Old style carriage designation

[spikey]

I used to know all this stuff, but alas my trainspotting days are 60 years behind me now, so I must ask you guys ...

 

What is the term used to describe carriages of the type without a corridor i.e. in which each compartment has an external door on each side of it?

[br2975]

"Non-gangwayed" ?

[Fat Controller]

' Non-corridor'?

[The Johnster]

They were also described by not having a 'K' or 'O' in the telegraph code, thus a BSK was a corridor Brake Second, but a BS was a non-corridor Brake Second, a non-corridor or non-gangwayed second being an S, and a composite being a C.  AFAIK there were no non-corridor all firsts, but they would have been Fs.  B was the designation of a non-gangwayed full brake vehicle, and BG was Brake Gangwayed.

 

DMU stock came up with all sorts of combination such as DBSO for driving brake second open, but IIRC did not distinguish between gangwayed and non-gangwayed stock (early class 116/7/8 and similar 'high density' suburban dmus were built without gangways and had them added later, otherwise all dmu stock was gangwayed within the unit by default).

[spikey]

Cheers chaps.  I guess it must have been "non-corridor" then.  Come to think of it though, wouldn't all coaches with a corridor also have gangways?  If so, why would there be a distinction between "non-corridor" and "non-gangwayed", if indeed there was?

 

All I know for sure is that my old granny hated the old carriages without corridors, on the grounds that her bladder gave her an absolute maximum safe journey time of 45 minutes ...

[Jim Martin]

wouldn't all coaches with a corridor also have gangways? 

 

Not necessarily. Some companies built coaches without gangways, but with short internal corridors so that passengers had access to a toilet. As far as I know, coaches like this didn't have a full-length corridor with the toilets at the end: they'd be the type where there'd be a couple of corridors, then a couple of toilets (probably paired widthways across the coach, with one serving the compartments towards the carriage end and the other serving those towards the centre), then a couple more compartments, then another pair of toilets, then another pair of compartments. The presence of a corridor notwithstanding, these would still be termed "non-corridor" coaches.

 

Jim

[The Johnster]

The GW, and WR as it's successor, used corridor stock on services of more than 2 hours journey duration in order to provide toilet facilites, which included some apparent oddities such as the Newport-Brecon trains, corridor gangwayed 'main line' stock to give access to toilets for all passengers, but hauled by 8750 class panniers though a South Wales valleys environment for much of the journey surrounded by non gangwayed compartment trains.  The Pontypool Road-Neath service was similar, but usually featured larger tank engines, 56xx or 5101.

 

Spikey's old granny's bladder would have approved!

Edited August 29, 2017 by The Johnster

[Steamport Southport]

The LMS certainly had full first non gangwayed coaches.  Diagram D1702 is an example, available from Comet. The Midland also had them, Ratio make a kit for one.

 

 

 

 

 

Jason

[spikey]

The LMS certainly had full first non gangwayed coaches ...

With corridors?

[Jim Martin]

There's a drawing of a Lavatory Luggage Composite (Type 10A) on the GER Society website at https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/rolling-stock/carriages/types-9-13 which illustrates the sort of thing I was referring to above (you have to scroll down a little bit, but not far).

 

Jim

Edited August 29, 2017 by Jim Martin

[chrisf]

AFAIK there were no non-corridor all firsts, but they would have been Fs.

 

The Great Western had some.  They were declassified during the war.  Many saw out their days in South Wales.  Having only eight compartments they are easily spotted in photographs.

 

Chris 

[spikey]

There's a drawing of a Lavatory Luggage Composite (Type 10A) on the GER Society website at https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/rolling-stock/carriages/types-9-13 which illustrates the sort of thing I was referring to above (you have to scroll down a little bit, but not far).

 

Jim

Gosh, what a wonderful way of keeping the riff-raff separated from their betters!

[Andy W]

Not necessarily. Some companies built coaches without gangways, but with short internal corridors so that passengers had access to a toilet. As far as I know, coaches like this didn't have a full-length corridor with the toilets at the end: they'd be the type where there'd be a couple of corridors, then a couple of toilets (probably paired widthways across the coach, with one serving the compartments towards the carriage end and the other serving those towards the centre), then a couple more compartments, then another pair of toilets, then another pair of compartments. The presence of a corridor notwithstanding, these would still be termed "non-corridor" coaches.

 

Jim

BR built non-gangwayed vehicles with internal corridors to allow lavatory access as late as 1960, admittedly as DMU or EMU trailers. There were also MK1 non gangwayed hauled vehicles with internal lavatory access. Some of these consisted of open saloons with an end door leading to a central pair of lavatories, others had compartments with side corridors - I have memories of the AM4 (304) EMUs which as delivered had one coach out of the original 4 with a side corridor past first class compartments, then the lavatories, then a second class open saloon. No way of getting to the other three coaches making up the unit.

[keefer]

Mk1 non-gangwayed loco-hauled stock included the SO(NG) open 2nd and CL composite. Can't recall if the 2nd was open or semi-open, but the composite was as described above with central lavatories separating the 1st class compartments from the 2nd class saloon

[giz]

Another variation came just before WW2 when the LNER built some Dia 265 non-gangwayed lavatory thirds which had 8 compartments with a full length corridor and the lavatory at one end. they were of the steel panelled Gresley type.

 

Some SR emus (2BILs?) were of a similar layout.

[Steamport Southport]

With corridors?

 

Some had small corridors. These being the "Lavatory Stock" that Airfix and now Dapol make. Unfortunately Airfix never made the first class coaches. Diagram D1761.

 

 

 

Some details in this thread. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64375-Dapol-ex-lms-non-corridor-lavatory-coaches-a-review-of-sorts/

 

 

 

Jason

[Dunsignalling]

Gosh, what a wonderful way of keeping the riff-raff separated from their betters!

Luggage compartment aside, that's the usual arrangement in non-corridor lavatory composites.

 

In fact, the Holden design was more generous to third class patrons than most.

 

On many longer types, only the two first class compartments and the two thirds at the opposite end of the lavatory section were linked to it, the remaining third class accommodation having no access. The LMS CL modelled by Airfix and Dapol has such an arrangement.

 

John

Edited August 30, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Coryton]

Gosh, what a wonderful way of keeping the riff-raff separated from their betters!

 

A solution I came across in China (on a full corridor train) was to lock the corridor doors between hard and soft class.

[phil_sutters]

The S&DJR made provision for both third and first classes to share one lavatory. I suppose that if you felt you needed the provision you chose the compartments on either side. Maybe others chose not to travel in those compartments as the lavatory opened directly into them.

[jim.snowdon]

The S&DJR made provision for both third and first classes to share one lavatory. I suppose that if you felt you needed the provision you chose the compartments on either side. Maybe others chose not to travel in those compartments as the lavatory opened directly into them.

S&DJR lavatory composite carriage no 34 1904.jpg

More likely, there were two lavatory compartments across the width of the carriage, one 1st and one 3rd, with a diagonally placed partition between them.

 

Jim

[phil_sutters]

More likely, there were two lavatory compartments across the width of the carriage, one 1st and one 3rd, with a diagonally placed partition between them.

 

Jim

That would make sense - although I would think that the partition would more or less follow the centre-line - more = First / less = Third!

[Poor Old Bruce]

The LMS certainly had full first non gangwayed coaches.  Diagram D1702 is an example, available from Comet. The Midland also had them, Ratio make a kit for one.

 

What Ratio don't tell you is that the same kit is also suitable for making into a Composite coach arranged 3311133. The bulkheads between the thirds were thicker so the peasants didn't get any extra leg room!