Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Most organisations numbered their horses as well as giving them names.

 

They would either be  branded on their rump ( like on the cowboy films) or they would be branded on a hoof.

 

Numbering horses makes it much eaiser for the bean counters to run statistics checks.  There would always be lots of "Dukes" and "Queenies" and possible a "Herculese" or two around he network, , but a numbering system makes accounting and stock checks much easier.

 

Palominos and coloureds ( 2 or 3 tone) were not common "in service" which leaves greys, brown (bays and duns etc) and blacks.

 

My educated guess is that 2020 if the number was allocated, it would probably be a brown of the Suffolk Punch style - for drawing a heavy goods cart or shunting.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
4 hours ago, M.I.B said:

Most organisations numbered their horses as well as giving them names.

 

They would either be  branded on their rump ( like on the cowboy films) or they would be branded on a hoof.

 

Numbering horses makes it much eaiser for the bean counters to run statistics checks.  There would always be lots of "Dukes" and "Queenies" and possible a "Herculese" or two around he network, , but a numbering system makes accounting and stock checks much easier.

 

Palominos and coloureds ( 2 or 3 tone) were not common "in service" which leaves greys, brown (bays and duns etc) and blacks.

 

My educated guess is that 2020 if the number was allocated, it would probably be a brown of the Suffolk Punch style - for drawing a heavy goods cart or shunting.

 

You're right. Atkins says, "Every horse was known by a number branded on the offside forehoof [snip]. The number was shown on a card above each stall in the stables". He says that a "roan mare" (?) purchased in 1917 was numbered 1859. She was the oldest horse in service in Sept 1936.

 

He also says that circa 1900 the most common type of horse across the GW was known as a London Van Horse. Lighter than a shire, more active and suited to town roads. Heavy dray horses were also much used, of course.

 

 

BTW: I think there is another GWR 2020 to be had because the horse-drawn vehicles were in a different numbering sequence to the "mechanically-propelled" vehicles.

 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Harlequin said:

 

I think there is another GWR 2020 to be had 

 

 

Did staff have payroll numbers?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

20 hours ago, richbrummitt said:

Wagon 2020 would be something 19th century and probably pre-diagram book. Open of <4 planks would be the favourite for me, though it could just as easily be a roof less cattle wagon or brake van.

 

19 hours ago, JimC said:

Statistically by far the .ost likely is the open because there were so many more of them.

 

 

Atkins p31:

 

S4 (Tadpole) 6w open fish truck osL420 built 1887/8 ... some rebuilt to 8ton vans 2009-44.

 

There must have been an earlier use of the number though.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, richbrummitt said:

Atkins p31:

 

S4 (Tadpole) 6w open fish truck osL420 built 1887/8 ... some rebuilt to 8ton vans 2009-44.

 

There must have been an earlier use of the number though.

 

Bingo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amusing though this thread has been and To cheer you all up !

Having nearly note nearly ! found all this years versions

you all have a nearly full year to think and find pictures for 2021 in all its forms

plenty off thinking / research   time but no posting until 2021

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Graham456 said:

Amusing though this thread has been and To cheer you all up !

Having nearly note nearly ! found all this years versions

you all have a nearly full year to think and find pictures for 2021 in all its forms

plenty off thinking / research   time but no posting until 2021

 

Aha!

 

I was just about to post that I found a picture in RWA of a milk tank to dia. O35 bearing running number 2021. Some of the captions include the range of numbers for a lot but this one doesn't. However, given the number of other milk tanks with numbers in the low 2000s that 2020 was probably also a milk tank to, possibly, dia. O35. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, richbrummitt said:

 

Aha!

 

I was just about to post that I found a picture in RWA of a milk tank to dia. O35 bearing running number 2021. Some of the captions include the range of numbers for a lot but this one doesn't. However, given the number of other milk tanks with numbers in the low 2000s that 2020 was probably also a milk tank to, possibly, dia. O35. 

 

... taking the numbers of withdrawn tadpoles, it would appear.

 

How come milk tank diagrams are in the open wagon series?

Edited by Compound2632

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

... taking the numbers of withdrawn tadpoles, it would appear.

 

How come milk tank diagrams are in the open wagon series?

 

They're considered as coaches when it comes to diagrams where O means milk vehicles i.e. siphons and tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, richbrummitt said:

 

They're considered as coaches when it comes to diagrams where O means milk vehicles i.e. siphons and tanks.

 

 OK. Were they in a separate NPCS number list or is this 2020 a replacement for the carriage with which @Penrhos1920 opened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 OK. Were they in a separate NPCS number list or is this 2020 a replacement for the carriage with which @Penrhos1920 opened?

 

NPCCS were in the passenger diagram series. Penrhos' old 2020 coach had probably disappeared or had been renumbered (1907?) by the time the S4 6-wheeler fish trucks were transferred into the passenger stock lists (in WWI). These in turn had disappeared by the time the Hawksworth C83 diagram coach (which also had a 2020) appeared in BR times. (see https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrbsh2540.htm)

 

I don't think there was a milk tanker 2020, but that would throw a spanner in the works!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 6 wheel coach 2020 survived into the 1930s.

 

Tadpole 2020, although given a passenger diagram, was NPCCS and in a different number series to coaches and wagons.  Also in the NPCCS number series were siphons and passenger brake vans.

 

Has anyone got or seen a GWR pay check disc with number 2020 ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right: NPCCS had a different number series. I had forgotten. My mistake.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the drivers have 20/20 vision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 57xx said:

Did the drivers have 20/20 vision?

 

They certainly did.  They were tested for colour vision by sorting a box of coloured wools.  Russell describes the test it one of his reminiscent books.

  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/01/2020 at 23:01, Penrhos1920 said:

 

They certainly did.  They were tested for colour vision by sorting a box of coloured wools.  Russell describes the test it one of his reminiscent books.

And in his books Harold Gasson remembers when he took his test who after thousands of trainees over the years all were a variation of shades of coal dust black!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.