Trains are not although they are allowed extra time between Rodmarton and Kemble (and on other sections).   Mixed Trains were required to comply with the normal Instructions in respect of Stop Boards where wagons brakes needed to be applied.

[BWsTrains]

I came to this topic hoping to pick up some insights about the types of coaches (autocoaches aside) that would have been found on smaller West country Branchlines in the mid-1930s. I've seen various suggestions but none fit with the prototype info I've been able to dig out.

 

As I understand it B-Sets were mostly found in Suburban settings and rarely seen on rural branchlines. Collett 57' Bow ended non-corridor stock were normally operated in groupings of 4 / occasionally 3 coaches further East and North than the West country, again in suburban locales.

 

Sadly I don't have (and unlikely to get access to) any of the quoted reference books on GWR branchlines and so would appreciate any help in identifying suitable stock, my line would be running 1 or 2 coaches in mixed trains.

 

Colin

 

# edit - originally I though the Culm Valley line would be a suitable model, but that was not an important point.

 

Edited September 25, 2021 by BWsTrains

[Karhedron]

48 minutes ago, BWsTrains said:

As I understand it B-Sets were mostly found in Suburban settings and rarely seen on rural branchlines. Collett 57' Bow ended non-corridor stock were normally operated in groupings of 4 / occasionally 3 coaches further East and North than the West country, again in suburban locales.

 

On the contrary, B-sets were designed very much with branchline use in mind and were less common in suburban settings where higher capacity was often called for. A small Prairie or (less frequently) Pannier hauling a B-set was a staple of west-country branchlines.

 

Small Prairie’ 4569, in BR lined green brings a red ‘B’ set into Bodmin General in September 1958.

 

In the early 1950s, a 45xx small Prairie drifts into Wadebridge with Bodmin Branch No 2 set with a service from Bodmin General. The coaches (6977 + 6778) are diagram E140 and are still in their last GWR livery.

http://www.gwr.org.uk/venton/b-set-wadebridge.jpg

 

4582 leaving Avonwick 

 

 

 

A 4500 on a standard 'B set' approaches Nancegollan from Gwinear.

 

It was even possible to see small diesels like NBL class 22s hauling B-sets

http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/uploads/7/6/8/3/7683812/8719405_orig.jpg

 

It was

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, BWsTrains said:

I came to this topic hoping to pick up some insights about the types of coaches (autocoaches aside) that would have been found on smaller West country Branchlines in the mid-1930s. The Culm Valley line would be a suitable model. I've seen various suggestions but none fit with the prototype info I've been able to dig out.

 

The Culm valley light railway was delightful but definitely an oddball. It was an independently built light railway with very flimsy track and low line speed. This limited what locos and coaches could be run there, even thought it was operated by the GWR. If it had not been for the large dairy at Hemyock, it is doubtful it would have even survived until nationalisation. As such, it does not make a good example of a "typical" GWR branchline (if there even is such a thing).

 

If you are looking at the 1930s then Autocoaches and B-sets were the staple rolling stock on most west-country branchlines. Are you looking for models that are available ready-to-run or are you looking into kit-building? 

[D9020 Nimbus]

Perhaps worth mentioning that the prototypes of the Hawksworth auto coaches modelled by Bachmann and Farish were not actually introduced until after nationalisation. The GWR livery on these represents a preserved example.

[The Johnster]

I'd agree that the Culm Valley branch was pretty unusual in many respects, in some ways a passenger service tacked loosely on to the back of a creamery branch.  Auto working was not used here and single coach trains were adequate for the traffic, gas lit coaches being used because the low speeds and short distance provided insufficient dynamo speed to charge the batteries for electric lighting.  Barry Railway and ex-LNE stock was used.

 

Pre-Collett auto trailers were of two basic types (apart from being split into converted steam railmotors and purpose built trailers), according to layout, suburban and branch, the difference being that branch trailers had separate guard's accommodation and a small space for parcels and mail.  We associate auto trains and B sets with bucolic branches, and they certainly appeared in such places, but the bulk of auto work was main line suburban, and a good bit of B set work was on main line stopping trains.  B sets in the sense of a pair of semi-permanently coupled non-gangwayed BCs with the brake compartments at the outer ends were so described in the Bristol Division, and the term has passed into popular use among modellers, but other divisions used the term for different formations, so for instance a Birmingham Division B set was a 4 coach set BT/C/C/BT, and you can model it with the Hornby 57' Collett suburbans though other styles of similar coaches were used before these were built.  We all know what we mean by a B set, though the term would have been meaningless to many railwaymen in the way we mean it.

 

The modelling stereotype of a 'typical' bucolic West Countr GW branch line is to some extend a myth.  There were overall similarities between many of them, but many differences as well; very few were actually built by the GW or any of the big companies.  Typically, a local town would host a meeting of it's local business interests at which they all decided that 'we must get connected to these new-fangled railways so that we can sell our produce in the big cities', so they formed a local railway company and got an Act of Parliament passed to authorise it; this time next year, they were all going to be rich!  At this point the big railways would become aware of the matter, and, judging the moment at which financial reality hit and the scheme was running out of cash, would make the locals an offer they couldn't refuse; in fact sometimes competing big companies with geographical strategies might even compete and give you a slightly better price.  The big company would operate the railway for you and absorb your now failing company, which had wasted most of the capital it had raised on impressive station facilities to show that they were serious players, after all they could afford it, they were all going to be rich this time next year. 

 

Over time, the wealth of the locality was squandered on items brought in by the branch, and the dream was never realised, rural poverty worsening until the dawn of the modern dormitory village/second home era, neither were many of the branches ever profitable, though to be fair to the big companies they regarded them as loss leaders supplying profitable traffic to the main lines, even after nationalisation and up to the Beeching era, by which time matters were critical and something had to be done.  General merchandise goods traffic was overwhelminly inward, with very little being sent out to pay for it.  

 

But it all meant that GW branches were different in appearance, layout, and form, and in the 1930s the biodiversity of stock and locos being used on them was much greater than in post war years, the standard 48xx and auto trailer with a 45xx/B set at peak times/pickup goods would be supplemented by 2021s, 850s, the last of the steam railmotors, 517s, Metros, non-gangwayed clerestories.  There were different diagrams of B set coaches as well, some of which are available from Wizard as Comet kits.

[Kris]

The Kingsbridge branch had 2 "B" Sets allocated to it. I believe that this was also the case for St. Ives. 

[BWsTrains]

9 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

The Culm valley light railway was delightful but definitely an oddball. It was an independently built light railway with very flimsy track and low line speed. This limited what locos and coaches could be run there, even thought it was operated by the GWR. If it had not been for the large dairy at Hemyock, it is doubtful it would have even survived until nationalisation. As such, it does not make a good example of a "typical" GWR branchline (if there even is such a thing).

 

If you are looking at the 1930s then Autocoaches and B-sets were the staple rolling stock on most west-country branchlines. Are you looking for models that are available ready-to-run or are you looking into kit-building? 

 

Hi,

 

Thanks very much for all the useful input again. It does explain why I've often seen B-Sets in modeled settings.

 

As to Culm valley I take your point, my comment was specifically regarding situation, located off the mainline in Devon and the length. It does seem that Hemyock / Millhayes is one of the sleepier locales in the observable Universe! With hindsight the limited passenger volume made it a poor example to quote.

 

My setting in the same area will be based on a much more prosperous and busy albeit mythical market town supporting significant passenger and freight.

 

BTW It'll be only RTR coaches from now on so I might have a bit of a wait for a B-Set. Seems like Hornby have been working thru their range doing updates and B-Sets have not been reached. Will have to run a pair of old Clerestories in the meantime and Autocoach services of course.

 

Edited September 16, 2021 by BWsTrains
addition

[BWsTrains]

7 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The modelling stereotype of a 'typical' bucolic West Country GW branch line is to some extend a myth.  There were overall similarities between many of them, but many differences as well; very few were actually built by the GW or any of the big companies.  Typically, a local town would host a meeting of it's local business interests at which they all decided that 'we must get connected to these new-fangled railways so that we can sell our produce in the big cities', so they formed a local railway company and got an Act of Parliament passed to authorise it; this time next year, they were all going to be rich!  At this point the big railways would become aware of the matter, and, judging the moment at which financial reality hit and the scheme was running out of cash, would make the locals an offer they couldn't refuse; in fact sometimes competing big companies with geographical strategies might even compete and give you a slightly better price.  The big company would operate the railway for you and absorb your now failing company, which had wasted most of the capital it had raised on impressive station facilities to show that they were serious players, after all they could afford it, they were all going to be rich this time next year. 

 

Over time, the wealth of the locality was squandered on items brought in by the branch, and the dream was never realised, rural poverty worsening until the dawn of the modern dormitory village/second home era, neither were many of the branches ever profitable, though to be fair to the big companies they regarded them as loss leaders supplying profitable traffic to the main lines, even after nationalisation and up to the Beeching era, by which time matters were critical and something had to be done.  General merchandise goods traffic was overwhelmingly inward, with very little being sent out to pay for it.  

 

Thx Johnster for your input.

 

I loved the quoted section, we've been following "Walking Britain's Lost railways" and your story was repeated over and over. There was one branch in Scotland where the locals were fully behind it as an investment and it became an enduring success, Finlarig as I recall.

[The Johnster]

38 minutes ago, BWsTrains said:

 

BTW It'll be only RTR coaches from now on so I might have a bit of a wait for a B-Set. Seems like Hornby have been working thru their range doing updates and B-Sets have not been reached. Will have to run a pair of old Clerestories in the meantime and Autocoach services

Plenty of the Airfix/Hornby B sets on eBay, and not too expensive.  They are showing their age a bit now but can be worked up to a greater or lesser extent; painting the interior and replacing the buffers with better cast whitemetal retrofits will lift them considerably and is not difficult.  eBay sometimes has the ancient Keyser plastic construction kit E116 flat ended B sets, usually made up.  With the addition of a floor and interior, and similar embellishments such as new buffers, these too can be made into reasonably acceptable models.  Also from Keyser and occasionally available is the A31 auto trailer, a whitemetal kit, again usually made up, but very heavy.  It also needs working up with a floor and interior, but if you can find one that has been put together reasonably neatly it is not the worst model ever made, for all it's 70 year old credentials, and with detailing can be made into something worthwhile.  The worst feature is the thickness of the body sides.

 

It is a moot point as to whether Hornby will eventually release new toolings to better current standards for the A30 auto trailer and the B set, after all the current release of the A30 is basically the same as the decades old Airfix model, though it does have better wheels.  They are probably happy with the sales for it and find it more profitable than the situation in which the sales have to defray the cost of a new tooling.  They recently re-issued the 'shorty' clerestories, 1961 models, still with the wrong bogies and no interior detail, on this basis.  If this is the case you will be no worse off sourcing the coaches on eBay.  Check that the auto trailers have all their buffers and ventilators, though, as these tend to go missing!

 

Locos are a problem in the case of the 48xx 0-4-2T, which has proved a difficult thing for RTR producers to get right.  The old Airfix is still the body tooling used by Hornby, but the mechanism has been updated, because the old Airfix mech tended to run into problems with it's sprung plunger pickups sticking.  But the updated mech has had problems too, as has the mech of the short-lived DJM 48xx.  It is difficult to get the balance of a rigid 0-4-2 chassis right; the answer is full compensation but this is unlikley to be featured on an RTR model for cost reasons. 

 

Bachmann locos are a better bet, much more reliable, and 64xx auto, 45xx, and 4575, though the 4575 is not really a branch line loco.  The 64xx was not introduced until 1932, but fortunately the Bachmann model represents the earlier batch.