Bulleid 4-COR unit?

[Guest maxthemapman]

With Kernow knocking down the price of Bulleid coaches, I have stocked up on these with a view to trying out a project that I have been thinking about for years.

 

What if there had been a big shortfall of express electric units on the Southern after WW2?

 

It should be possible to convert the Bachmann Bulleid coaches into something plausible. They would have to be able to run in multiple with Maunsell 4-COR units, which means a one-eyed front and a Phoenix motor coach corridor end. The luggage compartment from the Bachmann brake coaches is probably a little bit small, but I would have to live with that. It's going to be hard to squeeze in a motor bogie to replace a steam bogie. Any thoughts or suggestions much appreciated.

[gelboy45]

Food for thought. I too have often wondered what a Bullied mainline emu might have looked like but I had only considered the Bullied 3 car 59' stock with the outside doors to the compartments. A Bullied 4 Sub cab is all that needs! Not sure what a corridor connection would have looked like....

Gerry

[eastwestdivide]

On the luggage compartment, it's not a lot different to the size of the 4-CEP guard/luggage area, so why not? As per gelboy45's post, the cross between a 4-SUB and 4-COR front end should be interesting. Go for it.

[Xerces Fobe2]

Interesting Idea - my I suggest it should be known as a 4 -BUL!

 

XF

[Guest maxthemapman]

Thanks for the suggestions so far. The corridor connection off the front of a standard 4-COR is actually very wide, and so unless Bulleid was in a particularly stylistic mood, the most straightforward solution would probably be something like a BR design EPB, perhaps with a 4-SUB height window, I would definitely need a SUB front end to see how to do the driver's doors.

 

Any thoughts on whether the intermediate coach should be a corridor 2nd or a 2nd open? Bachmann give me a choice.

[eastwestdivide]

Any thoughts on whether the intermediate coach should be a corridor 2nd or a 2nd open? Bachmann give me a choice.

The original layout of the 4-CEPs (before refurbishment) was open motor coaches and side-corridor compartment trailers, and they were later than your period, so I'd have gone for that on the grounds that the gradual phasing out of compartments was still a long way in the future.

[Guest maxthemapman]

Good point, so corridor 2nd it is.

 

The buffers look a bit wimpy on the Bachmann coaches, replace them?

[phil-b259]

Good point, so corridor 2nd it is.

 

The buffers look a bit wimpy on the Bachmann coaches, replace them?

 

Definitely. When BR produced the Maunsel PP conversations they fitted the outer ends with heavy duty EMU buffers. The Brighton belle stock also had heavy duty buffers between cars, as did the 4 CORs if my memory is correct (both used screw couplings within the sets and not the buckeyes fitted to steam stock).

[Gwiwer]

Having had a close relationship with 4Cor (and related) units from the early 1960s to date I can say that these are very dear to my heart making any sort of project to represent them - or something like them - of significant interest.

 

The SR was well-known for adapting to and overcoming extreme difficulties and coping with stock losses and shortages in very enterprising ways. Several generations of loco-hauled stock have been converted to multiple units with the history of such adaptation only being brought to a close with the withdrawal of the Gatwick Express Mk2 stock. Other units were wholly or partially rebuilt into newer units.

 

I see no reason why this logic should not have given rise to Bulleid stock being pressed into service as EMU stock since the SR workshops were already adept at similar rebuilds. Recover running gear from war-damaged units, perhaps, and place it beneath loose-coupled stock. Or simply lift the bodies off and swap the frames if there was a close fit.

 

My thoughts are that the end coaches would be open with all intermediate coaches being compartment stock. This matches the contemporaneous main line non-Pullman stock of 6Pul, 6Pan, 4Cor, 4Res and 4Buf types.

 

These units all had very heavy buffers between the cars thought necessary I believe because of their partially-timbered construction and the possibility that a motor coach along the train could push the coaches forward against each other if things weren't working properly.

[Guest maxthemapman]

Taking a Bachmann body and dropping it onto an SR EMU pre-war chassis would make life so much easier than motorising a Bachmann coach ...

 

But the elephant in the room is that the layout of the Bachmann brake coach is nothing much like the Maunsell 4-COR motor coach, with a central toilet and two compartments.

 

It would be easy to open up the compartments. Perhaps the guard's door should also be converted into a passenger entrance, but that gives rather generous spacing, and are that many passenger doors really needed, so perhaps the guards door should be rubbed off and filled in.

[Colin parks]

Hi Max,

 

Here is my penny'worth on your proposed project:

 

If you were to use converted steam-hauled coaches, that would pre-suppose that a Bulleid '4 COR replacement' building progarmme would not make use of a steel-bodied, jig-built design. Rather, it would be like Bulleid's wartime take on the 4 LAV.

 

So, that would give you: a domed-roof cab like the original 2 HAL, heavy-duty buffers on all headstocks - as Gwiwer and Phil suggest. The most likely composition of the unit would be: all-third motor coaches with guard/luggage vans at each end, a trailer corridor composite and and a trailer all-third. I would beg to differ with those of you who suggest a '1948 production series' 4 SUB front would have been fitted. They were fitted to all-steel bodied stock. Bulleid steam stock had wood/canvas roofs for which the domed cabs were designed to fit. Bulleid suceeded in grafting these cabs onto the original 2 HALs, seconds series 4 LAVs and first series 4 SUBs.

 

On a practical level, I have found that a Black Beetle motor bogie will quite happily pull/push a 4-car EMU about as long as you have brass bearings and pin-point axles on all bogies. (In your case, all seven). Conversely, Bachmann coaches that are not converted to having brass bearings in their bogies run very stiffly after a short while in use. (This I have found out from running my 4 CIG unit made from Bachmann BR mk.1 coaches.) A Black Beetle unit ought to fit in the limited space available in the brake coaches you have without much trouble. They do need extra pick-ups fitted to the wheels on the trailing bogie of the powered coach for reliable running.

 

The question of the wheelbase of the motor bogies is another matter, but I would go for 8' 9" with 3' 6" dia. wheels (the motor bogie wheels were slightly larger than this in reality, but 14mm is probably the closest size you will find in model form.. Bulleid used this configuration.

 

Er, will this do?!

 

All the best,

 

Colin

[Guest maxthemapman]

Colin,

 

Many thanks for your input. Do I take it that the domed front on hybrid stock is there for technical reasons rather than stylistic reasons. This gets interesting because if you put a Maunsell-design 4-COR front corridor connection on a domed Bulleid roof, you would get something rather startling that would be not unlike the front of a Clacton unit.

 

Of course, with a hole punched through a domed Bulleid front so that people can walk through it, its structural properties are going to change, so something different might be needed.

 

With the news from yesterday, everything changes. I now have a suitable chassis for the motor coach available (although an expensive option with discarding everything else) and a wallet that is going to be taking serious damage.

 

Max

[Colin parks]

Hi Max,

 

I take your point that the units would need a corridor conection through the cab ends for your 'Bulleid 4 COR' to be a direct replacement for Maunsell 4 CORs. That would leave you with a cab front design somewhere between that of a 4 COR and a 4 CEP.

 

Yes, after yesterday's announcement from Hornby, the situation has changed for Southern Electric modellers. The chassis of the Hornby 2 BIL would need a little adaption if being used under Bachmann steam-hauled coach bodies. I think there is a difference in length over headstocks - I could be wrong though.

 

All the best,

 

Colin

[phil-b259]

Hi Max,

 

I take your point that the units would need a corridor conection through the cab ends for your 'Bulleid 4 COR' to be a direct replacement for Maunsell 4 CORs. That would leave you with a cab front design somewhere between that of a 4 COR and a 4 CEP.

 

Yes, after yesterday's announcement from Hornby, the situation has changed for Southern Electric modellers. The chassis of the Hornby 2 BIL would need a little adaption if being used under Bachmann steam-hauled coach bodies. I think there is a difference in length over headstocks - I could be wrong though.

 

All the best,

 

Colin

 

In general Maunsell stock (including his EMUs were built on 59'6" underframes. Bullied increased this to 63' for his mainline stock (except for a small quantity during the changeover where already built underframes were finished as multi door coaches to Bullied profile) but as far as I know kept the shorter length for his EMU designs (presumably to save time and money redesigning the more complicated Electric unit underframes)

[Oldddudders]

In general Maunsell stock (including his EMUs were built on 59'6" underframes. Bullied increased this to 63' for his mainline stock (except for a small quantity during the changeover where already built underframes were finished as multi door coaches to Bullied profile) but as far as I know kept the shorter length for his EMU designs (presumably to save time and money redesigning the more complicated Electric unit underframes)

My 1961/2 Combined Volume insists that PULs, PANs, CORs etc were all 63' 6 vehicles, i.e. only a foot shorter than Mk1 bodied CEPs. Maunsell steam stock was 59', but not his EMUs.

 

EDIT - The same tatty book tells me the BIL vehicles were 62' 6 long.

[10800]

Golding's book of plans has

 

2BIL and 2HAL coaches 62'6" over body panels, 61'11" over headstocks (motors actually 61'11 1/2 ")

 

COR/BUF/GRI and 6PUL/PAN/CIT coaches 63'6"/62'6" except the PAN/CIT FK which was 59'0"/57'11" and the PUL/CIT Pullmans at 66'0"/65'0". The standard vehicles all had 44'6" bogie centre wheelbases.

 

Mk1 based BEP/CEP etc were all 64'6"/63'5" with 46'6" bogie centre wheelbases.

[Colin parks]

Golding's book of plans has

 

2BIL and 2HAL coaches 62'6" over body panels, 61'11" over headstocks (motors actually 61'11 1/2 ")

 

COR/BUF/GRI and 6PUL/PAN/CIT coaches 63'6"/62'6" except the PAN/CIT FK which was 59'0"/57'11" and the PUL/CIT Pullmans at 66'0"/65'0". The standard vehicles all had 44'6" bogie centre wheelbases.

 

Mk1 based BEP/CEP etc were all 64'6"/63'5" with 46'6" bogie centre wheelbases.

 

Hi 10800,

 

You've got the 'book' too then. (Salt, pinch, with, take etc. come to mind - in no particular order!)

 

Further to the above infomation, the 2 BILs had a 44' 0" wheelbase. I have drawings by Mike King which agree with this measurement. 4 SUBs and Tin HALs were to these basic dimensions too. To be honest, I was referring to the practicalities of fitting a Hornby 2 BIL chassis to a Bachmann model of a Bulleid steam-hauled coach, believing the latter to be slightly longer in the chassis department. Max could do whatever is easiest as there is no prototype to copy.

 

All the best,

 

Colin

[10800]

Hi Colin

 

Yes I wondered about the 'reputation' of this book when I made the post. I have Mike King drawings somewhere of the COR/PUL/PAN families, but if there are errors in the dimensions I posted I'm happy for anyone to correct them.

[Budgie]

With the news from yesterday, everything changes. I now have a suitable chassis for the motor coach available (although an expensive option with discarding everything else) and a wallet that is going to be taking serious damage.

You don't have to discard everything else; you could sell it to someone who can make use of it (such as me). 

 

They would have to be able to run in multiple with Maunsell 4-COR units, which means a one-eyed front and a Phoenix motor coach corridor end.

Why one-eyed? With Bulleid's penchant for innovation, wouldn't he have put a headcode panel on the door in the corridor connection?

[Guest maxthemapman]

 Why one-eyed? With Bulleid's penchant for innovation, wouldn't he have put a headcode panel on the door in the corridor connection?

Depends on whether it would be possible for the gangway be able to join onto Maunsell 4-Cor units even with a stencil holder on the front (I'm assuming that roller blinds are not going to be invented). I can think of some very good reasons for stencil holders not getting in the way, but Bulleid also had a reputation for irritating innovations.

 

I am assuming that this is going to be a stop-gap build to cover massive wartime losses, and so the emphasis is going to be on something quick and dirty. For a large-scale build of something carefully planned, we would have to assume a delay in nationalisation, and either Kent Coast or Midhurst/Steyning electrification