BR MK1 - Corridor vs. Open

[Derekl]

The Brighton line 4 CIG units (or class 421) had three first class compartments in the driving trailers plus a single standard class (if I remember correctly). They were withdrawn in 1993.

[cheesysmith]

North of the river the 305 emu which had a trailer coach added from a 302 (compartment with side corridor) lasted well into NSE days.

 

Without looking at the books, there was some old Mk2 use around manchester but as to compartment or opens?

[cheesysmith]

Remember open coaches have been around in general use, not just for diners, longer that people think. The LMS built them as they were lighter so made good use of the lower powered locos they inherited, but they called them vestibule stock.

[Rivercider]

Many years ago I read a book from the local library about railway crime and murders, though I cannot recall the title.

 

One incident recounted was of a man travelling alone in compartment stock to or from Slough (I think). He was joined by another passenger in an agitated state, who then attacked him and he fought for his life, and I think survived.

I believe the other passenger was an escaped prisoner.

One outcome of the incident was to knock through an unglazed 'window' opening between each compartment to make the coaches more open. These openings were named 'Lows (or Lowes) lights, after the victim of the attack.

However I have never been able to find the book or incident again.

 

cheers

[Nearholmer]

55 minutes ago, Derekl said:

The Brighton line 4 CIG units (or class 421) had three first class compartments in the driving trailers plus a single standard class (if I remember correctly). They were withdrawn in 1993.

The refurbished CEPs still had corridor first class I think, and they lasted until c2005, but I’m not claiming they were the last, just the last I recall off the top of my head.

[EddieK]

When I worked for a well known heritage railway in North Yorkshire, the consensus from the Board was that compartment stock was the work of the devil. It was perceived that TSOs were more likely to be fully occupied and allow 64 people to be seated. If a couple boarded the train and found a compartment already occupied by a family of four, they would be more likely to move on and sit elsewhere, while if this couple found a table of four in a TSO where two seats were already occupied, they would be more disposed to sitting in the two vacant seats. 

In the Covid world, I suspect it may have been a different story. The 2x SK that had been on loan to another railway were claimed back....

[EddieK]

On Midland Main Line in the early 1980s, I recall that the six seater compartments in SKs used on commuter trains had their armrests sewn up and the seat numbers on the wall above were renumbered so as to give eight seats in each compartment.

[caradoc]

16 hours ago, The Johnster said:

A major backwards step of mk3s and every coach design since, as was 'airliner' face-to-seatback seating.  Discomfort for the sake of operator profit; the second class 8 window per side shell shell should have been ths standard, first class patrons do office work and don't need windows to look out of. 

 

I would have agreed with the negative view of seats not aligning with windows (which, let's not forget, started with BR in Mark 3 TSOs, and also EMU types such as 313/314 etc), until my last trip on an early morning Oxford-Worcester service (en route to the SVR); Despite having almost the entire coach to choose from a fellow passenger sat in a seat with no window at all ! (He was, of course, using an electronic device for the entire journey). 

 

3 hours ago, ikcdab said:

I actually much prefer the airline type seating on a train. You can make the area your own and you are not risking being seated at a table opposite someone with undesirable characteristics.

 

So do I ! Unless the train is particularly busy with every seat taken, you are guaranteed a degree of privacy. 

 

The benefit of compartments does of course depend on who you end up sharing one with; As teenage trainspotters we used to start fighting at station stops, to dissuade anyone from invading us. But in the right circumstances they were wonderful; En route overnight to Inverness in 1979, for my first Freedom of Scotland Rover (First Class), I left Euston in a late-build Mark 1 TSO with lighting so bright the Gestapo would have hesitated to use it for interrogations. At Carlisle my Rover became valid and I transferred to an empty compartment in a Mark 1 FK - Heaven !

 

 

[Wheatley]

3 hours ago, ikcdab said:

I actually much prefer the airline type seating on a train. You can make the area your own and you are not risking being seated at a table opposite someone with undesirable characteristics. And on occasions I have deliberately selected one without a window if I needed to sleep. So here is a vote for modern layouts.

Ditto. No playing footsy with the person opposite, and you can (usually) stretch your feet out a bit under the seat in front. I always look for or ask for airline seats.

 

But then I'm generally anti-social.. 

[russ p]

The loco hauled transpennine services had a mk2 FK until 91

I remember Christmas 1990 there were additional Xmas shopper trains from York to kings Cross made up of blue and grey mk1 SKs and BSKs hauled by 91s blunt end first from York 

[EddieK]

Further to my above comments, I recall my ride on a train excursion almost exactly 40 years ago. It was a BR (Merrymaker??) excursion that I joined at St Albans to go to Chester. It utilised a rake of Mark 1 stock that would presumably be used on commuter services, so the compartment armrests were sewn up and compartments seated 8. 

My booked seat was in such a compartment, but my fellow occupants were a family (?) group of about six, and I felt slightly uncomfortable to be within *their* territory. I ventured down th train and found an empty TSO, where I took a seat. At every subsequent pick-up stop, I nervously awaited the hordes about to board my TSO, but none appeared. The result was a comfortable day out, in my "own" (massive) space.

[Fat Controller]

6 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

The refurbished CEPs still had corridor first class I think, and they lasted until c2005, but I’m not claiming they were the last, just the last I recall off the top of my head.

They also had a six-seater second class compartment; the card school and wine tasting group used to meet there on my wife's train from CX on Friday evenings.

[Derekl]

3 hours ago, EddieK said:

It utilised a rake of Mark 1 stock that would presumably be used on commuter services, so the compartment armrests were sewn up and compartments seated 8. 

 

Parkin says that the Mk1 SKs (which were TKs until 1956, when third class was abolished) were designed with compartments seating 6 with armrests down and 8 with armrests up. Reservation numbers were on the basis of 3 a side, 6 in the compartment. The initial stock had notices asking that the armrests be lifted to seat 4 a side in crowded conditions. This was apparently not very effective (that is a surprise), but in any event,  the Southern and Western regions wanted the stock to seat 4 a side as routine as they anticipated loads that would require it. Stock for those regions were 4 a side or 8 per compartment without armrests, reservation numbers being based on 4 a side. This started to get problematic when stock was transferred between regions, so all TK/SKs had the armrests removed or sewn up into the up position.

[Bulleidnutter]

The other thing to remember is the Western region removed the arm rests in the SKs to make them 8 seater compartments not 6. WR SKs had a 64 seater capacity versus the normal 48.

[Nearholmer]

Not just WR I think. I’m pretty sure that any second compartments in loco hauled coaches normally used for commuter services had the seats trimmed as plain benches for four people each side when I commuted in them in 70s-80s, first on the southern, then on LM.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Grimly Feendish]

Non-corridor compartments were useful for courting couples, if you could get one to yourselves. I have happy memories of the 23:57 (IIRC) from London Liverpool Street which the now Mrs Feendish and I caught to Upminster. This would have been in the early-eighties.

 

I can't say more on a family site.

 

 

[Michael Hodgson]

22 minutes ago, Grimly Feendish said:

Non-corridor compartments were useful for courting couples, if you could get one to yourselves. I have happy memories of the 23:57 (IIRC) from London Liverpool Street which the now Mrs Feendish and I caught to Upminster. This would have been in the early-eighties.

 

I can't say more on a family site.

 

 

I have heard signalmen on that line talking about late night services where they could see those sort of goings on as they passed 

[The Evil Bus Driver]

10 hours ago, ikcdab said:

I actually much prefer the airline type seating on a train. You can make the area your own and you are not risking being seated at a table opposite someone with undesirable characteristics. And on occasions I have deliberately selected one without a window if I needed to sleep. So here is a vote for modern layouts.

I'm the opposite. I get queasy if I can't see out so I always get a table so i get legroom and to avoid it coming through the gap in the seats and the occupier getting a sticky earful. It's the same reason I never use the rear facing seats at the back of a bus.

[Pete the Elaner]

9 minutes ago, The Evil Bus Driver said:

I'm the opposite. I get queasy if I can't see out so I always get a table so i get legroom and to avoid it coming through the gap in the seats and the occupier getting a sticky earful. It's the same reason I never use the rear facing seats at the back of a bus.

 

That wouldn't have been immediately pre-Covid then. You would need to be very lucky to get a table seat on most services.

The choice was to grab the first available seat (if there are any at all) or stand.

 

Does anyone remember the hi-density Mk2F TSOs? They started life as FOs before being de-classified, then were later refitted with aircraft seating layout. They were easy to spot because they kept their 7 windows a side. They had 74 seats, compared to the 72 in a Mk3A TSO with aircraft style seating layout. had 72. Being 10' shorter than a Mk3A, they were extremely cramped.

[russ p]

4 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

That wouldn't have been immediately pre-Covid then. You would need to be very lucky to get a table seat on most services.

The choice was to grab the first available seat (if there are any at all) or stand.

 

Does anyone remember the hi-density Mk2F TSOs? They started life as FOs before being de-classified, then were later refitted with aircraft seating layout. They were easy to spot because they kept their 7 windows a side. They had 74 seats, compared to the 72 in a Mk3A TSO with aircraft style seating layout. had 72. Being 10' shorter than a Mk3A, they were extremely cramped.

 

The high density TSOs ended up on Anglia they may have been cramped but oh what I would give for one of those in the morning when I go to London rather than an awful stadler unit!

[Pete the Elaner]

1 minute ago, russ p said:

 

The high density TSOs ended up on Anglia they may have been cramped but oh what I would give for one of those in the morning when I go to London rather than an awful stadler unit!

 

I remember them on Anglia services. I used the other carriages on my commute until I moved.

I remember there were 2 per set, usually coupled together & 1 of them was the smoking carriage.

[Edwin_m]

On 27/03/2021 at 19:12, The Johnster said:

A major backwards step of mk3s and every coach design since, as was 'airliner' face-to-seatback seating.  Discomfort for the sake of operator profit; the second class 8 window per side shell shell should have been ths standard, first class patrons do office work and don't need windows to look out of. 

The original Mk3 Seconds had four face-to-back seats each side of the central partition, facing away from each other.  There would have been much better alignment with the windows, with no loss of seating, if these had been at one quarter and three quarters of the way along the saloon.  

 

However one of the other innovations with the Mk3s was attaching the seats to tracks on the floor (I think the later Mk2s did it too).  So they could be, and were, re-spaced to increase capacity, so even if they'd been aligned initially they wouldn't have been later on.  

[Compound2632]

1. The last BR compartment I travelled in was the end downgraded first in the driving trailer of a 4-VEP - c. 1999 on the Reading-Waterloo service.
2. The last BR loco-hauled compartment I travelled in was in a BCK on a Birmingham-Bournemouth train in the summer of 1984.
3. My other half travelled in a non-corridor compartment multiple unit in October 1994, on her way to visit her sister and new-born niece in Greenwich, coming from Oxford via Paddington - so presumably from Charing Cross? What would that have been?

[Nearholmer]

3. Would have been an EPB.

[Nearholmer]

A lot of thought about the retro-ness of some loco hauled stock in this thread, but we should spare a thought for EMUs, and I would nominate the driving trailer composites in the early design of 2-HAP. They were pretty much pure Southern Railway in ambience, and if put behind a steam loco on a preserved railway nobody would suspect that they weren’t, yet they were built in the late 1950s and in service into the 1980s.

 

And, we had real, genuine SR coaches in the form of CORs and BILs in the early 1970s.

 

The 2H and 3H DEMUs had weirdly retro features too; were any of the zillions of classes of DMMU/DHMU particularly old-school? The ones I came across always seemed to exude failed-1950s-modernity more than style.