Wagon maintenance and repairs

[coronach]

Given that in the 50s and 60s, British Railways owned about a million goods vehicles, what were the arrangements for routine maintenance and repair?  Would wagon examiners routinely check wagons for condition, were repairs based on usage - how was this monitored?
 

How would wagons be checked for fitness to run - springs, flange wear, brakes etc?
 

Were wagons subject to regular overhauls in the many wagon works dotted around the country?  Were they sent for repair only when a fault was found?
 

Pre TOPS, how would a specific wagon be traced - was it simply down to paper records and wagon number recording when trains arrived into yards?

 

 

[balders]

Looking forward to this answer as I'd imagine that given the quantity (and quality) of stuff that was around that I'm sure there was some fag-packet and fingers crossed stuff going on in the background! (Compared to today........)

 

Regards 

 

Guy

[The Stationmaster]

Not sure when it first started but possibly the 1960s when the first big culls of the wagon fleet got underway any wagon identified as requiring repair was assessed to ascertain how much the repair would cost or it would be sent (if it was a runner) toa. storage site to await assessment.  Many classes of repair were based on monetary limits and if a wagon was going to cost too much it would either be condemned or placed in store waiting for the limits to change depending on what type it was.

 

Generally unless they were required for modification most types of freight vehicle were not called in for repair but the C&W Examiner would check if they were in date for various things - that black panel at the right hand end which appeared in the early 1960s - and mark the wagon off for repairs if anything was outstanding date wise.  Similarly wagons would be marked off for faults or defects and either sent to a repair location depending on what needed doing or sent to wait assessment.

 

The monetary limits varied according to wagon usage requirements.  Thus the limit on a particular type of wagon could be very low (=50p in some cases where there was a large surplus of that type of wagon) and it would be increased if a wagon type was in great demand and shortages were appearing.

 

TOPS main role in its early years was to help in identifying surpluses in the wagon fleet as use of the system improved the return of empties to loading locations.  One of the big reasons for the huge investment in TOPS was to vastly improve the turnround and distribution of empties and thereby reduce the size of the wagon fleet - which it did!

[Compound2632]

As a sort of benchmark to this, in the 1860s - 1880s, the minutes of the Midland Railway Carriage & wagon Committee record occasional missing wagon hunts, the criterion for a wagon being missing being that it hadn't passed through one of the wagon repair works within the past two years. (From the six-monthly returns of repairs, the average time between works visits was around nine months.) This would result in a few hundred missing wagons out of a fleet that even in the late 1860s was numbering several tens of thousands. Within a couple of months most of these would be traced leaving just a handful of hard cases which after six months or so would be written off. I think that this implies that at this period, wagons were visiting the works as required rather than according to a schedule. 

[Michael Hodgson]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

As a sort of benchmark to this, in the 1860s - 1880s, the minutes of the Midland Railway Carriage & wagon Committee record occasional missing wagon hunts, the criterion for a wagon being missing being that it hadn't passed through one of the wagon repair works within the past two years. (From the six-monthly returns of repairs, the average time between works visits was around nine months.) This would result in a few hundred missing wagons out of a fleet that even in the late 1860s was numbering several tens of thousands. Within a couple of months most of these would be traced leaving just a handful of hard cases which after six months or so would be written off. I think that this implies that at this period, wagons were visiting the works as required rather than according to a schedule. 

I imagine rolling stock was classed for accountancy purposes as a "fixed asset", and that sounds like an issue of having to explain to auditors why something on the books didn't appear to exist any more (probably because it was no longer appearing in movement records). 

 

Unless you keep a central record at Head Office of the whereabouts of wagons it would be very difficult to plan routine maintenance.  Pre-TOPS that would have been a very costly and error-prone clerical exercise, so relying on C&W examiners to report defects should be a lot more cost-effective.  Trains had to be checked fairly often to make sure that there were no hot boxes, loads were still properly secured etc, so major defects should come to light routinely.   That would have relied on the expertise of the staff in judging things like flange wear, damage to springs etc.  There was of course no ultrasonic testing, or manufacturer's vehicle-specific standards.   It would not have mattered unduly that not all staff would be equally competent, examination could not be done very thoroughly out in some windswept yard in the pouring rain or in the dark so things must often have been missed, as what one chap had passed as fit to use would soon be picked up by another examiner somewhere else.

 

I have read that (at least among some of the Big Four)  weekly notices sent to stations would include instructions to search for and report the whereabouts of certain missing wagons.   This would obviously be particularly important when the wagons had been sent out loaded and the customer was complaining, or where special wagons had failed to be returned after use, and presumably the same system continued whilst paper records were still the norm.  This would have been OTT for tracking individual ordinary wagons in daily use across the network, but Control Offices (introduced to cope with increased wartime traffic) would get daily reports of ordinary wagons standing idle.

 

 

[Compound2632]

21 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I imagine rolling stock was classed for accountancy purposes as a "fixed asset", and that sounds like an issue of having to explain to auditors why something on the books didn't appear to exist any more (probably because it was no longer appearing in movement records).

 

Just so. Rolling stock was accounted as part of the capitalisation of the company.

 

There was reproduced in an issue of Midland Record a Great Western circular notice from shortly after the Great War, listing the numbers of 100 wagons that should be returned to the Midland if found (rather than being loaded to any destination, being common user by this date). I don't know but my thought is that these might be wagons whose time was up - due for renewal.

[The Stationmaster]

33 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I imagine rolling stock was classed for accountancy purposes as a "fixed asset", and that sounds like an issue of having to explain to auditors why something on the books didn't appear to exist any more (probably because it was no longer appearing in movement records). 

 

Unless you keep a central record at Head Office of the whereabouts of wagons it would be very difficult to plan routine maintenance.  Pre-TOPS that would have been a very costly and error-prone clerical exercise, so relying on C&W examiners to report defects should be a lot more cost-effective.  Trains had to be checked fairly often to make sure that there were no hot boxes, loads were still properly secured etc, so major defects should come to light routinely.   That would have relied on the expertise of the staff in judging things like flange wear, damage to springs etc.  There was of course no ultrasonic testing, or manufacturer's vehicle-specific standards.   It would not have mattered unduly that not all staff would be equally competent, examination could not be done very thoroughly out in some windswept yard in the pouring rain or in the dark so things must often have been missed, as what one chap had passed as fit to use would soon be picked up by another examiner somewhere else.

 

I have read that (at least among some of the Big Four)  weekly notices sent to stations would include instructions to search for and report the whereabouts of certain missing wagons.   This would obviously be particularly important when the wagons had been sent out loaded and the customer was complaining, or where special wagons had failed to be returned after use, and presumably the same system continued whilst paper records were still the norm.  This would have been OTT for tracking individual ordinary wagons in daily use across the network, but Control Offices (introduced to cope with increased wartime traffic) would get daily reports of ordinary wagons standing idle.

 

 

One of the Weekly Notices almost invariably had either or bith of these two lists -

Missing wagins

Wagons On Hand Without Labels. (which meant loaded wagons) 

 

A regular sport in one office where I worked was to check the lists and see if any wagon(s) appeared in both lists and it did very occasionally happen!

[Michael Hodgson]

39 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

There was reproduced in an issue of Midland Record a Great Western circular notice from shortly after the Great War, listing the numbers of 100 wagons that should be returned to the Midland if found (rather than being loaded to any destination, being common user by this date). I don't know but my thought is that these might be wagons whose time was up - due for renewal.

If they were due for renewal, they would in all probability be fully depreciated off the books, so audit wouldn't care.  However if they were newer and off the MR system, with some other company  using them instead of their own wagons, that would have been an issue before common user.    Once pooling is in force, it doesn't make much sense to regard them as an asset of an individual company as they have effectively become an asset of the national network.  Valuation would probably have to be done on more of an estimation basis; their poor post-war condition might mean that stright-line depreciation wasn't a fair reflection on true value anyway. But the total figure would still be material.

[Compound2632]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

If they were due for renewal, they would in all probability be fully depreciated off the books, so audit wouldn't care.  

 

As far as I can work out from my reading of the Midland minutes and the half-yearly reports and accounts, the concept of depreciation didn't apply, at least in the modern sense. An item of rolling stock was regarded as a capital asset that retained its value; work done to maintain it at its book value was a charge on a depreciation fund out of revenue. In due course, the only way to maintain it at its book value was to replace it completely - to build a new wagon as a renewal of the old one. (Usually taking its stock number.) The Midland seems in general to have used a term of 21.5 years until renewal was due, although that may have gone out the window under the pressure of the Great War. The old item of rolling stock might not be immediately broken up but remain in service for a few years longer, as part of the "duplicate" stock, which (until 1913) did not have to be reported to the shareholders or in the Board of Trade returns. Around the turn of the century, the Midland's duplicate wagon stock was around 7% its total wagon stock.

Edited September 14, 2023 by Compound2632

[jim.snowdon]

19 hours ago, coronach said:

Given that in the 50s and 60s, British Railways owned about a million goods vehicles, what were the arrangements for routine maintenance and repair?  Would wagon examiners routinely check wagons for condition, were repairs based on usage - how was this monitored?
 

How would wagons be checked for fitness to run - springs, flange wear, brakes etc?
 

Were wagons subject to regular overhauls in the many wagon works dotted around the country?  Were they sent for repair only when a fault was found?

Wagons carried plates indicating when and where they last had a General or Intermediate Repair. These would be checked periodically by the C&W examiners and arrangements for wagons to be carded For Repairs when they were nearing the end of the permitted repair interval.

 

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, jim.snowdon said:

Wagons carried plates indicating when and where they last had a General or Intermediate Repair. These would be checked periodically by the C&W examiners and arrangements for wagons to be carded For Repairs when they were nearing the end of the permitted repair interval.

 

Those were quite a late innovation, though I don't know when were they introduced - well post nationalisation? (But this is the period the OP asks about.) They had antecedents in the painted lifting etc. dates on the solebar, or the NBR's crescent mark with year of last attention painted on. 

Edited September 14, 2023 by Compound2632

[hmrspaul]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Those were quite a late innovation, though I don't know when were they introduced - well post nationalisation? (But this is the period the OP asks about.) They had antecedents in the painted lifting etc. dates on the solebar, or the NBR's crescent mark with year of last attention painted on. 

Small cast plates with GR, IR and paint due dates were commonly used for many years. Often useful for identifying wagons in late life when the running numbers have been obscured.

 

It is the plaques at the right hand end showing maintenance were a late 1960s development. 

Paul

 

[Quorn Wagon]

Couldn't tell you the administration of the process but BR11883 details the following (attached)
Maybe a case of out of date send for repair.

[jim.snowdon]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Those were quite a late innovation, though I don't know when were they introduced - well post nationalisation? (But this is the period the OP asks about.) They had antecedents in the painted lifting etc. dates on the solebar, or the NBR's crescent mark with year of last attention painted on. 

Looking on the internet, the earliest example I could find dated back to 1946. I also found examples from the early 1950s still bearing the legend LMS, which suggests that these plates predate Nationalisation, the patterns still being in use.

[Compound2632]

6 minutes ago, jim.snowdon said:

Looking on the internet, the earliest example I could find dated back to 1946. I also found examples from the early 1950s still bearing the legend LMS, which suggests that these plates predate Nationalisation, the patterns still being in use.

 

Of course old ones taken off and replaced would have gone back in the melting pot, so the practice could originate some years earlier. But not on any pre-grouping line with which I am familiar, as far as I'm aware.

[The Stationmaster]

23 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

If they were due for renewal, they would in all probability be fully depreciated off the books, so audit wouldn't care.  However if they were newer and off the MR system, with some other company  using them instead of their own wagons, that would have been an issue before common user.    Once pooling is in force, it doesn't make much sense to regard them as an asset of an individual company as they have effectively become an asset of the national network.  Valuation would probably have to be done on more of an estimation basis; their poor post-war condition might mean that stright-line depreciation wasn't a fair reflection on true value anyway. But the total figure would still be material.

If they were off the MT R's territory the company would know that and although it would onvolve a lot of work it would be possible to trace them as apart from RCH amd company records at boundaries back then all freight loaded wagons in general traffic were invoiced so a paper trail existed 'somewhere'.  And in terms of balancing, even with a huge fleet, surely the MR checked that it had got back whatever it had sent 'over its borders'?

[br2975]

On 13/09/2023 at 18:46, The Stationmaster said:

Not sure when it first started but possibly the 1960s when the first big culls of the wagon fleet got underway any wagon identified as requiring repair was assessed to ascertain how much the repair would cost or it would be sent (if it was a runner) toa. storage site to await assessment.  Many classes of repair were based on monetary limits and if a wagon was going to cost too much it would either be condemned or placed in store waiting for the limits to change depending on what type it was.

 

Generally unless they were required for modification most types of freight vehicle were not called in for repair but the C&W Examiner would check if they were in date for various things - that black panel at the right hand end which appeared in the early 1960s - and mark the wagon off for repairs if anything was outstanding date wise.  Similarly wagons would be marked off for faults or defects and either sent to a repair location depending on what needed doing or sent to wait assessment.

 

The monetary limits varied according to wagon usage requirements.  Thus the limit on a particular type of wagon could be very low (=50p in some cases where there was a large surplus of that type of wagon) and it would be increased if a wagon type was in great demand and shortages were appearing.

 

TOPS main role in its early years was to help in identifying surpluses in the wagon fleet as use of the system improved the return of empties to loading locations.  One of the big reasons for the huge investment in TOPS was to vastly improve the turnround and distribution of empties and thereby reduce the size of the wagon fleet - which it did!

.

The 'storage site' hereabouts during the mid-60s was 'Roath Line Sidings' off the Taff Vale Main Line at Roath Branch Junction.

.

Wagons were held there for inspection, and then movement down the line to Cathays C&W Works and attention.

.

As for the 'monetary limits' placed upon repair, I suspect that these also gave rise to the large handpainted codes such as:- "SUB" - "SUBEX" - "SUBEX 2" -  "COLEX" - usually seen on 16 ton mineral wagons, and "OJO" (One Journey Only) seen on a more varied selection of wagonery , the latter seen on many wagons stored at Roath Line at the time.

[Stoke West]

8 hours ago, br2975 said:

.

The 'storage site' hereabouts during the mid-60s was 'Roath Line Sidings' off the Taff Vale Main Line at Roath Branch Junction.

.

Wagons were held there for inspection, and then movement down the line to Cathays C&W Works and attention.

.

As for the 'monetary limits' placed upon repair, I suspect that these also gave rise to the large handpainted codes such as:- "SUB" - "SUBEX" - "SUBEX 2" -  "COLEX" - usually seen on 16 ton mineral wagons, and "OJO" (One Journey Only) seen on a more varied selection of wagonery , the latter seen on many wagons stored at Roath Line at the time.

College Road goods was used by the C&W , the yard being full of 16 tonners spaced about 4 yards apart to allow work on draw gear and buffers . Remember passing by with it hammering down with rain and staff in yellow waterproofs working away with no cover at all like many C&W locations 

[eldomtom2]

While slightly after the OP's requested time period, the Silver Moon Consulting website has 1970s training manuals for carriage and wagon examiners that may be of interest.

[The Stationmaster]

On 17/09/2023 at 22:15, br2975 said:

.

The 'storage site' hereabouts during the mid-60s was 'Roath Line Sidings' off the Taff Vale Main Line at Roath Branch Junction.

.

Wagons were held there for inspection, and then movement down the line to Cathays C&W Works and attention.

.

As for the 'monetary limits' placed upon repair, I suspect that these also gave rise to the large handpainted codes such as:- "SUB" - "SUBEX" - "SUBEX 2" -  "COLEX" - usually seen on 16 ton mineral wagons, and "OJO" (One Journey Only) seen on a more varied selection of wagonery , the latter seen on many wagons stored at Roath Line at the time.

Actually Roath Branch Junction Sidings.  And our Chargeman there made a very good cup of tea so there was often a debate between the boss and I about which of us would be taking the pay there on Thursdays.  Although the tea was equally good at Nantgarw the boss was strict chapel and disapproved of the cabin's 'wallpaper' so I usually went there.

 

There were incidentally printed OJO wagon labels as well as the various other defect labels.