Left Hand or Right Hand coach - what does this mean

[Martingchapman]

I bet its a silly question to anyone who knows the answer but I dont understand how a coach can be a Left Hand or Right Hand design.

 

What aspect of the coach does the "Hand" refer to?

[jonny777]

It refers to the side that the corridor is on.

 

I gather that the GWR was rather keen on having all corridors on the same side in a train. Thus partial brake coaches (those with some seating ) would need to have the corridor on either left or right side if they were to be marshalled at either end of the train.

[woodenhead]

Corridor connection between the coaches were offset either left or right at first, only later did the idea of a central connection come into being.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangway_connection 

Edited May 18, 2015 by woodenhead

[phil-b259]

Corridor connection between the coaches were offset either left or right at first, only later did the idea of a central connection come into being.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangway_connection 

 

While initial designs may have had this feature the gangway connections have been placed in the centre of passenger services for 99% (as opposed to postal stock) of the time such things have existed in the UK. Certainly at the time the Collett stock was being produced offset gangways on passenger stock was a thing of the past.

 

However the internal corridor would need to be one side or the other if serving compartments and as highlighted in a previous post this means that if you want to have the internal corridors on the same side throughout the train and have a guards / luggage area at the outer ends then you will need to two different designs of coaches with the position of the internal corridor swapping from the left to right hand side (when viewed from the same end.

 

The GWR was strongly in favour of the principle of having the internal corridors all on the same side right up until WW2 and as such most of its coach designs came in 'right hand' and 'left hand' variants.

 

The SR on the other hand decided it wasn't so important and thus all its brake coaches had the internal corridor on the same side - thus meaning at some point along the train the internal corridor would swap sides.

 

While I am no expert I believe the LNER and LMS went along with the SRs school of thought.

 

Therefore Hornbys announcement of both 'right hand' and 'left hand' Collett stock is not only prototypical - it is fairly essential if you wish to provide a decent selection of Collect rolling stock.

Edited May 18, 2015 by phil-b259

[gwrrob]

The hand is the luggage area when viewed from the corridor side.When numbering these coaches there was no specific pattern logic between left and right hands.

[Castle]

Hi All,

 

Just to confuse things further, in the Dreadnought coaches, some had corridors which swapped sides half way down! This can be seen in the last survivor at DRC although not in the picture on the web page(!):

 

http://www.didcotrailwaycentre.org.uk/coaches/3299/3299.html

 

All the best,

 

Castle

[chrisf]

I confess to not having realised before now that the E127 composite had left and right hand versions.  To be honest, I don't see why it did given the explanations above, unless it was a way of grouping first class accommodation in one place.  Another way of doing that would be to build a corridor first and IIRC there were none of this design.

 

Rob is absolutely right about the numbering.  Some so-called learned tomes assert that RH coaches were odd numbered and LH ones even [or was it the other way round?] but this is not borne out by photographic evidence, not that there is too much of that!  As we now know, Hornby drafted in a top bloke [Mike Stationmaster] to help with research but even he hit a brick wall on this one.

 

Chris

[Martingchapman]

All,

Thanks very much for your replies, very interesting.

Perhaps it was not such a silly question as I first thought.

 

Cheers - Martin.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Martingchapman

[rovex]

 

On the basis that a picture paints a thousand words, I thought a sketch might elucidate the problem, so far as it could be called a problem. 

 

The top drawing shows the make up of the South Wales service using right and first handed coaches with the corridor down the same side throughout the train. 

 

The bottom sketch shows the same train without handed coaches, the corridor switches sides, although one of the thirds could be turned around so that the corridor each side of the restaurant car was on the same side, swapping over halfway along the train.

 

In his book, Harris suggests that the handed composites ensured that the first class compartments were closest to the restaurant car, presumably so that first class customers didn't have to walk to far to eat!

 

I know when the GWR stopped building handed stock, but does anyone know when they stopped bothering about marshalling the corridors along the same side, or did this only happen on the major expresses? Anyone know?

[Il Grifone]

The idea was that, to facilitate loading, the corridor would be on the platform side at Paddington no. 1 platform* (nearest the ticket office for principal trains) with the first class naturally nearest of all, in the middle of the train (also considered safest!). This obviously required left and right handed coaches - LH Bk/3rd, 3rd, RH 1st/3rd, LH 1st/3rd, 3rd, RH Bk/3rd (for the Collett 57 footers - the 'Riviera' for example was rather more complex though still LH and RH).

 

This practice continued until the thirties (IIRC the last 'handed' coaches were the 'Centenaries').

 

The LMS and LNER were trying to push the idea of 'open' ('vestibuled' in the case of crimson coaches) stock rather than compartments. (Of course, the GWR had already tried this, but it met with strong resistance from their clients.)

 

* Obviously, as it's the most important station on the GWR (and hence the entire country).

 

Edit to correct error in composites - couldn't tell my right from my left!

Edited June 15, 2015 by Il Grifone

[Adrian Wintle]

As mentioned above, the left- ot right-handedness is based on which end the non-third section of the coach (brake or first) is when viewed from the corridor side.

 

The Collett 57' stock had RH and LH compos because they (or some of them) were intended to run as six-coach sets (LH Van Third, Third, RH Compo, LH Compo, Third, RH Van Third).

 

The Centenary stock also had LH and RH Van Thirds and was probably the last GWR stock designed to have the corridor down one side (the south side). The set (from the Penzance end) was intended to be LH Van Third, Third, Third, Third*, Dining Car Third, Restaurant First, LH Compo, RH Van Third, RH Brake Compo (for St. Ives), RH Brake Compo (for Falmouth). The Airfix/Hornby Centenary coaches represent the LH Compo and the RH Van Third.

 

*This coach could also be attached between the RH Van Third and the first Brake Compo to strengthen the St. Ives section.

 

Adrian

Edited May 19, 2015 by Adrian Wintle

[Edwardian]

It might be worth adding that GW coach working timetables invariably specify that the brake ends are outermost, which you can only achieve with both left and right handers if you want the corridor to remain on the same side.

 

As was pointed out above, left or right handedness was determined by viewing the corridor side; i.e. the brake compartment (or first class section) is to the right on a right-handed coach when viewed from the corridor side.

 

Whilst handed Van Thirds are necessary to ensure brake ends remain outermost, handed composites only make sense, to me, if 2 composites are marshalled together, which I suspect did not happen all that often other than in the sets mentioned.  I would expect to find that most expresses of the period comprised more than one portion, i.e. a train is actually made up of two or three mini-trains, each with the required numbers of first and third compartments, brake coaches and luggage, reflecting different start and end points for the various portions.  Given this, it cannot have been all that often that you would need to run two composites in the same portion.  Doubtless examples could be found and, fortunately, information from coach working timetables, which provide at least the theoretical consist, are available, both from Kew and in at least one published volume.

 

Turning to the Collett bow-enders announced by Hornby, I suspect these coaches probably did not remain in the original sets for long; the Great Western had a propensity for running a real mixture of coaching stock diagrams in most services.

 

When introduced, these coaches were fully lined out with faux beading, as were steel bodied LMS coaches prior to 1933.  That would be a sight, but I doubt Hornby will ever produce that livery option.  I suspect that the coaches were more likely to be seen in the fully lined livery when working in sets.

 

I note the point about Platform 1 at Paddington, however, I doubt these new Hornby coaches typify trains on the principal routes out of Paddington, for instance, a look at a '30s coach working timetable would show ex-Paddington West of England expresses almost exclusively formed from 70' stock, all of which would have been older than the 57' bow-ended Collets (albeit the 'South Wales' 70 footers were only slightly older than their 57' counterparts), though I would be happy to learn of their use on other principal express routes from Paddington (Cheltenham Flyer, perhaps?).  Other railways might have run their principal expresses with 57' coaches, but the Great Western had 70 footers.  The new Hornby Colletts are suited to cross-country expresses, e.g. North to West services, i.e. between places like Wolverhampton and Crewe and Devon and Cornwall. 

 

I think Hornby are to be commended for tackling this subject in such a proper and thorough manner with all the basic revenue-earning variants.

 

Welcome (and long overdue) though these models may be, however, they are probably not the most suitable companion for Hornby's new King, but I really don't see anyone producing RTR 70' coaches any time soon. They will give the Castles and Stars something to pull and I look forward to seeing them released. 

Edited June 14, 2015 by Edwardian

[Londontram]

Don't quote me on this but something in the back of my mind tells me the LNWR flirted with left and right handed coaches, I shall have to go through all my books now to see if they did. Steve

[Adrian Wintle]

 

 

Welcome (and long overdue) though these models may be, however, they are probably not the most suitable companion for Hornby's new King, but I really don't see anyone producing RTR 70' coaches any time soon. They will give the Castles and Stars something to pull and I look forward to seeing them released. 

 

The 70' coaches were route limited and, even then, used only on specific services. The 57' coaches were more of a general service coach and were used much more widely, albeit interchangeably with other 57' (and later 60/61') stock if they weren't in sets.

 

Adrian

[Edwardian]

Indeed, 70 footers were reserved for the principal express routes, but in the '30s 'specific services' included every single West of England express (to Plymouth, Penzance or Truro), save the Limited, and then only because the Limited had dedicated sets of 60' coaches built for it.  You might get 57 footers on relief services, as the odd strengthener on, say, Saturdays, or on excursions, but the regular timetabled formations all required 70 footers throughout. 70 footers off a West of England express were even worked to Kingsbridge, and I wonder that more of the evergreen GWR branch termini layouts don't feature a Dreadnought or 2 tacked on to a B-Set..

 

I only pretend to reasonable knowledge for the services into the South West peninsular, though I note that 70 footers were also used for expresses to Wales, both Concertina and South Wales types being associated with this route.  

 

57 footers running to the South West would be on cross country express services from Bristol, Crewe, Wolverhampton etc and would include portions from further afield, e.g. Manchester or Birkenhead.  These services would typically be hauled by Castles or Stars, however, not Kings. Incidentally, there would be a high proportion of LMS vehicles on these services. 

 

To run a representative selection of passenger services on the South Devon mainline, you really need roughly as many 70 footers as 57 footers, and the Kings (along with Castles), are only likely to be seem with the former. 

 

The fascination of GW passenger services is, IMHO, with the coaches, more than with the (pretty standardised) locomotives, much as I love them.  Not only do you get plenty of 70 footers, which are simply magnificent, especially the Dreadnoughts, but you get many styles.  Looking at mainline running to the SW in the '30s, you get:  Clerestories (although mainly cascaded to local sets on stoppers),  Dreadnoughts (70'), Concertinas (70'), Toplight (wooden panelled and steel bodied) (70' and 57'), Collett coaches of the bow-ended period (57' and 70'), later Collett flat-ended coaches (57'), and sunshine stock, not to mention the Riviera and Centenary sets for the Limited.

 

What typifies a GW train, apart from the Limited, is that it will do its best to have as many of those different styles and periods in the length of a single train as it can!  The company seemed almost to take a perverse pride in achieving almost total lack of uniformity with its trains. 

[Edwardian]

Well, I was just looking at a coach working timetable concerning the working of "Ref Vans", mentioned in Rovex's coach formation thread.

 

I referred to the 9.15am Paddington to Taunton (it was a daily service but on Tuesdays it led with a Ref Van and there is a published picture of the Tuesday formation, Geen & Scott, Vol 2, plate 142).  Anyway, I mention it here because, coincidentally, it represents a service in which 2 57' composites were marshalled together, giving you the perfect excuse for using the forthcoming Hornby left and right handed Collett comps together, and, indeed, it allows you to use the whole set in one train.

 

Forgive me, I don't do the "BCK" stuff, which is meaningless for me, but, in old money, the formation (front to back) is:

 

70' Brake Compo / Van Third (Brake End leading) / Third / Compo / Compo / Van Third (Brake End trailing) / Refreshment Car / Van

 

The 70 footer came off at Cheltenham.  Geen & Scott's picture shows the train at Bristol.  The lead vehicle behind the Ref Van is indeed a Van Third with the brake end leading, followed by a Third, then a Composite with the first class section next to the following coach, presumably the second Composite. They are all Colletts.

 

Have a squint and tell me whether you think it shows all the vehicles with the corridor side facing south.

 

If you don't fancy Taunton as your destination, try Weston super Mare.  The 2.45pm ex-Paddington is also:

 

Van Third (Brake End leading) / Third / Compo / Compo / Van Third (Brake End trailing) (there then follows a Newbury portion)

 

The 5.15pm to Weston also includes this formation.

 

The portion from Weston that joined the 6.35pm Birmingham to Taunton also employs this formation.

 

Starting to see a pattern?

 

So, the some of the shorter range WoE expresses include or comprise 57' stock AND some run the formation that replicates the Hornby release, on the Paddington - Weston - Taunton route. 

 

This is news to me because my researches have concentrated on the expresses that reached the lands west of Taunton; the WoE expresses to Plymouth and Penzance were 70 footers and the 57 footer North to West expresses did not feature GW composites marshalled together. Rather, North to West services tend to need lots of Brake Compos, the one major variant Hornby are not doing!

[Edwardian]

Here is an edited version of the picture in question.  It is taken from plate 142 of Geen and Scott's Great Western in the 1930s Vol.2:

 

 

[Neilgue]

"The idea was that, to facilitate loading, the corridor would be on the platform side at Paddington no. 1 platform"

 

Given that coaches are not turned at the end of the journey, doesn't that mean that the corridor is only on the platform side for half the time?

[billbedford]

The idea was that, to facilitate loading, the corridor would be on the platform side at Paddington no. 1 platform

 

 

Surely this only applies to coaches with end vestibules? For coaches with doors to each compartment loading would be easier if the compartment side was towards the platform.

[kandc_au]

I have the same logic as Bill Bedford, BUT, I gather there must have been a logic as the what side was supposed to be  where and when. I am surprised that there isn't anything in writing around, regarding this and other anomalies that don't make sense to us mere mortals...

 

Khris

[Adrian Wintle]

I have the same logic as Bill Bedford, BUT, I gather there must have been a logic as the what side was supposed to be  where and when. I am surprised that there isn't anything in writing around, regarding this and other anomalies that don't make sense to us mere mortals...

 

Khris

 

Certainly the Centenary coaches were built so that the corridor would be on the south side of the train. I'm presuming this helped to control the temperature in the compartments.

 

Adrian

[billbedford]

Maybe this was the real reason the Centenary stock was not allowed south of Little Mill Junction on the North and West line. It would prevent then being turned on a round trip from Paddington via Crew or Hereford.

[Darwinian]

 

Surely this only applies to coaches with end vestibules? For coaches with doors to each compartment loading would be easier if the compartment side was towards the platform.

 

I recall running along the platform looking for a compartment with space in it on SR slam door stock when I was younger. Always relieved when a corridor was on my side and I could just hop on at the first available door and walk down the corridor to find a seat, quite often as the train was pulling out.

 

Maybe it was felt that it made enough of a difference close to departure time to avoid delays as would be travellers legged it along the train looking for a space. The corridor side usually had centre doors as well.

[rovex]

I remember reading somewhere that coaches were turned (presumably infrequently) so as to even out the effect of the sun fading the upholstery.

 

Any truth in this?

[The Stationmaster]

Maybe this was the real reason the Centenary stock was not allowed south of Little Mill Junction on the North and West line. It would prevent then being turned on a round trip from Paddington via Crew or Hereford.

No - it was prohibited as it was out of gauge.  In fact the prohibition was later extended to Hereford.