RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted March 4, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 4, 2015 Railways never cease to interest me. This topic is a good example of the kind of background activity and matters to be considered that are not immediately obvious when watching a train go past. Fascinating thread to read. Thanks to Black Sheep for asking the question. Edit for typo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted March 4, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 4, 2015 Having read all these posts it has certainly given me some thoughts about how I will handle Horse Box traffic on Lancaster Green Ayre. We have the horse dock which is a trailing bay off the down platform with a cover over it. The cover is being made. I have also got two horseboxes complete and three more kits to build for some more. It should be an easy move to detch them from the front of down trains and the train engine can then deposit them in the dock and reattach to the train. I'm not sure about the return working though. I'm thinking of getting the station pilot to pick them out of the dock and then propel them through the station and back to the fiddle yard where they will have to be manually put back into the nest down passenger. Alternatively I could have the pilot attach the box to the rear of an up train in the station. Jamie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 4, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 4, 2015 Having read all these posts it has certainly given me some thoughts about how I will handle Horse Box traffic on Lancaster Green Ayre. We have the horse dock which is a trailing bay off the down platform with a cover over it. The cover is being made. I have also got two horseboxes complete and three more kits to build for some more. It should be an easy move to detch them from the front of down trains and the train engine can then deposit them in the dock and reattach to the train. I'm not sure about the return working though. I'm thinking of getting the station pilot to pick them out of the dock and then propel them through the station and back to the fiddle yard where they will have to be manually put back into the nest down passenger. Alternatively I could have the pilot attach the box to the rear of an up train in the station. Jamie If they are worked in then presumably they would also be worked out - although not necessarily back the way they came (always something to remember with vehicles such as this is that they would be sent where they were next needed or to a station/yard where they would be held waiting order for the next loaded movement. However if they were 'foreign' vehicles they would be returned as quickly as possible to the owning Company via the shortest suitable route - so if they happen to be, say, LNWR vehicles they would be sent up the hill and round the corner at first opportunity after unloading). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted March 4, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 4, 2015 If they are worked in then presumably they would also be worked out - although not necessarily back the way they came (always something to remember with vehicles such as this is that they would be sent where they were next needed or to a station/yard where they would be held waiting order for the next loaded movement. However if they were 'foreign' vehicles they would be returned as quickly as possible to the owning Company via the shortest suitable route - so if they happen to be, say, LNWR vehicles they would be sent up the hill and round the corner at first opportunity after unloading). Thanks for that Mike that's very helpful. At lest some of the boxes will be 'foreign' in early LMS days but the idea of a working up the Castle branch appeals as it would be vry easy to do. We'd then have to do a 'hand of God' transfer to the main fiddle yard. Jamie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Sheep Posted March 10, 2015 Author Share Posted March 10, 2015 Is that actually the case? I've seen it suggested (by ex-railwaymen, whom I wouldn't presume to contradict) that the instruction actually states that such vehicles must be placed in the position in the train which will incur the least shunting. That may be directly behind the locomotive, but not in all cases, surely. On a passenger train it's not so much the couplings (likely to be screw) as the whip effect of a short vehicle on the back going through a set of points changing lines. The loco will have crossed at a slower speed, say 25mph but the loco might be 100 meters in front of the end of the train and now accelerating to line speed, the tail of the train might go through the points at 40mph+ creating a whipping effect for a short vehicle, not good for a horse and as already said, could knock a guard from his feet. 6 wheeled vehicles weren't as affected hence milk tankers and the LMS stove. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium keefer Posted March 10, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 10, 2015 In that case, surely the driver should make sure that the whole train has passed through the restriction properly before accelerating? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 10, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2015 In that case, surely the driver should make sure that the whole train has passed through the restriction properly before accelerating? That was exactly what he was supposed to do! Anyway as far as the position of 4 wheel vehicles in passenger trains is concerned I have already posted the Instructions which were in force for many years - wheelbase less than 15 feet (and more than 10 feet) they should go on the rear of the train (unless for operationeal reasons they were marshalled extreme front - quite likely with horseboxes as they might well be attached or detached at an intermediate station). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmrspaul Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I have discussed livestock regs elsewhere (eg HMRS yahoo forum). BR had an entire booklet of instruction. Details such as a tarpaulin over a cattle wagon varied according to date of year and livestock being carried. One feature which makes for interest on a model is that loaded the movement during shunting must be minimised - try it with a pickup goods with livestock in the consist. One reason to group them near the front if other wagons are attaching and detaching at the rear. Last time I saw a presumably loaded HB was in 1969, at the front of an express going hell for leather thru Berkhamsted, electric hauled of course. I did see a complete HB train being loaded at Waterloo. A bit special as it was the Canadian Mounties off to Windsor for the horse show. The maroon HBs stood out in a very green Waterloo. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinT Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 An interesting photo of Dulverton has recently popped up on ebay. Dated 21 August 1937 it is from the SLS collection (16326) & can be found from this ebay link:http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/351343467648?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2648&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT Taken from the Barnstaple end of the island platform it shews Bulldog 3361 backing a GW horsebox into the loading bay which is an extension of the cattle pens siding. The likely scenario is that 3361 has just arrived with a Barnstaple-bound passenger train, the horsebox (at the front of the train) has been uncoupled & is being reversed into the un/loading bay. Conceivably 3361 might have just backed down on to the horsebox already at the bay, & will retrieve it & place it at the head of the passenger train. However, as most of the horsebox traffic at Dulverton was to & from the Taunton direction, the chances are the photo shews a horsebox arriving. The dedicated horsebox loading bay was at the Barnstaple end of the Taunton platform & it was presumably used only for despatching traffic towards Taunton. Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinT Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I've found another photo of horseboxes being handled at Dulverton. It's dated September 1963 & comes from the Cornish Rlys Society site (yes really, they've got a very comprehensive page on the GW's Barnstaple line at: http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/taunton-to-barnstaple.html ) The photo is here: http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/uploads/7/6/8/3/7683812/6176377_orig.jpg Taken from the footbridge it shews a Taunton-bound passenger train apparently setting-back into the horsebox bay presumably to attach a horsebox (or conceivably, but unlikely, to detach one). Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 .....As for horses being spooked by fast moving scenery, when I moved to Australia I was surprised to note that horse floats here tend to be designed so that the occupants can see ahead through a large windscreen or by sticking up above the walls of open top designs. They appear to enjoy the sensation of travelling quickly with no effort on their part . As an aside to this, in the Sarratt area, I sometimes see a pony travelling in the back of a standard Renault Master van to and from shows. It seems perfectly happy peering out of the back windows, and doubtless causes some amusement for drivers following behind! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
runs as required Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I've found another photo of horseboxes being handled at Dulverton. It's dated September 1963 & comes from the Cornish Rlys Society siter conceivably, but unlikely, to detach one). Thanks for an interesting photo with lots of folk visible on the station for a post Beeching year! I recall an endlessly long hot summer Saturday journey from Barnstaple to Taunton (en route back home to Brum) after a holiday in Appledore in 1949. They were filming the original "Aargh! Jim Lad" Treasure Island in Appledore shipyard that year - opposite to where we stayed. dh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewnummelin Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 The photo is here: http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/uploads/7/6/8/3/7683812/6176377_orig.jpg Taken from the footbridge it shews a Taunton-bound passenger train apparently setting-back into the horsebox bay presumably to attach a horsebox (or conceivably, but unlikely, to detach one). Martin If I understand correctly the trailing points would have had to be padlocked (or fitted with a 'facing' point lock) or the passengers should have be de-trained. More time consuming things to consider when operating a model . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 If I understand correctly the trailing points would have had to be padlocked (or fitted with a 'facing' point lock) or the passengers should have be de-trained. More time consuming things to consider when operating a model . They should be clipped, scotched and padlocked, however in some places the detection on the shunt dolly was deemed sufficient locking for the shunt move of that nature. To quote an old railwayman "what folks couldn't see they couldn't get upset over". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 14, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 14, 2015 If I understand correctly the trailing points would have had to be padlocked (or fitted with a 'facing' point lock) or the passengers should have be de-trained. More time consuming things to consider when operating a model . Provided they were detected by a fixed signal (in that case - and most - that meant a ground disc) there was no need to clip up for a setting back move such as a shunt into the dock and no need to detrain passengers (a dmu I was on made a similar move at Churston on a Bank Holiday Monday in order to attach a loaded Conflat, seemed to take forever) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Hughes Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Of course horses travel by road nowadays. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Provided they were detected by a fixed signal (in that case - and most - that meant a ground disc) there was no need to clip up for a setting back move such as a shunt into the dock and no need to detrain passengers (a dmu I was on made a similar move at Churston on a Bank Holiday Monday in order to attach a loaded Conflat, seemed to take forever) That leads on to an interesting question. How did the timetable cater for extra time needed to add or remove a horsebox (or other vehicle) to a passenger train at an intermediate station? Or did they just accept that it would delay the train? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Station dwell times were greater in those days - there was much more sundries, parcels and other traffic which required manhandling - and there were also many more staff to help with such operations. There was often not the pressure of traffic either, so a branch train could be delayed by a few minutes without any knock on effects (let alone compensation payments). Don't forget, too, that loco changes were often carried out in well under 4 minutes, so just detaching a horsebox - which could be pinchbarred or pulled by another horse into a siding after the train had left - shouldn't have been a massive operation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 21, 2015 That leads on to an interesting question. How did the timetable cater for extra time needed to add or remove a horsebox (or other vehicle) to a passenger train at an intermediate station? Or did they just accept that it would delay the train? Technically it didn't - unless the train was retimed to suit (which would be very unusual for a single vehicle). But station dwell times did tend to be a bit longer 'in the old days' although station overtime (i.e. the train was at a station for longer than booked) was a quite common feature of delay statistics. But in many cases timings also tended to be a bit on the slack side so some 'spirited' running could often recover the time lost (it definitely didn't following the Churston attachment I mentioned above but that was a dmu so the timings were tighter anyway). Plus, as Jonathan has mentioned, a lot of things were done much more slickly (and corners were cut in the process) often because the signalling was more flexible and track layouts were suited to what was needed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombatofludham Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I did once accompany a Panto horse in the brake area of a Class 116 DMBS, when the guard spotted the horse on the platform he just opened the doors without batting an eyelid. Must be more common than we thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 21, 2015 Slightly off topic. A late friend of mine who was a Manningham based driver once had to take a train that included a parcel an to Ilkley. The van contained a circus elephant. Apparently part way there they looked back and saw a trunk end poking out of the van. They stopped at either Menston or Guisely. They then found a hammer and nailed and nailed a piece of wood over the loose slat making a lot of noise in the process. When they eventually arrived at Ilkley they parked the van and opened it to find a groom fast asleep on the straw having slept through all the hammering and banging. He then walked the elephant off onto the platform and led it out. I would have been interested to see the guards report as to the delay to the service. I suspect that many similar tales could be told about moving large animals by train. Jamie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold phil_sutters Posted January 31, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2017 Not typical! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejstubbs Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I thought that covering the horse's eyes was a fairly standard tactic when attempting to persuade a reluctant one to enter a horsebox. Maybe Clive Mortimore or Horsetan could confirm, or otherwise. In the photo it looks like the squaddie has just used the most suitable item closest to hand - his greatcoat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I've been to countless equestrian events and seen horses loaded thousands of times. Most load readily enough but when they do refuse I've never seen anyone throw a blanket over their head. When horses do refuse twenty people will come along and offer twenty different solutions, never heard covering it's head suggested. It might work with a horse of suitable temperament but if you threw a blanket over my wife's current horse he'd go berserk. They are animals whose first reaction to threat is to flee and suddenly being plunged into darkness is not going to reassure them. So, it might work on occasions, I wouldn't want to try it it with most horses. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Welch Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 The dedicated platforms for horse traffic were often referred to as 'Horse Landings'. Horses, being easier to control than cows, would simply be led by their halters to and from the wagons. They would (almost?) always have a familiar human, in the form of a groom, travelling with them throughout, which would again make manoeuvring them easier. As far as I know, horseboxes conveying horses would be formed into passenger trains; certainly, they were passenger-rated stock. Over 30 years ago I interviewed on old CLC man who had started his railway career at Cuddington station, Cheshire in the 1920's. There were a few racehorse stables in the district then and many horses were sent by rail, usually to Yorkshire and eastern England he recalled. The horse box was, he said always next to the engine of passenger trains. On arrival of the train the loco would be detached in the platform, drawn forward and back in to the landing to collect the box. Plenty of other traffic was dealt with this way so the staff were quite slick and it was a quick operation. In practice with horses not so! Quite often the highly strung beast had not been much further than the stables/training grounds so even having arrived with the horse in plenty of time the sight and sound of the railway (passing trains or if a loco was whistling/blowing off for example) was too much and despite the best effort of the groom and porters the horse could not be loaded and the train had to leave without it! I assume although he did not say, that the box was left to be loaded and collected later but that of course could be many hours later so the horse had to return to the stables. Am I right in thinking that boxes could only be conveyed on certain classes of passenger train and therefore, in this case, the connections to the east coast would have been missed? Little wonder it all ended up going by road. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.