London Transport train reporting numbers/Lettering-typeface for engineering wagons/brake vans.

[BachelorBoy]

On 05/10/2023 at 08:20, roythebus1 said:

I was trying to go with Johnston P22: but cut-and-paste lost the font!! I'll try again tomorrow when I'm not so tired. I've got it on my laptop. the only problem is that it doesn't have the punctuation marks.

 

 

Try putting in Gill punctuation marks ... I doubt anyone will notice the difference :-)

 

BTW: P22 also sells a companion font of symbols, etc

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by BachelorBoy
Added extra pix

[Typographer]

The P22 fonts should be complete with all punctuation - and unfortunately Gill stops are round, J’s were square (they are now diamond-shaped, but that’s another story).

The arrows and line diagram dingbats you show are great! Many happy hours making pretend car line diagrams with those!

 

The pic is what the wood type looked like. There were two weights. As roythebus1 implies, weights get adjusted in signwriting/transfer making.

 

Back on the OP’s actual topic, lettering could be consistently applied to metal plates using stencils. Half the numerals can be stencils without breaks (1 2 3 5 7) the rest would need a break in the stencil, but the resultant figure parts could easily be joined up with a brush. I’m not speaking from any knowledge of how it was actually done for these, just a thought.

[roythebus1]

Back in the 1970s a company called Rapitype used to do dry print transfers for Johnston Script. I had permission from LT to use it in connection with my range of cast metal bus kits. Sadly I got rid of the sheets as they became life-expired. The Johnston full stops are square, earlier versions were diamond shape. the Rapitype sheets also had the London Transport underlined fleetnames.

 

I don't know if Rapitype still exists.

 

[jim.snowdon]

16 hours ago, Typographer said:

Back on the OP’s actual topic, lettering could be consistently applied to metal plates using stencils. Half the numerals can be stencils without breaks (1 2 3 5 7) the rest would need a break in the stencil, but the resultant figure parts could easily be joined up with a brush. I’m not speaking from any knowledge of how it was actually done for these, just a thought.

The plates, along with the destination and line plates used on pre-war passenger stock, were enamelled, with the character(s) created by screen printing.

 

[bécasse]

1 hour ago, jim.snowdon said:

The plates, along with the destination and line plates used on pre-war passenger stock, were enamelled, with the character(s) created by screen printing.

 

Thanks Jim, I rather suspected that that was how it was done because, from the shear numbers and consistent results, it had to have been a mechanical process.

[46444]

5 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

The plates, along with the destination and line plates used on pre-war passenger stock, were enamelled, with the character(s) created by screen printing.

 

 

Thanks Jim,

 

Any idea of the size of the plates used on the Pannier's? Also the height of the numbers would be useful as well? 

 

Cheers,

 

Mark 

 

 

[Jeff Smith]

Scaling from the picture of L94 on pg 102 in Red Panniers against the buffer beam height (1'3") would suggest 6" high for the plate and 4.5 to 5" high for the numerals.  These seem to be individual number plates inserted into a three slot holder.

 

Pictures in the above book on pages 132 and 133 show numbers of two different sizes......

Edited October 7, 2023 by Jeff Smith

[46444]

5 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

Scaling from the picture of L94 on pg 102 in Red Panniers against the buffer beam height (1'3") would suggest 6" high for the plate and 4.5 to 5" high for the numerals.  These seem to be individual number plates inserted into a three slot holder.

 

Hi Jeff,

 

Thankyou. That will certainly be of help. Much appreciated.

 

I would agree they were placed in a holder. In some of the snaps in Red Pannier's these are visible both front and rear. 

 

Cheers,

 

Mark 

 

 

[Jeff Smith]

Please see my edited post above.

[46444]

5 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

Please see my edited post above.

 

I'll have a look Jeff.

 

Thanks once again.

[46444]

Hmmm!

 

I wonder if that's due to the first numeral (5) being older and more weathered than the middle and third numbers? 

 

Indoing so it appears smaller

 

 

 

[Engineer]

I don't have any answers of my own, but I've just had a chat with a long-retired person with lots of experience  in LT depots.

 

I'm told that the plates came in sets of five held together with a hefty ring, top centre.  Plates were 14 gauge steel, and a measured sample comes out at 5 3/4" high, 4 1/2" wide.  The dimensions and design were consistent from the Underground Group onwards into LT.  By the 1960s, with many grubby or missing plates, 'Fablon' sticky numbers with the same character forms were applied to otherwise unusable plates.  

 

With luck, I may have a chance soon to examine some plates at close quarters.

[Jeff Smith]

A bit of research yielded the following-:

Microscale Decals sheet 90161 UP Gothic White, HO in various sizes.

I happen to have the same sheet in gold (90163).  The HO 6" which actually measures 1,5mm so in 1/76 would be 4.5" - perfect.

The font is very similar to Johnston Script - the difference would be hardly noticeable in 4mm scale.  The 6" is the upper set.

 

[jim.snowdon]

6 hours ago, 46444 said:

 

Thanks Jim,

 

Any idea of the size of the plates used on the Pannier's? Also the height of the numbers would be useful as well? 

 

Cheers,

 

Mark 

 

 

Not now, but I would suggest scaling from photographs, or a visit to the South Devon Railway, whose ex-LT pannier appears to have retained its number plates.

[roythebus1]

The same numbers were used as set numbers on electric stock for an awful long time.

 

500 series was for engineers and special trains.

[KeithMacdonald]

1 hour ago, jim.snowdon said:

I would suggest scaling from photographs, or a visit to the South Devon Railway, whose ex-LT pannier appears to have retained its number plates.

 

Here's one they prepared earlier.

 

https://www.southdevonrailway.co.uk/rolling-stock/locomotives/5786-gwr-0-6-0pt/

[D7666]

And don't forget the valid digit range is not 000 to 999 but 000 to 777 without any 8s or 9s.

 

It is an OCTAL range not a decimal range.

 

Not withstanding that the /general/ numbering is 0xx 1xx 2xx 3xx 4xx passenger, 5xx 6xx engineers, 7xx empty and things like RAT, TRV, etc, each series are still for example 6xx

600-607

610-617

etc

670 to 677

 

So beware if making up fictitious numbers that you want to look real.

 

It's origins lies in legacy train describer system with cabin to cabin comms signalled by a 3 relay set (so only 8 combinations from 0 0 0 to 1 1 1 ) to send each digit, and there is no business reason to alter this even on lines where this legacy kit is no more.

 

 

Edited October 8, 2023 by D7666

[KeithMacdonald]

33 minutes ago, D7666 said:

It is an OCTAL range not a decimal range.

 

I did not expect that. London Transport was running an eight-bit operating system. Years before Lyons invented LEO.

[D7666]

18 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

I did not expect that. London Transport was running an eight-bit operating system. Years before Lyons invented LEO.

I am not talking about computer operating systems.

 

It is about electrical communications along copper wires between electro mechanical human manned signal cabins done by relays.

 

Zilch to do with operating systems in the same way that Linux / Windows / whatever O/S has nothing to do with how bits and bytes go along copper or fibre or radio.

 

In fact it has nothing to do with computers at all. It way way predates computers in any kind of railway command and control scenario. And even today no business case to migrate from 000-777 octal to 000-999 decimal the increased number range is not needed anywhere.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2023 by D7666

[KeithMacdonald]

1 hour ago, D7666 said:

I am not talking about computer operating systems.

 

You are getting exercise by jumping to conclusions. I did not say London Transport was running a computer system, it's clear to all it was a mechanical system.

[Jeff Smith]

On 07/10/2023 at 16:21, Engineer said:

Fablon' sticky numbers with the same character forms were applied to otherwise unusable plates.  

Looking through Red Panniers there are several instances of probably this, some bigger, some smaller.

[roythebus1]

10 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

Looking through Red Panniers there are several instances of probably this, some bigger, some smaller.

Yep, there was a lot of variation, depending who made the stick-on numbers.

[jim.snowdon]

19 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

I did not expect that. London Transport was running an eight-bit operating system. Years before Lyons invented LEO.

It's only a 3-bit system!

 

[Jeremy Cumberland]

19 minutes ago, jim.snowdon said:

It's only a 3-bit system!

 

9 bit, isn't it, with 3 digits?

 

Incidentally, I recall reading (on District Dave, perhaps) within the last couple of years that 8 and 9 were beginning to be used.

[jim.snowdon]

15 hours ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

9 bit, isn't it, with 3 digits?

 

Incidentally, I recall reading (on District Dave, perhaps) within the last couple of years that 8 and 9 were beginning to be used.

No, you only need three binary digits (bits) to code 0-7, with each of the three characters sent sequentially. How the train reporting numbers were transmitted in line with train movements is beyond my knowledge, but it goes back to the age of electromechanical computing.