Why "windcutter"?

[The Johnster]

The answer will probably be something like ‘double blocking’, where a signalbox does not clear it’s signals for a train until the next but one box along has accepted it and offered it to the third box.  This allows an underbraked train to respond to a distant against it so as to pull up at the home signal of the next box, a method used to signal 90-or 100-wagon coal trains e.g. Peterborough-Ferme Park or Stoke Gifford-Acton because of the length and the safety overlap built in to the signalling as protection agains spads. 
 

But I have never seen this instruction referenced, and cannot believe that experienced railwaymen took such chances without it.  

[hmrspaul]

2 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 

There would have been a fairly plentiful supply of spare instanters from the very early 60s on, as the fall in wagonload general merchandise traffic hit and the post-war boom in production eased; many wagons were scrapped as surplus to requirements despite being almost new.  The change in traffic conditions was easy easy to spot with 20/20 hindsight, but caught the railway napping; even the top management coup and the resulting 1955 modernisation plan failed to respond adequately to it.   

 

Sorry but I think your WR experience may be misleading you. The Instanter couplings may have been readily available on the WR from the scrapping of GWR wagons but the other Companies didn't use instanters. They used screw and these were not popular for mineral traffic where a lot of shunting was required and it is exceptional / unknown to see a screw coupling on an unfitted wagon in the 70s or 80s. 

 

It is also why I asked about the details of an H class freight because these were regionalised. 

 

And yes, I fully understand your difficulty in understanding how these unfitted freight trains could be run at a speed not seen on other regions. Perhaps we should start with knowing what the gradient profile was - I know little of the GCR but understand it was the most modern of railways and may well have been well graded which would have made running smoother, and the signalling may have been spaced to make stopping these trains easier, or perhaps they were double blocked? There are so many variables to consider; what we need is someone to come up with the instructions on how these trains operated. 

 

Paul

[Aire Head]

15 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Some anomaly seems to have resulted from the change from alphabetic to numerical train Classes with regard to Class H/8 and Class K/9 (mineral stopping in section or pickup/trip).  Class 8 was required to run with the instanters shortened and sufficient brake force for the load, speed being restricted by that of the slowest wagon, while Class9 ran with the instanters in long position, the reason that they were speed restricted to 25mph. 

 

What happened on the WR in the 1970s is going to be noticeably different to what occured on the ER in the 1950s.

 

Instanters may have been common by the 70s however only the GWR used them significantly prior to 1948. The LMS 1937 General Appendix mentions them as pretty much a novelty that you might find on a GWR wagon. This appendix was still in use post nationalisation.

 

The GWR made up around 10% of goods stock absorbed by BR as opposed to roughly 48% from the LMS and 36% from the LNER so I think we can safely ignore the whole idea of instanters having any impact or consideration in the running of these trains.

 

[Mike 84C]

I know that in this safety  orientated world things happened in the past that are not acceptable today. Yes, those unfitted coal trains did run that fast, I'm not sure there were accidents but I don't know. Dick Hardy was a fan of those trains and I think rather proud of them.

  Maybe they were the product of LNE/ER competition with the LMS/LMR for freight traffic ? at this distance in time will we ever know.

As regards fast running on the WR/LMR B.ham div; the Point to Point (PPS) bonus Scheme was a big incentive.

 After leaving the railway I was involved with agricultural /milling industries and road haulage, neither compare today with the conditions of the 1970's.  One thing leaps to mind, unloading of hgv's by hand 2 1/4 cwt sacks of grain , 1 cwt bags of fertilizer, 300 on a 15t load x3 or 4 for a days work and often no help at the customer. Today's times are very different. Rant over!

  All we have to do is accept these things happened, most men had a pride in the job and probably a few egos were massaged.  Good for a bit of cabin banter!

   I'm 75 now, would I do it all again? absolutely but only a young me!