6959 Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 In steam days it was 'normal' to have a passenger brake [bTK or, later, BSK] on each end of long trains. On shorter trains one or both brake ends might be a brake composite [bCK] instead. On very short trains a single passenger brake of one form or another could be in the middle of the consist. A van, aka full brake [bG] was sometimes used for extra baggage or parcels capacity on long distance expresses or boat trains. I should like to know what the operating rules said about a full brake being used instead of a BTK/ BSK or BCK. The reason for asking is that at present Bachmann make one only BSK in blood and custard with a Western Region running number and no BCK to use instead. I could use a BG at the other end from the BSK to keep it an all-MK1 set, or use a Hornby Hawksworth BSK or BCK for a mongrel. Not a life changing topic but it would be helpful to hear from full size railwaymen {even normal size railwaymen on the full size railway}. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stuartp Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 As far as I'm aware, other than restrictions on 4 and 6-wheeled stock at various dates the rules disn't say anything - a brake is a brake - as long as the guard has somewhere to sit the passengers can sort themselves out. The Passenger Manager might have something to say about the reduction in seats but it was within the operating rules. When the Queen of Scots Pullman went over to Mk 1 stock in the 1950s some 1928 Brake Seconds were retained as no Mk1 Pullman brakes were built, but these were replaced after a couple of years by a single Mk1 BG. Also BGs in passenger consists appear quite regularly in 1970s/80s photos of Far North and Kyle line trains. Not typical by any means, but on one occasion to my knowledge in 1987 the first train of the day from Huddersfield to Penistone consisted of a single BG with a station bench in it, hauled by an 08. It was pressed into service by the legendary Station Manager Hanton after none of the stabled 101s and 110s could be persuaded to start. The eventual arrival at Penistone was monumentally late but the Naylor Bros early shift got to Denby Dale which was what mattered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Holliday Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 For what it's worth, the LBSCR CME Robert Billinton built large numbers of bogie coaches at the turn of the 19th century, and apart from some blcok sets, none of them had guards / brake compartments. Instead a huge fleet of 6 wheel full brakes were used to top and tail almost every train. Of course, these were all non corridor as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ramblin Rich Posted February 22, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2012 Not typical by any means, but on one occasion to my knowledge in 1987 the first train of the day from Huddersfield to Penistone consisted of a single BG with a station bench in it, hauled by an 08. It was pressed into service by the legendary Station Manager Hanton after none of the stabled 101s and 110s could be persuaded to start. The eventual arrival at Penistone was monumentally late but the Naylor Bros early shift got to Denby Dale which was what mattered. Better still, a class 50 on 2 BGs mentioned on the "old" RMweb Re: Barnstaple line DMUs by D826 » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:04 pm Exeter could be relied on for some real scratch combinations in the late 88 - 90's. My girlfriend (now wife) went to Exeter Uni and on one memorable occaision in the summer of 89 we got the local from St Davids to Dawlish (which was going on to Paignton). Owing to stock availability (probably when the 155 doors were problematic), consisted of a battered Railfreight 47, and a blue and grey BG and, (from memory), an IC Exec liveried BG. Passengers got on, and were milling round looking miffed at the cages, and then realised they'd better grab whatever seat they could see. I remember people giving the guard a really hard time as he came round for tickets, saying it was disgusting and the like - I told him he'd made my year, and I would have paid extra. Admired the noise, acceleration, and look of surprise on peoples faces on the sea wall, when what looked like a minature parcels was actually revealed to be in passenger use. (I hung out of a window the whole way, grinning like a madman). That really did perform like a 'sprinter'. Matt Wood All I can say is Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 As far as I'm aware, other than restrictions on 4 and 6-wheeled stock at various dates the rules disn't say anything - a brake is a brake - as long as the guard has somewhere to sit the passengers can sort themselves out. This pretty much sums it up. Some sort accomodation for the guard was required. Beyond that the makeup of the train would be determined by passenger levels. AFAIK theer was no rule stating that a brake vehicle was required at each end of a rake although it was a common convention. If a particular train was expected to connect with some other mode of transport such as ferry, I can easily imagine a BG being included in the rake to handle the extra luggage such a train might be expected to carry. In short, I cannot think of any reason not to include a BG in your rake. Or failing that you could have a go at renumbering a BSK. Changing one digit should not be too hard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsOatcake Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Well there were very few Mark 3 Brakes built and most of the WCML Mark three rakes consisted of Mk3's and a BG. Until the advent of the DVT's Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Bird Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Admittedly, not steam days but, on the West Coast before push-pull and Pendolinos, the electric loco hauled trains usually had a 57' BG at the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
62613 Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 On the recast of the Transpennine service in about 1979, the trains were made up of 1FO, 6or7 TSO, BG,usually a NAV or NXV, all the passenger coaches were Mk2 A/B/C Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 22, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2012 This pretty much sums it up. Some sort accomodation for the guard was required. Beyond that the makeup of the train would be determined by passenger levels. AFAIK theer was no rule stating that a brake vehicle was required at each end of a rake although it was a common convention. As it happens it was required by Instruction in the early 1950s (in fact the Regulations involved were much older but had tended to be observed in the breach and were twice reinforced and reiterated following collisions involving passenger fataltities although there was already in place a relaxation allowing vehicles behind a brake in controlled circumstances. The big change came in the late '60s when there was a major relaxation on the number of vehicles allowed behind a brake. I seem to recollect going through al this on the previous version of RMWeb and somebody might recall the thread title. Edit - correction after buffalo led us to my original posts (thanks Nick) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Maybe this one? Google site search is your friend... Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Steven B Posted February 22, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 22, 2012 With contiunous brakes there was less need of a brake van/compartment on the end of a train. I do remember reading somewhere (can't remember where) that the brake vehicle should be one of the last three vehicles in the train - meaning that a five coach train could get away with one brake vehicle in the center of the train. Happy modelling. Steven B. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium BR60103 Posted February 23, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 23, 2012 For someone with mainly North American experience, were there any brakes that could be applied from a non-brake vehicle? How did they sit in sidings? For cars with continuous brakes, was there a way to apply those brakes from non-brake vehicles (aside from the chain)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 For someone with mainly North American experience, were there any brakes that could be applied from a non-brake vehicle? How did they sit in sidings? For cars with continuous brakes, was there a way to apply those brakes from non-brake vehicles (aside from the chain)? Handbrakes? No. Brake vehicles - in passenger traffic* - with provision for the guard were the only vehicles with handbrakes. All other passenger vehicles by the twentieth century had to be continuously braked with automatic (air or vacuum) brake and these could be applied by the locomotive crew or (I think) by the guard. The handbrakes, I believe, were mostly used as a parking brake or in emergencies. In sidings, the vacuum would generally be released by pulling the cord (which released a valve) leaving the brakes on. If the sidings weren't actually level, I suspect that chocks were used to reinforce the process. I'll leave the precise operating details - or corrections - to those with some practical operating experience. Adam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stuartp Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 In sidings, the vacuum would generally be released by pulling the cord (which released a valve) leaving the brakes on. If the sidings weren't actually level, I suspect that chocks were used to reinforce the process. I'll leave the precise operating details - or corrections - to those with some practical operating experience. In time the vacuum would leak off so stabled vehicles had to be chocked or coupled to something with a handbrake, or both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poor Old Bruce Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 The 1954 "Loads of Passenger Trains" booklet for the Midland Lines says: "A brake van or vehicle with brake compartment leading should, as far as practicable, be marshalled next to the engine of all passenger trains, except where the formation is otherwise specified in the Passenger Train Marshalling Circular or Carriage Workings or delay will be caused at the starting point. Similary a brake van or vehicle with brake compartment trailing should, as far as practicable be marshalled at the rear of passenger trains." The relevant bit for the OP is "brake van or vehicle with brake compartment." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 also in steam and up to about the 1990s it was normal for some passenger trains to convey Mail on them. IIRC the BG was at the London end on the W.C.M.L. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 as far as practicable I think that this is probably the key phrase to note. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
6959 Posted February 23, 2012 Author Share Posted February 23, 2012 I think that this is probably the key phrase to note. I cannot find a place called Practicable on any of my maps. How far is it from Impracticable? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
6959 Posted February 23, 2012 Author Share Posted February 23, 2012 The 1954 "Loads of Passenger Trains" booklet for the Midland Lines says: "A brake van or vehicle with brake compartment leading should, as far as practicable, be marshalled next to the engine of all passenger trains, except where the formation is otherwise specified in the Passenger Train Marshalling Circular or Carriage Workings or delay will be caused at the starting point. Similary a brake van or vehicle with brake compartment trailing should, as far as practicable be marshalled at the rear of passenger trains." The relevant bit for the OP is "brake van or vehicle with brake compartment." That answers my original post so I have copied it for my records. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eggesford box Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 In sidings, the vacuum would generally be released by pulling the cord (which released a valve) leaving the brakes on. If the sidings weren't actually level, I suspect that chocks were used to reinforce the process. I'll leave the precise operating details - or corrections - to those with some practical operating experience. Adam Hi, other way round, if you pull the cord it releases the vacuum or air in the cylinder and releases the automatic brake so the vehicle will only be held by the handbrake, if applied. As Stuartp says, after a while the vacuum would leak. In my limited experience the old Southern type Utility vans where very prone to this, the later BR designs less so. I am afraid I am not that technically minded and open to correction but it is the difference in pressure between the brake cylinder and the train pipe that releases or applies the brakes. Reduce the pressure in the brake pipe to less than that in the cylinder and the brakes come on. Sometimes the cords would be pulled when attaching another engine. I believe Western engines created a higher brake pressure than those of other companies so if the cords where not pulled then the pressure in the brake cylinders could be higher than the new engine could create in the train pipe resulting in dragging brakes.DMUs also appeared to not be able to create as much pressure as an engine so I used to pull the cords if attaching tail traffic to a DMU. Please feel free to correct me if I am talking nonsense but that has always been my understanding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dukedog Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Vacuum is created to RELEASE the brakes and the Vacuum is destroyed by operating the vacuum brake in the loco cab or valve in the brake van to APPLY the brake. In the unlikely event of a train parting in the middle the vacuum hose would pull apart thus destroying the vacuum and applying the brakes. Therefore a rake of stock in sidings disconnected from the source of vacuum (ie loco) would automatically have the brakes applied. Regarding the level of vacuum. GWR engines created vacuum at about 28 inches of mercury whereas a LMS or Std loco creates a lower vacuum of about 21 inches of mercury. Air brakes work to opposite way round, air PRESSURE is required to release the brakes releasing pressure in the brake line will APPLY the brakes. That is the way I was always taught when I was firing on a preserved line. Cheers Frank Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eggesford box Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Hi Dukedog, agree with what you say. My point is that the difference in the pressure between the brake pipe and brake cylinder is what controls the brake regardless of whether it is air or vacuum. If the cylinder is charged at 21 inches and the brake pipe is also 21 inches then the brakes will be off. Destroy the vacuum in the brake pipe so it is at normal atmospheric pressure by applying the brakes on the loco or van and the brakes will come on.If you then pull the cord on the brake cylinder, on the train vehicles, so that is now at atmospheric pressure as well then the brakes will come off. Leave a wagon uncoupled and eventually the automatic brake will release owing to air leaking out/into the brake cylinder depending on whether it is air or vacuum braked, hence why you apply handbrakes. Thats my understanding.As I said before I am not very technically minded and quite how the mechanism works to charge the brake cylinders and then the brake pipes on vacuum or single pipe air brakes as I assume it does I do not know.Perhaps someone more technically minded can advise or inform me I am talking codswallop! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stuartp Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 The vacuum is created on both sides of the brake piston, with both sides of the piston in equilibrium it drops to the bottom of the cylinder and releases the brake. Applying the brake allows air in under the piston to destroy the vacuum and apply the brake. When the vehicle is stabled the vacuum remaing above the piston will eventually leak off as air leaks in, and when the piston is again in equilibrium (this time with atmospheric pressure both sides) the piston will drop back down releasing the brake again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted February 23, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 23, 2012 You have the choice of a BG, or a pre BR vehicle. A chance to incorporate a filthy coach on an otherwise clean train. A last minute replacement for a defective vehicle, as 'something' with a brake control would need to be provided. Kevin Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eggesford box Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Ta Stuart, that makes sense and stirs some dim memories at the back of my head about how it actually works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.