AberdeenBill Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 Hi all, After my nonsense re the number of the ex-LNWR cinema coach, let's try again... How many cases of a "mismatched" regional prefix and design suffix actually occurred on coaches? Here are a few to get us started, but please add your own examples: W xxxx S various Bulleid coaches Sc xxxxx S Bulleid coaches E xxxx S Bulleid coaches W xxxxx E Gresley buffets S xxxxx E Gresley buffets Sc xxxxx W GWR-design passenger fish vans W xxxx M LMS-design CCTs Did any coaches bear a mismatched prefix and suffix from new? Thanks, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 On a related topic, I've often wondered why class 506 Manchester-Hadfield units were numbered MxxxxxM when surely there were a LNER design. Surely this one should have been a mismatched prefix and suffix? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewartingram Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 They couldn't have had mismatch from new. The numbering system was that the coach number was prefixed by its allocated region. If the design was from another, and the coach was cared for back on that region, the suffix denoted that. So, E(Bulleid)S was a Bulleid coach (Southern Railway, later BR Southern Region), re-allocated off region to the Eastern (prefix E), but major spares/maintenance sourced via the Southern region (S suffix). This only applied (in theory at least) to pre-nationalisation designs, which would not have been off region when new. After BR happenned, and they got moved, was when the mis-matches occurred. BR coaches of course had no suffix. Then of course there are the exceptions - as always - such as the506 units, or the Newton car carriers on the ER. Stewart Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 Surely the purpose of the suffix was simply to identify which of the "big 4" number series the coach was numbered in, to avoid duplicated numbers? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 Hi all, After my nonsense re the number of the ex-LNWR cinema coach, let's try again... How many cases of a "mismatched" regional prefix and design suffix actually occurred on coaches? Here are a few to get us started, but please add your own examples: W xxxx S various Bulleid coaches Sc xxxxx S Bulleid coaches E xxxx S Bulleid coaches W xxxxx E Gresley buffets S xxxxx E Gresley buffets Sc xxxxx W GWR-design passenger fish vans W xxxx M LMS-design CCTs Did any coaches bear a mismatched prefix and suffix from new? Thanks, Bill It gets even more confusing. Some of the LMS-designed Dia 2026 CCTs were actually built at Swindon.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Bird Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 On a related topic, I've often wondered why class 506 Manchester-Hadfield units were numbered MxxxxxM when surely there were a LNER design. Surely this one should have been a mismatched prefix and suffix? I agree that the numbering of these units was odd. Their counterparts on the Great Easterm didn't carry suffixes although they were prefixed GE for quite a long time! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisf Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 The suffix was introduced in 1952 for pre-nationalisation designs and BR standard coaches were not supposed to carry it but some did until the error was noticed and the offending letters painted out. It took a while for coaches to go through shops and there was at least one Hawksworth suburban still running around in 1956 with its number at the left hand end and minus the W suffix. More misfits - it seems that the BR built Fruit Ds, W92xxx, acquired W suffixes. I'm not at all sure that they should have done. Then there were the 80 suburban composites numbered MxxxxxW. These were built at Swindon for the London Midland Region after nationalisation to a 1937 GW design, diagram E156. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 They couldn't have had mismatch from new. Yes, they could: M16870W by robertcwp, on Flickr These were carriages built by BR at Swindon to a GWR design and allocated from new to the LMR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiDAS Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 Hi All I understood the first letter denoted originating region and the final the region responsible for maintenance. Ie a LMS coach used onthe western M******W Terry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
talisman56 Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 Hi All I understood the first letter denoted originating region and the final the region responsible for maintenance. Ie a LMS coach used onthe western M******W Terry My understanding of the numbering of the pre-nationalisation coaches was the prefix is the region the vehicle is allocated to and the suffix is the originating design company. I cannot think that the Bulleids swapped for Mark 1s to facilitate the Bournemouth electrification conversions would still be maintained by the Southern Region, especially the ones that found themselves on services to Inverness and Wick... The construction of the coach number (to use the example in your ie): M(used by BR(LMR))*****W(GWR design). The Bulleid SOs transferred away from the Southern Region retained the same numbers but the first letter was changed to suit the region transferred to: 1467/69/70/72/74/86/91/99/505 were S****S and became E****S 1466/71/79/82/84/89/95/98/500/02/04 were S****S and became Sc****S Some of these were repainted into lined Maroon and the new prefixes applied before transfer. Other 'mixed' coach numbers were found on the Bulleid vehicles transferred to the WR due to regional boundary changes in 1963/64, BSK 4307-09/11/12/17-20/27-32/39/40/54 and BCK 6714-17/19/26/38/42/46 changing to W****S. At least two of the BCKs (6716/19) received lined Maroon livery at Swindon in 1964. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium keefer Posted June 30, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 30, 2013 as talisman says, i'm sure in BR days the suffix denoted the pre-nat built (or designed) stock further examples being the gresley/thompson buffets e.g. ExxxxE, WxxxxE or SCxxxxE BR itself further confused matters from the '60s when certain stock designed and built by/for BR were given suffixes, but this seemed to be a way of designating certain stock as somehow 'non-standard' e.g. prototype GRP suburban S10000S, the newton-chambers TCVs ExxxxxE etc. this also applied to the met-camm pullmans for the ECML which were E3xxE - although arguably a mk1 design Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.