Penlan Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Detailing some early (pre 1870) coaches and I realise in all the photo's I have, none show any brakes on the wheels.Apart from the obvious 1830'ish L&M (Rocket) coach, the next lot available in kit form is LRM's 24' LNWR (Saltley) coaches from around 1860, and the photo's on LRM's web site doesn't show any brake gear either. I do have the LSWR Carriages Vol.1 by Weddell and that intimates any coaches with Guards facilities did have braking arrangements, certainly in the 1850's, and of course there was Newall's Braking system from 1853, which seems to have had rodding along the tops of the coaches to connect up brakes. - I have this book because it's my (original) photo of Windsor Castle as the frontipiece. In the above LSWR book, plate 2.9, which must be after 1862 (because that's when one of the coaches was built), it includes a late 1840's coupe 2nd. The brake coaches all appear to have brakes, though the coupe doesn't. The early LNWR used Fay's system (before going onto the chain brakes), which seems to be similar to Newall's, bar the fact the rodding ran to adjacent vehicles from the guards carriage via rodding underneath the carriages ('West Coast Joint Stock' book).The intimation is any coaches from say at least 1850, if not earlier should have some form of rudimentary brake gear, but where are the details, please. OK - I agree, I have them in the book(s) in front of me, but I was hoping to widen the discussion from a monologue to interested parties. I accept that in an earlier RMWeb survey, pre-group was only about 3% of members, and I suspect 1860's is likely to be around 3% of the 3%..... so 23 member might be interested in this query... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Holliday Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 You may find some answers, at least from a southerner's viewpoint, in the recently published LB&SCR Carriages: Volume 1: Four- and Six-Wheeled Ordinary Passenger Stock by Ian White, Simon Turner and Sheina Foulkes, which goes right back to the earliest coaches on the line. But even when Stroudley introduced his seven coach block sets for the South London Line in the 1870's, the only brakes were on the two brake vans at each end. They were fitted with spoked wheels, presumably to take the braking loads, whilst the rest had the more comfortable riding Mansell wheels. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted March 10, 2015 Author Share Posted March 10, 2015 Thank you Nick, I'm using 14mm, 8 open spoked wheels on my early carriages, mainly because when I'm viewing my layout from the armchair, I'm looking at an embankment with the train slowly trundling across, it's nice to see the wheels going round........ (and have some suitable refreshment in a glass to hand). I suppose if really wanted to model later pre-group with early stock, I should do the Bishops Castle Rly.... but with some 400+ items of rolling stock, I shall keep to the LNWR.. I looked at the (LBSCR) Brighton Circles web site and preview of their Journal http://www.lbscr.org/lbscrorg/Models/Journal/ I see on page 23, the flyer for the Coach book, the early coach there has brakes, though the photo is not referenced as to date - I know, buy the book, but I'm beyond buying more books these days.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotcent Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 As also a pre - 1865 modeller, I have the same problem. There were virtually no photographs taken at this time, and available drawings do not show this level of detail. Continuous brakes did not appear until the 1870's or later (much later for some companies!). I have always assumed that prior to this the brakesmen to be seen perched on the roofs were the only available train braking in this period, and I understand (though I can't find my sources at present) that the companies had rules governing the number of brake vehicles in relation to the length of the train. What I can't find any information about is how they parked them. Even quite humble goods wagons had handbrakes at this period. I have a number of drawings of goods and mineral wagons from the 1840's and they all show more or less sophisticated handbrake systems. I feel that coaching stock would at least have had a handbrake before continuous brakes came into use. But I can't find any information! Allan F Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmrspaul Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 The experiments and introduction of continous brake for passenger stock was written about in Backtrack, probably a decade ago. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium corneliuslundie Posted March 11, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 11, 2015 The information I have on the 1858 Rhymney Railway carriages came from an article published around 1900 which had a number of drawings. The loco drawings seem reasonably accurate so I put some faith in the carriage drawings. Of the three carriages shown only the break carriage has brakes I think it is called. There is a photo of my attempt at modelling them in another thread in this section supposedly on wagons. Jonathan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWCR Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Normally no brakes at all except on Guards vehicles. Exceptionally some lines had some primitive form of multi-vehicle braking such as the Webb chain brake. Air and vacuum brakes started to appear in the 1870's but many railways didnt fit them. Only really changed when continous brakes became a legal requirement in the 1890's. Even after this a carriage would not normally have any form of handbrake. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Normally no brakes at all except on Guards vehicles. Only really changed when continous brakes became a legal requirement in the 1890's. Even after this a carriage would not normally have any form of handbrake. 'Normally no brakes at all except on Guards vehicles.' Scary, eh?!! Only really changed when continous brakes became a legal requirement in the 1890's. M'learned friend is referring to the 1889 Railways Act, one of the most significant pieces of legislation to ever affect the railways of this country (arguably the most significant). This was a direct result (although it had probably been coming for a while) of the dreadful accident in Armagh (Ireland) where a significant number of the casualties were Sunday School children (they were in a portion of a train that ran away backwards down a hill and collided with a following train, running under the 'time interval' system). Not only did the Act require continuous brakes (for passenger vehicles) but also absolute block working and interlocking of signals and points on passenger lines. Note that the requirement for continuous brakes meant that, in the event of a division, the brakes would automatically be applied (ie fail safe) - some of the earliest, rudimentary forms of continuous braking prior to that did the exact opposite! Rail travel in the earlier part of the 19th century not always for the feint-hearted! Even after this a carriage would not normally have any form of handbrake. Yes, and a right pain when working in a coaching stock depot where loose vehicles are habitually stabled! Hence a large supply of chocks, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyC Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 The trains in the Armagh accident did have continuous brakes; what they did not have was automatic continuous brakes. On the Armagh trains the vacuum was created to apply the brakes [the opposite of what is done on any vacuum brakes in use today]. When the train was divided the brakes on the uncoupled section became inoperative. http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BoT_Armagh1889.pdf Jeremy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeOxon Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 The Board of Trade inspector's report on the 1868 accident at Bullo Pill (GWR) contains detailed description of the trains involved. For the mail train it states: "The 5 p.m. up mail train from Milford left Newport at 9.32, eight minutes late, and Lydney at 10.14, five minutes late, on the night in question, consisting of an engine (the Rob Roy) and tender, three passenger carriages, and a luggage van. The leading. carriage had a break compartment in it, in which rode a guard; and the third carriage, which was a mail carriage as well as a break carriage and a passenger carriage, also carried a guard.". So, out of three carriages, two had 'break' compartments, each with a guard Russell's 'Great Western Coaches, Part 1' describes the first standard (broad gauge) coaches of 1845, stating that the second class carriages had a primitive form of brake and, to apply this when necessary, the guard travelled with and amongst the passengers. The same book describes an early third class carriage in which the guard could apply the 'improved' clasp brakes. There are illustrations of these coaches on pages 4 and 5, which show single brake shoes on two out of the six wheels of the 2nd and clasp brakes on all three axles of the 3rd (probably only on one side) Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium corneliuslundie Posted March 12, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 12, 2015 Senior moment. I forgot to say that the Rhymney Railway carriages illustrated above were, according to the Board minutes, to be similar to those being supplied by C C Williams at the time to the GNR, so presumably the GNR ones would have had similar braking arrangements. C C Williams of Goswell Road, London, supplied carriages and wagons to several railways and also ran one on behalf of the owning company (OWW?) but I don't think he could actually have built them himself, and his premises were certainly not rail connected. Jonathan David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeOxon Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Further to my previous post (#11) on early GWR coaches, I have now found the following illustration in "The History of the LNWR" by W.L.Steel (1914) These early London & Birmingham Railway coaches have roof seats for the guards, with handles to operate wooden brake blocks on the wheels. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 Many thanks Mike, how come I've missed them, apart from the book's date. > "The History of the LNWR" by W.L.Steel (1914). They must have been reproduced elsewhere since then..... But not in Alan Prior's '19th Century Rly Drawings in 4mm Scale' (1983). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I thought these might go nicely into this thread, as I was put in mind of those drawings when I saw them. This is the Italian National railway Museum at Pietrarsa, close to Naples. The Museum occupies the site and buildings of a former railway works. The train is a replica of the first train to use the line in 1839 and was apparently built in 1939 to mark the centenary using drawings then still available in the works. Locomotive and stock were originally supplied from England and assembled on site. You can't get into what would have been the best positions for photography and the camera struggled a bit with some of the bright light streaming through the windows, but I hope they are of some interest and use. Only the guards vehicle had any sort of brake as can be seen. The red carriage was for the King, the others for ordinary travellers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWCR Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I travelled on a narrow gauge line in Sweden a short while ago. This had no brakes other than the loco and guards brake. Never legally required there, It also ran at a fair speed and was unfenced. In places the line actually passed through peoples gardens with dogs & kids chasing (or scattering). No chance of stopping quickly. In this country certainly wouldnt be allowed. It was odd looking at the carriages, and as in the photos above the underframe looking very empty. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 17, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2015 I travelled on a narrow gauge line in Sweden a short while ago. This had no brakes other than the loco and guards brake. Never legally required there, It also ran at a fair speed and was unfenced. In places the line actually passed through peoples gardens with dogs & kids chasing (or scattering). No chance of stopping quickly. In this country certainly wouldnt be allowed. It was odd looking at the carriages, and as in the photos above the underframe looking very empty. Pete Although of course for many years the Talyllyn ran with exactly the same arrangement of completely unbraked coaches using just the engine and brake van brakes. They subsequently decided, with some prodding from the Inspectorate, to introduce continuous brakes but reportedly their installation was not complete until 2001. The 1889 Regulations of Railways Act - alas no more - is probably one of the most impressive pieces of legislation ever passed b y the UK Parliament as it is remarkable not only for its impact on railway safety but also its brevity and economy of wording - would that today's legislators would learn from it. Section 1 of the Act, the part which among other things required passenger trains to be equipped with continuous brakes, was repealed in 1997 Incidentally it is still the case in Britain today that loco hauled coaching stock and the stock formed in some unit trains (e.g Mk3 coaches) does not have handbrakes other than on brake vehices/their equivalent although it does of course have continuous automatic brakes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 There are some useful references to be found here: http://www.steamindex.com/locodesn/braking.htm, including a book by C. Hamilton Ellis (reckoned to be better than some of his other works) and a suggestion that the Backtrack articles recalled by Paul Bartlett date from 1999 (I find the earlier volumes are easiest to find second-hand). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieB Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I thought these might go nicely into this thread, as I was put in mind of those drawings when I saw them. This is the Italian National railway Museum at Pietrarse, close to Naples. The Museum occupies the site and buildings of a former railway works. The train is a replica of the first train to use the line in 1839 and was apparently built in 1939 to mark the centenary using drawings then still available in the works. Locomotive and stock were originally supplied from England and assembled on site. You can't get into what would have been the best positions for photography and the camera struggled a bit with some of the bright light streaming through the windows, but I hope they are of some interest and use. Only the guards vehicle had any sort of brake as can be seen. The red carriage was for the King, the others for ordinary travellers. The locomotive is a replica of Longridge 2-2-2 "BAYARD" of 1839 and is one of nine locomotives supplied by that builder to what was the first railway in Italy. (In the builder's records it succeeds another 2-2-2 "DE AREND", which was one of four supplied to the Netherlands and which is also commemorated by a replica). I'd forgotten that the Italians had built a whole replica train to go with the locomotive - for many years they were on display at the Leonardo da Vinci Technical Museum in Milan. I must find my way to Pietrarsa! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I must find my way to Pietrarsa! Find your way is right - the line which passes directly outside the museum is closed as there's apparently a building in danger of collapsing onto it. We followed the recommended approach of taking the Circumvesuviana and then walking about a mile and a half through a pretty horrible town and dodging between the doggy dos. That said, like all the attractions we visited, the Museum itself was spotlessly clean and a pleasure to walk round. The only slight disappointment for me personally was that there was no freight stock on display, but that was a relatively minor downside. Edit - would anyone like to see the loco as well? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 The OP was in relation to my bodging one of the 'Great Locomotives' Rocket Coaches.It's been a while and I hadn't realised just how bad my eyesight has become for doing anything close up, though I know I have Glaucoma and Macular Degeneration, and the inability to have any depth of field - my eyes are like an f2 camera lense. But I have eventually got somewhere. Now before any LNWR expert tells me the number 2407 is wrong, this is based on a numerical progression from another known 1861 ex. Passenger Brake Van in Departmental use around 1900. Oh, I haven't added any brakes, though I may add a through Vacuum tube.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 .... and the number 2407 must be in a non-passenger vehicles lists, for a coach this old would even be beyond the supplimentary passenger coach numbering where a '0' is added before the number, e.g. 02407. I have opened up the various window frames - reduced the size of the bolections, which in the flesh look to be to narrow now, but the lower photo seems to show them as a more acceptable size (than on the original model). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The 1889 Regulations of Railways Act - alas no more - is probably one of the most impressive pieces of legislation ever passed b y the UK Parliament as it is remarkable not only for its impact on railway safety but also its brevity and economy of wording - would that today's legislators would learn from it. Section 1 of the Act, the part which among other things required passenger trains to be equipped with continuous brakes, was repealed in 1997 And here it is, in all its breathless brevity... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 Damn, means I shall have to add some brakes...Not to bad though, because the axles are on inside bearings attached to a plate screwed to the floor, so that whole running gear sub-assembly can easily be dropped and brakes added. There's also lead incorporated, the whole coach at present weighs some 62 gms, which should keep it on the rails I have one of those pocket size weigh machines < 500 gms like this one http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/500G-X-0-1G-Mini-Digital-Electronic-Pocket-Diamond-Jewelry-Balance-Weigh-Scale-/360698073530?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item53fb47d1ba. I bought it for weighing scratch built wagons, trying to get some consistancy, nothing to light that would easily derail during shunting moves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWCR Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I think the 1889 Act was followed by a period of about 10 years to allow complience. Certainly some minor lines were only fitting brakes around 1898 and loudly complaining having put it off as long as possible. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Argos Posted March 27, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 27, 2015 I believe it was 1892 before all LNWR coaching stock in service was vacuum braked. I can't remember the source of that nugget, but I dug it out in the past month when looking to see if I could justify avoid modelling the brakes on 7mm coach build. If you're interested I can try and rediscover the source. Needless to say I'm not that lucky.... Hope this helps Angus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.