HGR

LNG and LPG are quite different products with very different challenges to transportation. Enterprisingwestern has just posted while I'm in the middle of typing this !

LPG - Liquefied Petroleum Gas covers propane, butane, and mixtures of varying proportions of these commonly used as 'bottled gas' for camping, cooking, heating, etc. They can be stored as a liquid either under pressure at normal air temperature or alternatively at minimal pressure by refrigeration to about -40 deg.C.

LNG - Liquefied Natural Gas is predominately methane, with small amounts of ethane and other gasses used to control the calorific value of the gas that ends up in the public gas pipeline network. At normal temperatures it can only reasonably exist in gaseous form. To store as a liquid it must be cooled to cryogenic temperatures. It is typically held at LNG terminals in enormous storage tanks that are very well insulated with the liquid at -160 deg.C. There is gas 'boil-off' from the liquid in the tank that has to be removed / used or re-liquefied in order to prevent pressure in the tank rising dangerously. Look up La Spezia rollover incident to see what I mean.

When LNG is transported by sea, the LNG is loaded cold but the tanks on board the ship gradually warm up as the ship is under way, so the boil-off gas is often used in the main engines for propulsion rather than being lost through venting.

VTG have been running trials in Germany for the last five or so years for inland transportation of LNG using special railtanks. Not aware of any UK application though as our LNG terminals feed the gas pipeline network directly.

They are called 'operating panels', and appear to have been introduced in 1969 along with the introduction of the 'new' Working Manual for Rail Staff - part 6 the white pages covered preparation and working of freight trains. This pre-dated TOPS by a few years.

The first wagons that they were prepared for were 16 T MIN and then various steel-bodied (e.g. ex. LNER style) OPENs. There appeared to be no logic though in the sequence that they appeared in the B.R. catalogue. The TOPS diagram books showed a copy of the operating panel and its number so that you could order them up from stores. The number appears in tiny text at the bottom corner of the vinyl self-adhesive yellow label. Beware that this catalogue number only related to different numeric data printed on the panel, and not the vehicle type it was intended for so the same panel could apply to some quite different wagons, an example being operating panel number 7 that was popular for the 13 T vac braked 'standard' wagons of various heights - LOWFIT, MEDFIT, HYBARFIT, SHOCOPEN, etc.

There were also various 'blank' wagon panels where the data boxes were empty so you could write the numbers in by hand with black paint and a thin signwriter's brush ... or more likely a black permanent marker, but you can imagine how less-than-permanent they turned out to be !

As observed by earlier posters the labels were not so sticky on flaking paint / rusty underframes and often completely or partly fell off the wagon, so consequently later issues of the WM included examples of panels for common wagon types to use when manually assessing the train loading / available brake force.

Thank You again. That is the original part 4 mauve pages that was withdrawn in Feb. 1972, use of older type containers presumably had ceased by then ?

The only CONFLATs I ever saw in traffic never had containers on them ! Only bits of random machinery or redundant / scrap semaphore signalling equipment coming back to the CS&TE sidings. 

BeRTIe,

Thank You for those scans. That answers a few questions ! 

Interestingly, some of the specific traffics appear to have already 'gone' by then. For example malt. Clause B1 alludes to a serious bit of culling of the previously extensive variety of pre-printed labels for specific traffics. In later versions of the WM, the wording of cl. B1 was further simplified.

As an asside, when the WM was first issued it had a part 4 for loading of B.R. type containers. This was quickly withdrawn (1971 ?) and part 4 was to be re-used for the labelling of defective wagons. I've not seen a WM with a later part 4 though.

Cheers.

Does anyone out there happen to have a copy of the B.R. Working Manual for Rail Staff containing the wagon labelling instructions - the yellow pages section, dated before 1973 ?

If so, could you scan / copy / post images on here by chance please ?

My copy is post-'73 so has the TOPS version of the wagon labels - with the five box TOPS location number for the destination. What I'm looking for is the earlier version that has wagon labels pre-TOPS that have the three boxes for the three-character destination routing code instead. Hopefully it would also list the labels used for the traffics that disappeared off the railways in 1971, and thus didn't make it into the TOPS era wagon labels.

Alternatively, if anyone has a pre-TOPS copy of the Wagon Labelling Guide, this could answer my questions ?

Any help gratefully appreciated. Thanks.

55 minutes ago, markw said:

Isn't it the code for a 16t mineral with bottom doors (H for hopper-ish), can't think there would be many left though.

The bottom door variant were included in with MCO. The AARKND (the four-character TOPS code - see diagrams on Barrowmore web-site, etc) differentiated between the ones with side and end door only as MCO C and those with '... and bottom doors' were originally assigned MCO F but this was quickly changed to MCO D. Interestingly the MCO F variant originally was listed following on from the vac braked MCV variants, but maybe then realised that the bottom doors would preclude vac brake so was changed to MCO D as the next available MCO variant but remained at the end of the list. The bottom doors required the use of double brakes, without a cross-shaft, in order to leave the space under the bottom doors unobstructed. 

Not aware of any use of the code MH before the MHA box body conversions in the '90s as mentioned by 'keefer'.

However, bear in mind that MCO wagons transferred to the DCE fleet as general material carriers were coded ZHO.

The TOPS code 'CA' is a bit of an oddity in that it isn't really a two-letter GENKOC as would be for other wagons. So for brake vans the 'C' is not part of the Covered (Bulk) group. Instead it's a throwback to the three lettered codes for railway operational purposes, such as the TOPS code RSH = wagon sheets, ROP = ropes, etc.

Brake van in American = caboose, so the traffic brake van in the B.R. implementation of TOPS was initially given the TOPS code CAB as would be typically used in the USA. If you look at many of the first issue TOPS-era vehicle diagrams for the brake vans they are coded thus.

This was quickly changed so that the third letter became the BRAKTY brake type code as for all other vehicles. The GENKOC 'CA' is really part of the 'R' group. The TOPS codes shown on the vehicle diagrams were amended to correctly show the appropriate brake type in the third letter. So CAO as on your example vehicle is a traffic brake van, unfitted.

Beware the blue/red livery was the 'blue era' livery for service vehicles, not just research dept. so could be any of the engineering departments under the DM&EE. It was the blue/grey coach livery with rail red substituting the rail grey panel to denote a service vehicle instead of revenue coaching stock. The first ones I'm aware of were BTU tool van conversions that came out of Cardiff Cathays in 1970 and were kicking around in South Wales. Fairly soon after, all-over yellow became the livery for 'plant' and CM&EE vehicles. BTU vehicles had a band of black diagonals on the yellow. The RTC continued to use the blue/red livery for their vehicles, until the 'executive' variant came out in the later '80s.

On 09/08/2021 at 15:09, Flood said:

HGR has covered the full details but as he states in 1975 the VAA (VAB) was solely for the ventilated variety, VBA (VBB) for the non-ventilated. In reality the first batch 200000-200208, were virtually, if not all, coded VAA (VAB). The remaining batches were VBA (VBB) although some errors can be seen on individual wagons being coded VAA (e.g 200633, 200643, 200644).

Just been having a further dig regards the 200000 - 200099 / 200120 - 200208 batch. As you point out most were coded VAA or VAB and it got me wondering how come so many of these were showing up as this even in Railfreight and EWS liveries after all the later batches had been recoded. If you discount the ones that became assorted barriers or runners or transferred to the departmental fleet, the many left of that batch were showing up on TOPS as either Design Code VA 001A (VAB) or later as VA 001C (VAA), both of which it lists as 'ventilated'. Only the intermediate batch of twenty had ventilators on the ends (originally dia. B.R.1/267 in the old books), the rest (dia. 1/248) which were the majority of the batch had a note added 'ventilated doors, except 200033 to VBA'. Now I can't for the life of me ever remember any of them having doors that were intentionally ventilated any more than the deteriorating door edge seals ? Can't see any means of ventilation visible on the doors despite a scroll through Paul Bartlett's excellent web-site.

This was certainly one of those cases where 'learning as you went along' was evident in the introduction of TOPS.

The original intent when the GENKOC (the first two letters) part of the TOPS code was allocated around 1973 was :

VA = COV AB (full length doors, and included both ventilated and non-ventilated variants)

VB = COV CD (centre doors)

[ at this time, VC was assigned to CATTLE vans ]

As mentioned by earlier posters, the third letter (BRAKTY) was 'A' for air braked, and 'B' for vehicles air braked & vacuum piped.

The fourth letter in the 'full' TOPS vehicle type code - AARKND was originally supposed to be 'N' for non-ventilated, and 'M' for ventilated.

The Design Codes (the diagram numbers e.g. the pages in the vehicle diagram books as per Barrowmore MRG web-site) were first assigned in 1975, by which time :

VA = VAN, full length doors - (ventilated or non-ventilated)

but was quickly changed to

VA = VAN, full length doors - (ventilated)

VB = VAN, full length doors - (non-ventilated)

VC = VAN, centre doors

As the process of assigning Design Codes to vehicles had already commenced when the change of ventilated / non-ventilated definition occurred, the upshot was :

VA 001A which was the only genuinely ventilated variant (the 200100 - 200119 batch) remained where it was. This was VAB.

VA 001B to VA 001H which were the non-ventilated variants, were all re-coded in the range VB 003A to VB 003G, but unhelpfully not in the same order. These were VBB except the last two types which were VBA. 

VA 002A which was a ventilated COV AB with experimental suspension was re-coded VA 001B in the place now vacated by the above non-ventilated re-codings. This was done to fit in with how Design Codes are grouped according to differences in vehicle characteristics. This one was a VAB.

Many of the VAB later lost their through vac pipes, becoming VAA.

The only other odd one out / 'prototype' was B 787395 which was initially given VV 022A in the general ventilated vans but later re-coded VA 010A. This also was a VAB.

The centre-door COV CD initially given VB 001A to VB 001C and VB 002A were rapidly re-coded VC 010A to VC 010D (again in different sequence), two types were VCB, other two VCA. Note that this group had to start from number 010 because there were already cattle vans occupying VC 001 - VC 007 (all of which vac braked VCV).

As above, the incoming re-coded non-ventilated vans then dropped in to VB 003 onwards in the now otherwise emptied VB group. Some were correctly re-branded VBB or VBA but not all were done correctly. Just for good measure, some of the ventilated ones that should have remained VAB / VAA got accidentally re-branded VBB / VBA as well. 

Just to add to this, of the vans originally lettered COV AB a not insignificant number had this modified to the TOPS code simply by painting out the first two letters to leave 'V AB' as the supposed TOPS code, often regardless of whether they did still have the vac pipes or not. This is partly the reason why many non-ventilated vans were running around as 'VAB' when they should have been VBB or VBA. TOPS users in the AFCs tend to only input the vehicle number into TOPS so a discrepancy between the train list output by TOPS and the code painted on the side of the vehicle would not have been that much of a concern at the time. Always worth carefully comparing vehicle number range and painted TOPS code in photographs.

The snippets of the vehicle diagram index in one of the posts up-thread are from the original, first issue of the index. If you look in later copies of the diagram book there will be an index with the later pages marked 'ISSUE 2' that will show the Design Codes as resulting after the change to the VA / VB definition. Beware that the index pages were released individually, so a revision to issue 2 would apply to just that page. There were also some interim revisions that were not released as new ISSUE numbers, usually to expedite typographical corrections but sometimes to sneakily insert new vehicle types or delete ones that had become extinct.

On 06/08/2021 at 18:56, BernardTPM said:

Yes, but as pointed out this wasn't true blue/grey livery: different shade of blue, no white lining, square corners to the grey rather than rounded.

As an engineer I count these as all being part of the development of the same thing ... part of the corporate image. Starting with the mock-ups displayed to the 'top brass' at Marylebone in 1963. There have been a number of revisions and variants of 'blue / grey' livery over the years.

As well as the change of shade of blue to Rail Blue as mentioned - which itself became a British Standard industrial colour, and the differing treatment of the lining and the corners. The underframe and running gear were initially all-over brown - to help hide the general brake block dust grime colour that everything ends up. Then there is blue solebars and headstocks with the remaining underframe and running gear black, and alternatively everything black below the body. Having spent much time scraping paint off underframes, it's amazing what the successive layers of paint reveal, and the lettering that appears within on the frames that were made at one works and sent to another to have the body built on top.

38 minutes ago, Marshall5 said:

Although not 'standard' Mk1's the XP64 stock was delivered in blue/grey in time for the ECML summer timetable in 1964.

Ray.

I'll have to go digging to find the details, but what was the Mk.1 catering car that was running with the XP64 set ? This could well have been the first conventional Mk.1 painted blue / grey in spring 1964.

edit : and the two half-brakes that were with the set as well when it was running on the ECML. 

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

@HGR, were the numberplates systematically replaced to reflect these changes? 

 

Would LMS 50 ton armour plate truck 700202 of 1937 have lasted to see these changes? No doubt the fact that it was a special wagon probably explains the survival of the plate; it lasted into a time when people started collecting such things.

In general, no. They would usually retain whatever plates they had when built unless they had been the subject of a significant re-build / refurbishment under a new lot number.

When B.R. came about, pre-nationalisation plates showing their former owning company names G.W.R., L.N.E.R., L.M.S., or S.R. were simply painted out so that only the letter denoting the former company was painted white (W / E / M / S respectively), the other letters being 'obliterated' with black paint. This signifying the re-numbering of former company vehicles with the 'regional' prefix.

The change of load and tare weights into Metric was effected in the data panels painted / stuck onto the sides of the wagon, but the 'D' plates would be unaffected and left as-was, worded 'TONS' or 'T'.

Wagons built after 1973 or thereabouts came out with Metric 'D' plates from new. Later '80s new-builds / re-builds were outshopped with the plates stating '20.0 t  GLW' etc.

There were some cases of plates which were replacements for missing ones on older wagons. These varied from locally made (hand-) painted plywood !!!! or flat steel sheet with punch stamped numbers (often only half-inch high digits) or lettering burned on with a stick welder. Occasionally you do find genuine replacement cast iron plates (modern lettering / weight on an otherwise old lot number vehicle) and these are very uncommon and infinitely collectable.  

The same occurred when wagons were uprated. Only new lot numbers tended to get new 'D' plates. Example (old, pre-MGR) coal hoppers uprated to 25 t on re-bodying.

Other upratings could result from modifications or improved suspension, but some were somewhat subtle. Take for example 20 Ton ferry vans - the long wheelbase ones with the one long sliding door centre of each side. Some of these were uprated to 25 T / 25.0 t at some point (I think as part of their move from continental traffic to domestic use as TOPS code VJX), but otherwise looked no different to their original guise. They were at least though treat to a new design code to differentiate the ratings of this variant. Some of the ones I've seen of these have the 'D' plate butchered with a stick welder to crudely change the '20' to '25'. At the same time the 'G' of the GB number prefix was painted out black to leave just the 'B' prefixed number white.

Then there was the downright mysterious upratings that could only be put down to witchcraft / wizardry. Take as example BOGIE BOLSTER E. A letter came round from D.M.& E.E. stating that the engineers had realised !?!? that these 30 T wagons could in reality carry 32 Tons, as if by magic. The letter stated that the vehicles should not be returned to WRDs for re-plating, but instead would be dealt with as-and-when passing through works. Customers such as British Steel who loaded these wagons were to be instructed of the increased carrying capacity and load inspectors were to bear this in mind. I never saw any of these with other than their original 30 T 'D' plates.

3 hours ago, Ian Smeeton said:

Would number plates be loaded or tare weight? Loaded, I suspect

 

Wagon 'D' plates up to the mid '70s would display the carrying capacity / load. These were Imperial Tons. The tare (empty) weight of the wagon was painted on the bodyside.   

When TOPS was first set up in the early '70s, weights were Imperial Tons, but by the time it was rolled out properly (mid '70s), metrication had come in, so wagon plates from thereabouts started to show load in Metric tonnes. There is a small conversion factor between Tons (symbolised by a capital 'T') and tonnes (signified by lower-case 't'), so wagons up to about 15 T stayed unchanged in tonnes. 16 T MINerals became 16.5 t. Standard brakevans went from 20 T to 20.5 t, etc. Larger wagons such as 50 T STURGEON became 51 t.  At the same time the painted tare weights on wagons changed from Tons - Cwts (hundredweights) to being shown as kg (there was a rule for rounding these off to the nearest 50 kg).

After that, B.R. changed over to quoting the Gross Loaded Weight of the wagon on the 'D' plate, GLW (= load + tare weight). So 12 T VANFITs ended up now being 20.0 t GLW. The largest of the bogie steel carriers and bogie tanks were now 102 t GLW, which in old money was 100 T, corresponding to the old 25 Ton axle loading limit on B.R.

Beware that on the other hand, coaching stock vehicles gave their TARE weight on the dimension plate shown on the coach end (i.e. empty of any load). Where relevant, load would be indicated by lettering on the side of the vehicle.

Another important distinction is that mileages are no longer used for charging purposes as was the case when first mandated by Parliamentary regulations. Now they are best thought of as a means to locate positions along the route.

As has been mentioned up-thread, junctions where the zero datum is located could be re-modelled. The datum remains where it was. The new junction point could then end up a chain or two either side of the zero.

Also, if you were using mileposts to log train performance, this can now leave a trap for the unwary. Consider for example Newton Hall north of Durham station on the ECML. The curve there was eased considerably many years ago when the junction was removed, allowing ECML trains to negotiate the new alignment at a much better speed than previously possible. The upshot of this is that there is now 15 chains 'missing' between the mileposts either end of the curve. The major realigning of the Darlington - Saltburn route around the British Steel plant at Redcar and the deviation at Redcar New Jn. resulted in the loss of over half a mile (47 ch.) from the milepost distances. 

The engineers sidings on the UP side to the south of Hitchin station just before you run out into open countryside - see the Hitchin South box drawing up-thread, was referred to as the stockyard. This was for p-way materials. In the '70s a very good source of random wagons. More recently a housing estate !

The ODM / OTP yard was on the DOWN side immediately north of the station where the former junction to the Bedford line diverged from the main line. I concur on the friendliness of the staff in there - always willing to let the inquisitive in for a look around.

Bear in mind as well the re-bodying programmes that were done. There were a couple of significant batches in the mid-'60s and then later in around 1976. These would field some ex-works examples. This then brings the opportunity with dia. 1/108 wagons to lose the top flap doors and / or have the body fitted the opposite way round. 

Remember that place well in the '70s - '80s. It was the p-way ODM dumping ground for many an old yellow track machine awaiting scrapping.

There was a departmental Mk.1 BSO there that was still in maroon livery. It had the (unique?) coincidence of the last three digits of its KDB 975269 number matching its previous identity hiding under the paint as E 9269. It vanished sometime in the early '80s I think preserved ?

Did it become a diesel depot after that in the '90s or later (and a hiding place for a couple of class 56s) ?

When I've heard this term used years ago by the 'old hands' it referred to specific lodging turns, particularly those that only came up occasionally. Long distance diagrams / workings where you didn't have the hours to get back - so you were put up in railway lodgings (usually a spare room in another railway worker's house in that area) to work home or come back 'on the cushions' the following day. Suspect it was historically more of a freight thing, as you could get regularly looped or 'put inside' to allow faster / passenger trains to pass, and spend a whole shift just to get a short distance covered. Booked arrival / WTT time on anything slower than a 6-speed was pretty much a hit-and-miss affair in the '80s.

1 hour ago, Edwin_m said:

 

One of the links above suggests early 60s but from childhood recollections I would say about 1980.  They are certainly a lot more conspicuous painted yellow.  

The relevant text is also quote in a linked article, suggesting that posts are required every quarter of a mile but there's nothing there that prevents them being changed.  Might cause a problem in future if they decide to replace them with metric measurements for ETCS (which works in metric so has speed restrictions in km/h) or any other reason.  

The ECML gained a fresh set of yellow mileposts (the whole numbers initially) in 1979. The numbering remained unchanged as was prior to that date, the only difference was the yellow ones were now provided on both sides of the line. The earlier white MPs remained in place but the former NER ones (York northwards to the border) were only on the DOWN side of the line, as was normal NER practice. The new yellow ones were variously up to a few feet away from the originals - not sure if this simply reflected more accurate means of measuring their true position.

One thing that was evident for example between York and Darlington was that there was an offset of up to two chains between the position of some locations along the route as quoted in the Sectional Appendix and the measurements taken from the nearest quarter milepost. In most cases the S.A. was +2 ch. beyond the MP positions, but not consistently in every case.

My time 'in the muck and bullets' was mid - late '80s and through the '90s on the engineering (the dark) side. The tail lamps rule change mentioned by earlier posters was thus just before I got my hands on the kit. Did notice though that of the 47s I've had the pleasure of clambering around under the desk the mod to the switch varies between a carefully / properly installed link wire of the correct size and type, to some what you would describe as 'local' mods done with any old bit of wire that happened to be to hand. I hadn't realised that the switch itself had been changed from a two-way, centre-off to a two pole on / off type as they didn't look that clean to have been recently changed.

Mind you, knowing the number of modifications made to the wiring over the years you can see how quickly the most recently altered stuff gets just as mucky as the rest of the wiring it's hiding amongst. Always amazing just how many permutations there were as to how the infamous 'wire 12' mod could be implemented, or the curious way some of the DSD / vigilance mods took a circular route across and around the loco to get from half-way down the side of the engine room, over the top via the control cubicle to the opposite bodyside thence to No.1 end cab, then all the way to No.2 end / cab down the bodyside (passing the original starting point on the way) to get to the SSF box under the desk where the headcode frame used to be. All that so as to use existing redundant wires without needing to have to break into any in mid-run. Some of the former boiler wiring was fair game for this, as was the leftovers from the original 'potted relay' DSD wiring. Still, never expect a loco to exactly match its alleged wiring drawings. 40+ year old EMUs provide the same variability between vehicles having been modified numerous times throughout their lifetime.

Does anyone happen to have an early copy (pre 1988) of the loco-hauled coaches diagram book no. 200 or the DMU (railcars) book no. 220 that still contain the vehicle number to design code index sheets that they could scan or copy for me please ? The books I have, and the ones on Barrowmore, are post-1988 revisions so don't contain the index any more.

These index sheets were included in the diagram books when first issued in 1980, but were not updated thereafter. In 1988 they were withdrawn and users were instructed to remove and destroy the index pages and instead use the RSL for up-to-date individual vehicle data.

What I'm trying to do is identify the vehicle types that existed in 1975 that were allocated codes but became extinct by 1980 when the individual vehicle codes were initially allocated. After that, I can make a start trying to fill in the gaps in the diagram books for those that were withdrawn or superseded in the 1980s.

As happened with the wagon diagrams, I suspect the vehicles that were allocated codes in 1975/6 but were extinct by 1980 might not have been drawn up. A lot of conversions, refurbishment and facelifting occurred in the meantime and resulted in a lot of the initial diagrams becoming obsolete during the life of the diagram books. Need to find someone who didn't throw those pages out !

Any help will be much appreciated.

41 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

Sorry, I do know how Pullman gangways work - and I've explained this on another thread recently ......... no, the question was "Why was 'hiding' the tail lamp on the body end not perceived to be a problem on earlier stock ? - especially with B.S. gangways which project further !".

My apology, misread your question. 

Parkin mentions the Standard Carriage Committee minute where this came up, and gives the explanation as to not fitting the lamp iron on the coach end as "lamp then not easily visible if signalman on opposite side". Does not give any further reasoning why this should have now become a problem when not so with previous stock other than the minutes stating that it was at the request of the operating departments. 

Looking in to this a bit further there is another minute that states the height of the lamp bracket on the gangway in order to avoid fouling the irons on ER 'regional vehicles' which have a foot / lug protruding at the bottom. This implies that some LNER or BR(E) pre-Mk.1 vehicles had the irons on the gangways already.

6 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Why was this not perceived to be a problem on earlier stock ? - especially with B.S. gangways which project further !

They work in a different way ...

B.S. gangways were intended to be clipped together when coupled, so there would be no relative movement between the mating faces of the two gangways. All of the flexibility occurs between this and the coach end.

The rubbing plates on Pullman type gangways as used on Mk.1 are not attached to each other when coupled. The protrusion of the rubbing plate in front of the headstock is slightly more than half the distance between headstocks on adjacent vehicles when the buckeyes are coupled. A pair of sprung buffer rams / plungers behind the bottom of the rubbing plate pass through the headstocks to accommodate the buffer forces (the side buffers being retracted play no part in carrying the buffing forces). This ensures that even with full drawbar pull there is always some residual 'squash' keeping the rubbing plates in contact. The rubbing plate / gangway faceplate is constrained by the buffing rams in the vertical and horizontal directions. So relative lateral and vertical displacement between the coupled coaches causes the two rubbing plates to slide over each other.