Castle Aching

[Edwardian]

17 minutes ago, Donw said:

 

there was more room between CA and Achingham

 

Yes, you're right, and the plan I made had tight clearances.

 

But what are the best alternatives?

[Regularity]

On 19/05/2022 at 21:40, Edwardian said:

WNR railway carriage livery.

The EWJR, when it resumed passenger services in the 1880s had a two-tone livery in the usual format, moving in the early noughties to “cream” waist panels only (about the time it became the SMJR) and then, when it supplanted its coaching stock with second hand vehicles from the Midland, went to full over crimson lake (1910).

On 20/05/2022 at 12:19, St Enodoc said:

That reminds me of a very politically-incorrect joke from a Leeds University Rag Mag circa 1976 (other institutions of learning are available), which I can't possibly repeat here.

“If all the young ladies who attended the Yale promenade dance were laid end to end, no one would be the least surprised.” - Dorothy Parker (1893-1967), noted wit and feminist.

Rag mags used to take quotes, and remove the attribution and sometimes the context, in the name of a cheap laugh, sometimes aggravating people who (without them understanding the context, either) view the remark as offensive/sexist.

Then there are the arguments, etc, claims of picking on subgroups, insensitivity, countered by “it’s all for charity” (doesn’t excuse genuinely trying to be offensive) and failure of a sense of humour, etc.

All this happens in ignorance, at supposed centres of learning.

Don’t know if it’s still like that, but I remember it being like that in the 80s.

 

 

[Donw]

Well now there are many possible alternatives you have to choose the best for you. One good way to start is to make a list of the features you regards as 'must haves' and those which are 'nice to have'.

 

So you might specify Minimum radius 30" (750mm) as a must

visible radii minimum 36" (900mm)  as a nice to have

 

quite  often you have to compromise on some must haves if you are trying to cram too much in. These are fairly rural towns so a little room to breathe is needed to keep that flavour.

I think the three stations you are focused on are a good choice.

I also think the town scene behind CA is an essential part. Buildings are one of your strengths and will make the layout special.

 

You do not need complex station layouts for it to be interesting to operate and with three stations it will be enough.

 

As you say there may be a lack of space at Achingham for the town but there will be plenty of buildings to do for BM and perspective can be fun. A hand painted backscene for Achingham would be great if you are up to the challenge.

 

Don

[Edwardian]

Random post ....

 

I was browsing through some saved photographs and came across one I'd meant to look into further .....

 

 

This is the aftermath of a crash on the GER at County School in Norfolk in 1915.

 

Grim though photographs and reports are, they are invaluable insights providing otherwise unrecorded details, such as train formations.

 

Fortunately in this accident, which occurred at low speed, there were only three injuries and no fatalities.

 

Here we see two derailed Third Class coaches. I was struck, as I invariably am, with the predominance of 6-wheel stock and the rounded window style, which the GER built in great quantity over a sustained period, which again emphasises how the 4mil modeller should have lots of the David Eveleigh kits and relatively few of the D&S 'square lights' that were built over a short period right at the end of 6-wheel coach construction.  

 

The characteristically deep waist panels and long grab handles are evident. Thinking back to Woko's posts, note how the roof vents are only present over the end (smoking) accommodation. In terms of livery, I'd assume the coaches were probably no longer sustaining a varnished teak finish but could have been painted over coach brown.  The further coach clearly shows the tops of the large class numbers below the waist.  This was, IIRC, introduced in 1902, so would presumably be common if not universal by 1915. 

 

This 6-coach train formed the 11.15am Wells to Norwich. It's just the sort of train I've been aiming for for CA.  The train loco was given as No.446, which would be a T26 Intermediate 2-4-0 of 1891 and exactly the class you'd expect hauling local GER services around Norfolk. 

 

The formation is given, in order, as: x2 Thirds, x2 Composites x1 Third, x1 Brake.  I frequently come across services without a brake coach at each end. Indeed, why would they unless the formation was to reverse unaltered?  Even then, you might not necessarily need the brake at the trailing end.  I wonder what the regulations or recommendations were?  The advantage of a brake at each end is not having to have vacant compartments to form a crumple zone at the engine end.  The GWR did this, but, again, I wonder what the regulatory position was? My model railway preference, where all services do reverse and will not require re-marshalling, is to bracket with a brake third at one end and a luggage brake at t'other (in preference to 2 brake thirds, which I suggest would be more of a suburban formation), but it's important to remind myself that this is not necessarily always typical. 

 

Two of the Thirds were identified (1064 and 762) and one of the Composites (80). I don't have a copy of the coach register, however. I assume these were the three lead vehicles derailed in the accident.

 

The passenger train was run into by a 17-vehicle goods train, ex-Norwich. Its driver was found to have been solely responsible for the collision. Its loco, 629, equally inevitably, a Y14, though a pretty early one dating from 1884.

 

So there we are, a little slice of the GER in Norfolk, 10 years on from the setting of CA, but not really much different from what I'd expect to recreate on the layout.

 

Have a happy Sunday.

 

Report

 

 

 

 

Edited May 22, 2022 by Edwardian
Grammar

[St Enodoc]

16 hours ago, Regularity said:

The EWJR, when it resumed passenger services in the 1880s had a two-tone livery in the usual format, moving in the early noughties to “cream” waist panels only (about the time it became the SMJR) and then, when it supplanted its coaching stock with second hand vehicles from the Midland, went to full over crimson lake (1910).

“If all the young ladies who attended the Yale promenade dance were laid end to end, no one would be the least surprised.” - Dorothy Parker (1893-1967), noted wit and feminist.

Rag mags used to take quotes, and remove the attribution and sometimes the context, in the name of a cheap laugh, sometimes aggravating people who (without them understanding the context, either) view the remark as offensive/sexist.

Then there are the arguments, etc, claims of picking on subgroups, insensitivity, countered by “it’s all for charity” (doesn’t excuse genuinely trying to be offensive) and failure of a sense of humour, etc.

All this happens in ignorance, at supposed centres of learning.

Don’t know if it’s still like that, but I remember it being like that in the 80s.

 

 

I told you that other institutions of learning were available.

[ianathompson]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

The advantage of a brake at each end is not having to have vacant compartments to form a crumple zone at the engine end. 

 

Would this have been a consideration in the Edwardian era?

From what little I know most pre WWI stock disintergrated rather than crumpled when involved in an accident.

It was also not uncommon for the coach to telescope where the body became detached from the underframe.

 

To be honest I suspect that a "crumple zone" is a modern concept.

I remember a question being asked in signalling school where some-one raised the disparity in drivers' and signalmen's wages.

The answer was along the lines of, "They are sitting in the pointy end. They pay for your mistakes with their life."

 

The crumple zone in modern emu sets is the driving cab and the driver is "expendable".

Having ridden in the cab of a class 365 you are well aware that there is nothing between you and any obstruction.

 

Ian T

 

[Compound2632]

Lt. Col. von Donop is not my favourite among the Inspectorate. "Four wagons slightly damaged". Francis Marindin would have given us names and numbers.

[Compound2632]

54 minutes ago, ianathompson said:

Would this have been a consideration in the Edwardian era?

 

Possibly not but it does seem most unusual not to have a brake compartment or van at each end. Quite apart from anything else, where did all the parcels traffic and luggage go, even supposing the two composites to have been of the centre-luggage type? At the other extreme to this, a standard formation on the S&DJR at this period was five 6-wheelers: brake / third / first / third / brake. 

[Andy Hayter]

My understanding is that buffer vehicles/zones were widely used on railways as means of protection - and not just in the UK.

 

I accept that in a severe collision Edwardian stock had a habit of converting to matchwood.  However in less severe collisions it was generally the outer vehicles that suffered most, with those further away from the point of impact sometimes surviving completely untouched.

 

To suggest that a brake van at each end did not provide any protection would be like saying you don't need seat belts on planes because if the plane flies into a mountain they provide no protection.  

[Caley Jim]

8 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

My understanding is that buffer vehicles/zones were widely used on railways as means of protection - and not just in the UK.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that it was a requirement that when there was not a brake compartment, or non-passenger carrying vehicle, next to the locomotive, the first three compartments of the leading coach had to be locked to prevent their use.  Presumably this also applied if the leading vehicle had a centre guards compartment.

 

Jim

[Schooner]

14 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Lt. Col. von Donop is not my favourite among the Inspectorate.

 

If you're working on a Top Trumps edition, please do share!

 

@Edwardian, much in your last post to read, mark and inwardly digest. Agreed on the quality and qualities of Strangford, though!

 

Turning the CJF up one notch might give us something like...

 

...with the developed lower level and door-crossing allowing not only for return loops (for hands-free system coherence) and storage* but also a continuous run with BM sitting on a 'mainline' circuit. As per, the above to be taken as a sketch only to see if the idea is workable. It is. Has it got legs? Let's find out...

 

*Under the terminii, not shown for clarity/my convenience :)

[Compound2632]

23 minutes ago, Schooner said:

If you're working on a Top Trumps edition, please do share!

 

Now there's an idea. But I've had a different one (better or worse I dare not judge): Railway Inspectorate Cluedo. It is not one of the Inspectors who has committed the crime, of course, but they are the characters who move around the board, trying to uncover that the accident was on the North Eastern Railway, caused by Signalman Nixon and the lack of continuous brake. If you've come across Harry Potter cluedo, you'll see how this can be developed...

Edited May 22, 2022 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, ianathompson said:

 

Would this have been a consideration in the Edwardian era?

From what little I know most pre WWI stock disintergrated rather than crumpled when involved in an accident.

It was also not uncommon for the coach to telescope where the body became detached from the underframe.

 

To be honest I suspect that a "crumple zone" is a modern concept.

I remember a question being asked in signalling school where some-one raised the disparity in drivers' and signalmen's wages.

The answer was along the lines of, "They are sitting in the pointy end. They pay for your mistakes with their life."

 

The crumple zone in modern emu sets is the driving cab and the driver is "expendable".

Having ridden in the cab of a class 365 you are well aware that there is nothing between you and any obstruction.

 

Ian T

 

 

Indeed, but see the GWR practice referred to.

 

45 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Possibly not but it does seem most unusual not to have a brake compartment or van at each end. Quite apart from anything else, where did all the parcels traffic and luggage go, even supposing the two composites to have been of the centre-luggage type? At the other extreme to this, a standard formation on the S&DJR at this period was five 6-wheelers: brake / third / first / third / brake. 

 

Yes, these could have been First-Third centre luggage composites and probably were.

 

The WNR Norwich and Bury services are intended to be Luggage Brake / 4-Compt. First-Second Luggage Composite / 4 Compt. First-Second Luggage Composite / 5-Compt. Third / 5-Compt. Third / 3-Compt. Brake Third

 

[Donw]

I do not know where this crumple zone stuff comes from. In the 60s I regularly travelled on the DMUs from Paddington to Reading and would usually choose the leading car hoping to get a front seat and that the driver hadn't pulled the blind shut. There wasn't much of a crumple zone there.   The GWR did like formation with a brake at each end  this may also have been to do with tail traffic or just strengthening coaches. I believe the GWR had rules about how many vehicles could be behind the brake I cannot remember now if this applied to unbraked vehicles or all vehicles.

 

Coach diagrams could be fairly complex with a pattern over a few days or they could be simple with a simple shuttle pattern.

 

Don

[Regularity]

I think there was just a preference to having a guard at the end of a train, where possible - and generally only one coach beyond the one with the guard’s compartment, which was permitted to run with the guard’s compartment at the front (so, brake 3rd and compo, as seen on many GER branches). In any lengthy rake, where there might be reasonable parcels/smalls traffic, then a brake coach at each end sorts everything out nicely: GWR van 3rd, compo, van 3rd branchline sets are a classic example, albeit short and only 3 coaches long. A Market day 3rd could be simply added outside the set without need to remarshal the rake. The EWJR had brake 3rds with a central guard/luggage section, with a 3rd class compartment either side, and generally ran with the coach sandwiched between a third and a compo, which is why I have three such coaches and no more than that at the moment!

[Chrisbr]

From the 1905 GWR General Appendix - 

[Nearholmer]

This is a topic that has come up before, and it is clear that there was a difference between BoT recommendations, and the more stringent practices adopted by some railways. 
 

This is what the BoT said in 1885:

 

 

I don’t think this ever became mandatory (a requirement), but it was certainly treated as if it was, and the definition of “near” I think was only ever nailed-down in company ‘rules’, rather than BoT documents.

 

A good collection of the relevant BoT documents is available at ‘Railways Archive’ if you want to look at later editions to check. 
 

BR seems to have made a decisive move away from “at or near the tail” at some point in the 1960s, introducing 4 car EMUs with the guard’s compartment near the centre, instead of one at each end, in 1964 I think, and doing a big re-marshalling of loco hauled sets on BR(S) c1967, to move from one guard’s compartment at each end to one near the middle. That move must have been with approval (‘no objection’) of the inspectorate.

[Edwardian]

Adrian Marks has kindly provided me with a copy of the GER's 1906 instructions on the number of "Guards and Break [sic]* Vans to be run with passenger trains". It contrasts with the GW rules for 1905 just cited.

 

The most relevant line for this discussion is "when more than 13 vehicles, including the Break Van, are run, two Guards and two Break Vans are to be provided".

 

So, on a 6-vehicle train like the 11.15 am Wells to Norwich service, a single brake coach suffices and, presumably, would be the norm.

 

We do engage the BoT recommendation Kevin cites, for "when two or more Break Vans are run, a Guard must, where practicable, ride in the rearmost Break Van."  

 

So, there is no requirement for the brake coach to be the last vehicle and no requirement for a second brake coach for trains under 13 coaches.  Further, where the train grows to 13 vehicles en route, the quest for a second brake coach may be deferred, the requirement being merely to take steps to secure a second brake at the next station at which the train calls.

 

* Wonderful that the GE is still using this spelling in 1906. The WN surely also should.

[Compound2632]

21 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

BR seems to have made a decisive move away from “at or near the tail” at some point in the 1960s, introducing 4 car EMUs with the guard’s compartment near the centre, instead of one at each end, in 1964 I think, and doing a big re-marshalling of loco hauled sets on BR(S) c1967, to move from one guard’s compartment at each end to one near the middle. That move must have been with approval (‘no objection’) of the inspectorate.

 

I recall Paddington-Oxford Class 50-hauled trains of chiefly non-air-conditioned Mk 2 opens with a Mk 1 brake second at the centre of the train, in the early 1990s. I wonder if, apart from the operational convenience, the abandonment of the rear guard came with full track circuiting, or at least the removal of the requirement to go back and put down detonators to protect the train if brought to an unwonted stand in section?

[Adam88]

45 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I recall Paddington-Oxford Class 50-hauled trains of chiefly non-air-conditioned Mk 2 opens with a Mk 1 brake second at the centre of the train, in the early 1990s. I wonder if, apart from the operational convenience, the abandonment of the rear guard came with full track circuiting, or at least the removal of the requirement to go back and put down detonators to protect the train if brought to an unwonted stand in section?

 

No mention of detonators in the relevant poetry.

[Nearholmer]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

wonder if, apart from the operational convenience, the abandonment of the rear guard came with full track circuiting, or at least the removal of the requirement to go back and put down detonators to protect the train if brought to an unwonted stand in section?

My, possibly incorrect, recollection is that guards still had a role in protecting trains well after the move to ‘one brake in the middle’.

 

I’d always assumed (yes, I know) that BR decided to make the change when the traffic in dogs, bicycles and perambulators really dried-up, passengers luggage in advance ceased, and the volume of railway parcels fell significantly, highlighting how much space was being devoted to the carriage of stale air.

[MrWolf]

It's a real PITA trying to get a bicycle on a train nowadays. Some companies will take them (if there's room and the staff aren't having a by the book day) others you have to book in advance, using the app, which won't work or won't update on your phone etc etc.

It's much the same if you have a dog. (Can you not put your dog on the seat? He's got a ticket, also he's a Doberman, doesn't shed fur, he'll sit where he wants thank you.

Then you can stand all the way south from Lancaster because all the seats are marked reserved from Carlisle, yet nobody has sat in them by the time you change at Birmingham. Better to get out of steerage class, find I quiet corner in first class and pretend to be asleep whenever beak comes by. They're not allowed to be impolite and disturb the captains of industry from their power naps.  🙃

[St Enodoc]

14 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Now there's an idea. But I've had a different one (better or worse I dare not judge): Railway Inspectorate Cluedo. It is not one of the Inspectors who has committed the crime, of course, but they are the characters who move around the board, trying to uncover that the accident was on the North Eastern Railway, caused by Signalman Nixon and the lack of continuous brake. If you've come across Harry Potter cluedo, you'll see how this can be developed...

Very interesting but I'll stick to Rail Race, thanks all the same.

[Flying Fox 34F]

Moving the position of the Guards location occurred earlier than BR. David Jenkinson commented on certain rules in his carriage book denoting the number of vehicles permitted at the rear of the train without the handbrake.

Also, when the Derby Lightweight DMU’s arrived on the scene, the van area is pretty much in the middle. 
Finally, Swindon Works rebuilt the 4 CIG EMU’s to to move the van area from both ends and place it nearer the middle of the set.

Ultimately, photograph of the relevant era, prove and disprove the rule!

 

Paul

[Hroth]

I thought the "guard at rear" protocol was mandated by the mode of operation of continuous brakes.  In the days of vacuum braking, the most effective/safest application of brakes, especially if there was a derailment, was from the rear of the train as that would keep a tension on the couplings and keep the derailed vehicles in a relatively straight line as vacuum braking initiates from the point of activation. 

 

Air brakes work from the furthest point of the system (ie the rear of the train) so the guard can more or less be at any point in the train.

 

 

I'm quite willing to be shot down on this as I can't exactly remember how Rolt explained it in Red for Danger....   :-)

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by Hroth
forgot a bit, and whats the difference between a d and a t?