Cooper Craft BR Mk1 BCK D171/172 question

[sjp23480]

I have searched RMWeb and the wider interweb and would like confirmation of my suspicions. 

 

I have been building this kit, but referred to both Comet drawings and a Replica RTR of the same prototype when I noticed that the Cooper Craft moulding has two extra windows on the corridor side that do not appear on with the Comet sides or the Replica RTR.  On the corridor side they have only five full size windows with no toilet size windows next to the doors at either end of the passenger compartment. 

 

Is the Cooper Craft moulding incorrect, or is it for a different diagram than that modelled by Replica and Comet?

 

Thanks

Steve 

 

 

[31A]

The outline drawing plan in the Parkin Mk1 book indicates windows in the positions shown in your photograph (the side elevation drawing is of the other side); however in the picture in the same book of W21188 (Dia 172) the small toilet size windows on the corridor side are not there!

 

I don't know whether that may have been a difference between the two diagrams, although the drawing in the book indicates that the difference was that  Dia. 171 was 3 a side seating and Dia. 172 was 4 a side seating in second class.  I think the provision or not of armrests in second class was a "Regional" thing.

[sjp23480]

1 hour ago, 31A said:

The outline drawing plan in the Parkin Mk1 book indicates windows in the positions shown in your photograph (the side elevation drawing is of the other side); however in the picture in the same book of W21188 (Dia 172) the small toilet size windows on the corridor side are not there!

 

I don't know whether that may have been a difference between the two diagrams, although the drawing in the book indicates that the difference was that  Dia. 171 was 3 a side seating and Dia. 172 was 4 a side seating in second class.  I think the provision or not of armrests in second class was a "Regional" thing.

Steve,

Thank you for checking Parkin, I would love a copy but they are like hens teeth and seem to hold their price.  

 

Interesting that you have found examples with and without these windows.  I should have explained that the picture above is of the corridor side - I have added another image below with arrows to indicate the windows in question.  

 

According to the instructions D171 had armrests in all compartments (six seats per 2nd class compartment) and D172 had them only in First class and eight seats per 2nd class compartment.  Looking at the running numbers D171 was spread across Eastern, Midland and Scottish regions, almost all D172 coaches had Western region running numbers. 

 

Steve

 

 

[31A]

1 hour ago, sjp23480 said:

Steve,

Thank you for checking Parkin, I would love a copy but they are like hens teeth and seem to hold their price.  

 

Interesting that you have found examples with and without these windows.  I should have explained that the picture above is of the corridor side - I have added another image below with arrows to indicate the windows in question.  

 

According to the instructions D171 had armrests in all compartments (six seats per 2nd class compartment) and D172 had them only in First class and eight seats per 2nd class compartment.  Looking at the running numbers D171 was spread across Eastern, Midland and Scottish regions, almost all D172 coaches had Western region running numbers. 

 

Steve

 

 

 

You're welcome Steve!  The windows you have highlighted are the ones which are present on the plan view drawing but missing in the picture of W21188.  I'm not sure whether I've got anywhere else to look, except that you can sometimes identify coaches that appear randomly in pictures of trains!  Having thought about it, I'm pretty sure the 8 seats per compartment (4 per side, no armrests) was a WR thing.  The Parkin book does give details of regional allocations but it's in a big table which I must admit I haven't checked!

 

[Clive Mortimore]

All Third/Second class compartments could sit four a side, the LMR, ER, NER and ScR had armrest that dug in your back when seating four not three per bench seat.

 

The corridor side should not have any windows opposite the toilets. On the diagram you can see the hatched area opposite the toilets showing it should be solid.

 

 

[sjp23480]

@Clive Mortimore many thanks for the additional insights.  Looks like I will have to get the Miliput out!

 

The barrowmoremrg.co.uk site is a fantastic resource that I hadn't come across before - thank you for sharing

 

Steve

[31A]

5 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

All Third/Second class compartments could sit four a side, the LMR, ER, NER and ScR had armrest that dug in your back when seating four not three per bench seat.

 

The corridor side should not have any windows opposite the toilets. On the diagram you can see the hatched area opposite the toilets showing it should be solid.

 

 

 

That must be a different version of the official diagram to the one in Parkin then, the plan view in that one (which also seems to be a reproduction of the official diagram) definitely indicates windows on the corridor side opposite the toilet doors.

 

I remember riding in Mk 1 compartments where the arm rests had been permanently sewn up in the 'up' position to convert them from 3 a side to 4 a side.  Can't remember whether that was on the WR or not, though.

 

[Grovenor]

My understanding is that the WR omitted armrests and provided 4 seat number discs so their summer holiday traffic with compulsory booking could be reserved by seat numbers. The other regions rarely went in for compulsory bookings and you would have needed a brass neck to convince the existing occupants to put the armrests up and let you take the 4th seat.

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, 31A said:

 

That must be a different version of the official diagram to the one in Parkin then, the plan view in that one (which also seems to be a reproduction of the official diagram) definitely indicates windows on the corridor side opposite the toilet doors.

 

I remember riding in Mk 1 compartments where the arm rests had been permanently sewn up in the 'up' position to convert them from 3 a side to 4 a side.  Can't remember whether that was on the WR or not, though.

 

Hi Steve

 

Both BR diagrams don't have window on the corridor side opposite the toilets. The Parking book does show them on the diagram it uses. I have not found a photo of a BCK with those windows on the corridor side. I have the second edition of the Parkin book and it has a photo of a BCK corridor side on page 62 with no windows.

 

The other BR diagram

 

One of a my conversions based on the BR diagrams, Skinley drawing and photos.

 

 

Both Hornby and Bachmann are the same as my effort when it comes to the layout of the windows.

[The Johnster]

The 4-a-side 2nd class seating without armrests was used for coaches intended for use on the Western and IIRC Southern regions, which were considered to have shorter journeys in general than regions involved in West or East Coast Scottish traffic.   Coaches got transferred between regions and cascaded all over the place during the blue/grey era, which accounts for the sewn-up armrests in some of them as the WR snd SR kept the number of booked seats per compartment the same as their previous practice. 
 

This applied to all gangwayed corridor mk1s with second class accommodation.  IIRC correctly (and I would be reluctant to assert that I definitely do), there was a difference in mk1 non-gangwayed compartment stock as well, WR and SR being required to seat twelve per compartment and the others eight.  The 64’ ten-compartment WR non-gangwayed mk1 seconds, some of which were xfer to SR for use on the Exmouth branch, could therefore seat 120 passengers, as could their immediate Hawksworth 64’ predecessors, though I believe the mk1s were slightly wider inside the compartments.  

[Enterprisingwestern]

8 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

One of a my conversions based on the BR diagrams, Skinley drawing and photos.

 

, and the Dulux colour chart!

 

Mike.

[sjp23480]

Thanks everyone for your comments and insights. Interesting. I have two of these kits, one of which has had those windows filled - which was a pain to do effectively.  

 

Given there is some evidence of these having these "extra" windows, I am going to leave them on the other one.

 

Steve