“Illiterate “symbols

[Regularity]

The only sure solution is to find dated photos or records at your chosen location, and failing that, find the nearest (in both senses) information you can on which to base your conclusions, bearing in mind that company loyalty might incline foreman to use their own companies wagon if everything else was equal, particularly on the GWR where they had a higher opinion of their wagons, particularly those with sheet rails.

 

The rest of theme, as with logos/emblems/illiterate markers, we are going to he having these same circular discussions time and again.

[kevinlms]

12 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

 

So I agree. But then who were any of these markings, symbols or letters, for? Still an unanswered question...

 

 

It would be truer to say that the NB painted the letters either side of the quatrefoil, since the latter was in use for many years before the letters started to be used, c. 1892. The same goes for the LNWR diamonds (lettering introduced 1908, diamonds discontinued 1912) and NSR (large NS introduced when? replacing the early style of 6" N.S.R [knot] 6" number).

Those comments do indicate that the LNWR diamonds (and other companies versions too) were in fact not for 'illiterate' purposes at all.

Earlier in this thread we have discussed and basically agreed that 'railway employees were required to be able to read & write', at least to basic levels. So, in the case of a goods guard he would most certainly have to do so, to carry out his duties.

 

But LNWR goods stock generally carried the diamonds only until 1908, lettering in addition from 1908 and diamonds eliminated from 1912. This included LNWR goods brake vans, so what was the need for diamonds on these vehicles, if the guard and every other employee that needed to know could read, why?

The diamonds weren't there to identify brake vans to non railway employees, such as other people working in goods yards, as they had no business to touch them.

 

So the only conclusion is that, it was a logo and nothing to do with literacy.

 

There is photographic evidence around, that shows brake vans around with just diamonds. So where did the idea come from that any of these symbols were for literacy purposes? Railway press years later?

[Poggy1165]

Was the British Rail double arrow thing an illiteracy mark?

 

Thinking about it, why did BR put ownership markings on its loco and coaches, when for all practical purposes the entire fleet was owned by BR? Could have saved an awful lot of paint/transfers.

[Regularity]

No, the double arrows was definitely designed to be a modern logo, showing double tracks with arrows denoting travel there and back, intertwined to show a trailing crossover and trailing points, and more generally just trackwork. It’s a very clever piece of work, when you look at the parts and the sum of the parts, and inspired other logos elsewhere.

As to why it was necessary to show ownership, well, it’s debatable I suppose, but initially it was to make a clear statement that the railways were no longer private companies, but belonged to the nation.

The arrows of indecision was adopted not to show ownership, but to create a unifying image for rail as opposed to road or air transport. (And used to show vestigial control over connecting ferry services in Sealink.)

The fact that it is still in use to denote railway facilities shows how effective it is.

[kevinlms]

11 minutes ago, Regularity said:

No, the double arrows was definitely designed to be a modern logo, showing double tracks with arrows denoting travel there and back, intertwined to show a trailing crossover and trailing points, and more generally just trackwork. It’s a very clever piece of work, when you look at the parts and the sum of the parts, and inspired other logos elsewhere.

As to why it was necessary to show ownership, well, it’s debatable I suppose, but initially it was to make a clear statement that the railways were no longer private companies, but belonged to the nation.

The arrows of indecision was adopted not to show ownership, but to create a unifying image for rail as opposed to road or air transport. (And used to show vestigial control over connecting ferry services in Sealink.)

The fact that it is still in use to denote railway facilities shows how effective it is.

The same way that the symbol for an open railway level crossing, usually depicts a STEAM locomotive, even though they haven't been in daily use for over 50 years!

[sulzer27jd]

1 hour ago, Regularity said:

No, the double arrows was definitely designed to be a modern logo, s

Very much a leader in what would now be described as corporate image. The same logo was (and to some extent still is) used throughout the railway, on equipment, on buildings, on paperwork and throughout advertising and promotion. To the point where if you show the symbol to most people they will instantly recognise it is something to do with railways. During the recent upgrade of Haymarket station in Edinburgh the logo was cleverly set into a galvanised metal screen, followed even more recently with its use on Glasgow Queen Street refurbishment, these uses confirm that is still very much intrinsically linked to the railway system.

 

It may, at least in terms of the UK, be one of the most successful logos ever.

Edited November 4, 2020 by sulzer27jd