HGR

Those three photos of 205 031 show everything as per how it should be expected in terms of orientation. Ref earlier post, notice the DTC has the unexplained footboard under the toilet window !

When built these had full-length footboards. The photo in Motive Power Recognition 3 DMUs shows 1111 with these fairly fresh from refurbishing. The only thing on the solebar is a conduit running along the full length of the coach for the heater wiring on this side of the coach. This is tucked behind the bottom of the footboard, which has a fancy rebate to accommodate the conduit. There is a 'T' fitting in the conduit under each seating bay with a short upstand going up into the bodyside to feed the heaters under that seating group. You can see the shadows cast by these. There's a little cutout notch in the back of the footboard at each position where the conduit comes up. This photo shows the coach looks to have by then acquired a single footboard at the nearest end, and a pair of longer ones that would otherwise fit a DTC (with the gap under the toilet window). As an aside, talking of DTCs, when they ended up with individual single door footboards towards the last years in service, there were DTCs running around with a full complement of footboards, including one under the toilet window where there would have otherwise been a gap ???

The footboards changed over the years. The original ones were full coach length. Then as long lengths of timber became more scarce whenever they needed to be replaced they would often be replaced with shorter length ones. The extreme case towards the final years was the only boards available were for individual doors. (they're actually wider than the door so you can stand on the step to the right of the door, holding on to the commode handle and still swing the door open unobstructed - e.g. if climbing in from rail level). So if the EP unit is not visible, it may well be that the coach is the other way round, but don't know why that would have been necessary.

Now that IS interesting. As well as the butterfly, it looks like the EP brake box is not visible under the TS, which it should be visible under the frames on this side. Can you have a closer look at your photo please to see if you can see either a large box under the middle of the coach, or a white pressure gauge just below the solebar near the middle of the coach.

The DMMUs were intentionally designed to be 'fluid' formation. The only restrictions were maximum of six motors in a train, and maximum of twelve vehicles in all, mainly because all of the control EP valves being fed from the leading car (or at least, the one with the key in). For this reason the control jumpers were duplicated both sides and both jumper and receptacle provided so any ends could be coupled together in any orientation. Hence you could get plain twins (DMBS - DTCL), power twins (DMBS - DMCL intended, but pairs of DMBS wasn't unheard of), and any permutation of triples with one or two motors, and quads with two motors. Some of the IC / CC / TP sets were up to six car sets, or pairs of sets coupled up to the 12 vehicle limit. When the diagrams were first drawn up for these mechanical DMUs they were as sets formed for the routes that they had been ordered, but that was quickly dropped. The motor brake then retained the original diagram number and the other vehicle(s) in the unit formation given their own separate diagrams. The DEMUs and EMUs were 'fixed' formations. Similar vehicles could be exchanged between units, for example to cover for maintenance shortages, but the relative positions within a unit would be maintained. There were a few exceptions, for example an unexplained handful of 4 SUB and both S.R. and B.R. type 4 EPBs with the intermediate trailers reversed. These had the centre buffer. Motor coaches had a rubbing plate at the inner end, so one trailer had a buffer at both ends, and the other had one buffer at the MC end and rubbing plate facing the other trailer. In addition, one trailer was electrically 'straight through' and the other was the crossover coach to allow the jumpers to swap sides. There was also a CEP motor coach 61035 that acted as a spare. It was a No.1 MC, but with a bit of minor terminal adjustment could be dropped in to replace a No.2 MC at the other end of a unit. There was a trailer 70044 with similar abilities that could occupy either trailer position in a unit. This had duplicated receptacles at one end because of its earlier conversion from TFK to TSK, so you only needed to have a loose set of jumpers to put it into the No.2 trailer position and disconnect a couple of wires in the terminal box. To use an EPB driving trailer as a TS in a thumper, the extra receptacles for lighting and heating were needed at the former cab end as these don't pass over between units, only within the unit. The now unused driving controls were disconnected at the coach-end terminal bars to prevent any unwanted operation. Also because of the strange choice to have the EP brake chest use different terminals in a DEMU than an EMU, the wires for this had to be moved to the correct terminals for DEMU use.

In an MLV the traction battery is 176 V (200 V on charge), so about one quarter of the normal line voltage. The express gear ratio is intended to balance out at roughly 90 MPH on the level at rated load on 750 V in weak field. The speeds I listed 'on battery' are in parallel but you only have the much lower voltage of the battery so won't reach any significant speeds unless going downhill. The batteries in the ex. 501 battery locos were connected for 320 V operation. These had different motors which were rated for 630 V. The Watford DC lines were in effect LT lines, so a bit lower voltage than B.R. Southern third rail. Hence the motors can reach a higher speed than an MLV on battery. On the Watford DC lines the 501s were quoted as 70 MPH because of their really low gear ratio, but I think towards the end they were restricted to 60 MPH ? Getting the likes of 45 MPH at roughly half voltage on level to falling gradient would be reasonably expected. The amount of batteries, hence the capacity available, determines the running time. With the battery locos it also resulted in them being a rather hefty RA 4 as they ended up being not far short of 60 Tons each. One of the reasons for the 25 MPH limit was this increased weight compared to the available brake force. When on battery there is not much advantage of cycling between motoring and coasting, unless you are coasting in preparation to slow down for a speed restriction or a stop. The extra current drawn in periodically accelerating back up say from 20 to 25 MPH and saved whilst coasting in between averages out about the same as the steady current that obtains motoring at the same average speed.

That's weird ... can't think why the centre trailer would end up the opposite way round unless it happened during the refurbishment, but there's no reason for it to be. The vehicles in a DEMU are all 'handed' and can only go one way round in their place in the unit. A two-car unit has a motor coach with receptacles on its inner end to take the jumper plugs of the driving trailer. When made up to three cars, the centre trailer in effect extends this so has jumpers at the end that will be adjacent to the motor coach, and receptacles at the other end adjacent to the DT, but is otherwise wired 'straight through'. The thumpers had high-level brake pipes between coaches within the unit, but these only ran down one side of the unit - the nearside of the motor coach. Hence the centre trailer was also handed from the point of view of the brake pipes. When you look at Hastings units, the six-car formation is in effect a pair of three-car sets coupled back to back, but without intermediate cabs of course. The intermediate trailers are fed from the motor coach that is nearest to them. One of the trailers has to be a 'crossover' coach to allow the jumpers to swap sides. In the Hastings six-car units it is done at the inner end of the TFK. On the Thumper motor coaches the inner end has a duplicated control jumper on the opposite side to the receptacle, and high-level brake pipes on both sides, allowing two motors to run back-to-back, or one to be tagged onto the end of another unit. When 1111 was refurbished to become 3H(M) it had gangways cut into the inner coach ends, but I'm not aware that the jumpers or brake pipes were altered, so the centre car should have remained the same way round as built.

Please have a careful look at photo's of three-car class 205 / 3H DEMUs with their original centre trailers to see if you can see which end the pass comm butterfly is at (the red tell-tale tablet at cantrail just under the end of the gutter). Or, if you can see the EP brake chest (the big box below the underframe), or its two isolating valves and pressure gauge just under the solebar. Or, if you can see through the windows which way round the seating is arranged - it's 2+3 so the centre aisle is not on the longitudinal centreline of the coach but is offset nearer to one side. The reason behind the request is to see if the internal seating layout always matched the external bodywork orientation. The trailers were built to the same diagram, so you would expect them all to be the same orientation made to the same drawings. But, were the later ones with window frames reversed compared to the earlier ones ? When originally built the TS was half non-smoking and half smoking so the red NS labels would be visible in the widows of that half of the coach, but later this became all non-smoking. When you look at photographs of green liveried units, the non-smoking half of the coach as evidenced by the red triangular window labels is not always towards the same end of the unit. If you look at the seating layout that is shown in the Appendix to the Carriage Working Notice of units 1127 - 1133 it shows the 2+3 seating of the centre trailer TS the opposite way round to the other two vehicles (MBS and DTC). The non-smoking saloon in the TS is the end adjacent to the MBS. However the earlier units 1101 - 1118 when strengthened to three car had the trailer seating the other way round so as to be the same way round as the other two cars in the unit. Not sure if 1123 - 1126 were the same, though their trailers were part of the same lot. Does anyone have an Appendix to CWN that shows a seating layout for units 1101 - 1118 / 1123 - 1126 ? For the strengthened 3H, the orientation was : Pass comm tell-tale at the end adjacent to the motor coach. If this is to the left, it's the 2 seat side. If it (and motor coach) is to the right, it's the 3 seat side and the EP brake unit and pressure gauge may be visible this side under the TS. If you see any that are the other way round, please can you post a picture on here.

An MLV on battery with no tail load will attain about 25 MPH on level track, and be taking about 100 Amps. With 100 Ton load, it's about half that speed and 200 - 250 Amps on the level. By way of example 100 Ton tail load on a 1 in 145 rising gradient gets you down to below 10 MPH and the current up to 300 - 400 Amps. These are in PARALLEL notch. There's no point going for WF as the increase in speed compared to the increase in current is marginal to say the least and just serves to hasten the onset of flat batteries. You need the higher voltage of the third rail and its ability to deliver hundreds of amps to get the legs out of weak field. The 250 Amp Hour rating of the batteries is the 5 hour rating. So is like saying a steady 50 Amps for five hours. If you draw higher currents, you get progressively lower overall capacity than rated, so 100 A won't last for 2.5 hours. This is probably where the 20 minutes running time on battery comes from given the sort of currents above. Incidentally, the maximum charge rate is limited to 50 Amps (at best) by the regulator that fields the MG, so a full re-charge would be expected to take at least five hours. In reality the current starts to tail off as the battery state of charge comes up to approaching full, so it takes more like a full 8 hour shift to pack in the full 100%. A good set of fully charged batteries, minimal air leaks and no unscheduled stops / unexpected restarts should let you get from Redhill to Tonbridge in an hour or so. But, if it all goes quiet on you, you're on your own in the middle of the back-of-beyond !

There wasn't a range quoted. Instead, the operating manuals specified that the MLV could run 'on battery' for a maximum of 20 minutes and then must return to the juice rail.

Some of the MLVs got new batteries in the early 1980s. However not all - 68003 / 9003 for example still had its earlier old style EXIDE IronClad battery when it was withdrawn, and the battery was pretty much useless by then. The ones that were replaced received new Crompton plastic-cased cells. Although the same 'spec', advances in battery technology should have given them a slight additional advantage over their predecessors even though still quoted as the same 260 amp-hour rating. The older batteries manufactured by the likes of EXIDE were certainly more tolerant to mis/abuse, so would survive deeper discharge, being left flat for a while, etc. The newer types although bringing you back to 'factory fresh' condition, seem to be far less tolerant and must be looked after carefully. Add to this, the modern propensity for battery manufacturers to scrimp on internal active material to save cost / weight but still claim the same capacity rating /endurance. The batteries take some time to reach full state of charge, so the success of any trip would be down to three things : battery condition, initial state of charge, and driving style. Other factors can have an effect to some extent, such as the flat end of the vehicle being marvellously un-aerodynamic, meaning that a head or tail wind will be noticed. Another factor, and a very significant one, is the van in tow. If it's air braked, fine, so is the MLV. If however it's a vac braked van, you need to run the exhauster on the MLV. This runs continuously at slow speed to maintain the running vacuum, but is speeded up to initially create vacuum and release the brake. Compare this with the compressor, which cuts in and out in response to the governor to maintain reservoir air pressure so is not running continuously. The exhauster absolutely hammers the battery, and takes far more power over time than the compressor, thus reducing the time 'on battery'. Of course, you would never ever contemplate leaving the exhauster cut out and pulling strings on the van(s), leaving the poor guard (if you had one) in the van as a swinger on the back !

The date I have noted down, though I can't remember where I got the information from originally, is 1962 for a batch of ex. LNER TROUT that were converted at Santon. This was the location where the slag from the blast furnace at Scunthorpe steelworks was dumped. The TROUT were given a new diagram E 231. The DOGFISH were converted next, becoming diagram 1/588. Not sure if these were taken from the batch that were already allocated to Santon Slag Heap, or the selection was a bit more diverse. Also, there was a batch of 24T IRON ORE hoppers converted in a similar way, but the hopper extension was not as high (6" ?). These were ex. P.O. hoppers. Quite remarkably one was skulking around on the Isle of Wight ages later, and its claim to fame was it became the last ex.P.O. 'P' series wagon running on B.R. These conversions were a bit weird in having a footboard step on the side of the wagon to allow access to the chute handwheel that was half-way along the wagon in between the solebar and the hopper body. Don't recall seeing a diagram for these.

Not sure of regional variations, but the technique I was aware of in re-using panels or rails that had battered ends was to cut off one foot of length, so you in effect ended up with 58' panels with good ends. The Southern Railway had three-hole fishplates where the centre bolt had a 'half hole' in each rail end. Easy enough to notch a rail end in the shop but not sure how easy that could be done out on site. I think I've seen the BTC film showing a track survey being done. A notebook with pre-ruled column lines for the rail lengths either side and joint lead triggers vague distant memories. Also worth remembering that the length of new rails is the nominal plus or minus 3/16" (+/-5mm). This seems to be better with rails from about the 1960s or later, but can be more like up to 1/2" over length with old 30' panels. Add to that the expansion gaps which sometimes seemed to be far more generous than expected for the temperature, but on one side only - and not because of rail creep either ! Don't think the bag of metal legs ('L' shaped spacers) came in to it when gapping the rails.

A question for P-Way practitioners, if you would please : From what I remember, PADS (or CatMaster as was) used to have catalogue numbers for 60 foot rails either undrilled, or drilled (broached / cold-formed) with fishplate holes. For the inside rails of curves, where an under-length rail has to be used every so-many panels to keep the rail joints level, I think there were 1", 2", and 4" under-lengths (i.e. 59' 11", 59' 10", and 59' 8"). These were available as 95RBH bullhead, or 113A flat bottomed, presumably only as pre-drilled for jointed track. My question is, were these a more 'modern' offering, and before that were there only short rails that were 4-1/2" shorter than nominal length, at 59' 7-1/2" ? This would be equivalent to one hole pitch of the fishplates. Were these rails available 'shop made', or were they produced on-site by cutting off 4-1/2" from one end of a full length rail and then drilling and broaching an extra hole inboard of the remaining original hole at that end ? A further variation on the theme would appear to be 2-1/4" under-length, such as 59' 9-3/4" which would if a pre-drilled 60' imply chopping off at the first hole, then re-drilling in between the two original holes, and a further half-pitch inboard. That would be evident in then having three closely spaced holes at the cut end.

Once the coach design had been drawn up by the drawing office, it would be easy to determine a set of offsets for laying out a curve, for example by measuring up from the cantrail / roof edge at pre-determined points along the length of the coach. That way, the radius does not need to be measured or even known by the fitter, only a set of more manageable points that could be readily marked off directly on the surface of the roof.

A loading gauge at the end of a branch line rural station with only the single platform could be a possibility if the traffic didn't warrant the provision of a dock siding. No signal box or ground frame to release. Guess a pick-up goods would trundle through once or twice a week, run as required. The gauge in the photo is the rather generous GWR profile gauge with the characteristic flat top. It has the short curved extensions that could be swung down (usually had a rope / lanyard to their ends that was tied off on the upright pole. These extensions were used for gauging loads that were destined off WR teritory. To demonstrate the ingenuity of wagon loaders, I once saw a pair of characters ('old hands') presented with an enormous pile of sawn planks start by nailing a 'wall' of said planks to the sides and ends all around inside a wooden bodied open, and then proceed to fill the resulting interior space of the now almost double height with loose planks stacked neatly horizontally. Presumably to be unloaded equally manually at the receiving location. Didn't dare ask. There is a book titled something like 'Freight wagons and their loads working on the GWR or Western Region of BR' that has a photograph of a far older GWR open loaded with rough sawn timber planks in much the same way. Don't know if that method of loading was more common than might be thought.

Do you have examples of which vehicles please ? I have a vague idea that some Pullmans were originally built with 'silver' roofs, but not sure if this was untreated new galvanised, or was painted steel. Some of these later were carrying white painted roof. The silver grey reappearing on more recent umber and cream repaints.

The roof of Mk.1 coaches was made of galvanised steel sheets. When new, this is a very silvery shiny surface, but turns a dull grey as it starts to oxidise. The sheets are welded across the width of the roof, producing the bead that is visible on the outside. They are hidden behind the aluminium alloy gutter channel at the cantrail, which covers the roof - bodyside join. The width / 'length' of the steel panels depended on the type of stock and the builder or works. Some simply used a common width of sheet across the full length of the coach, resulting in a fixed number of equally spaced weld lines regardless of the interior layout. Some stock, for example Eastleigh produced D/EMU coaches used a selection of different widths of roof panels, with or without ventilators, to suit the compartments or seating bays they covered, or other areas such as cab, van, etc. Hence the ventilators on a hauled Mk.1 FK don't line up with the compartments, but on a Southern Region EMU they are nicely symmetrical with the doors / windows. New roof panels were painted with a black bituminous 'high build' (thick coating) paint. Galvanised surfaces are notoriously horrible to get paint to stick to. Unfortunately a steel coach roof gets extremely hot in strong sunlight, so the expansion / contraction is quite significant. The paint hardens and loses its pliability with age, so it gradually cracks and flakes, and areas fall off exposing the grey galvanised steel beneath. When vehicles came into works for classified repairs, each roof panel was considered individually. Any panel where more than a quarter of the paint had flaked off had to be completely stripped, weld to weld / gutter to gutter, and was then repainted with the high build roof paint. The method of stripping was usually tediously by hand with scrapers, but some coaches bear the scars or pock marks of the application of far more brutal methods ! If however, the paint was generally sound, any loose flaking was cut back to a firm edge, then painted with what was described as 'cosmetic' roof paint which was low build, that being much thinner coating thickness. This was quite noticeable on close inspection, but looked OK when the vehicle returned to traffic. How long it lasted thereafter before starting to crack and flake was another matter. The original B.R. roof paint was black. Ideal in steam days, but the worst colour you could use for steel under direct sunlight. Later a grey version was available as an alternative colour used in the blue / grey era.

A related question please : In the pre-TOPS days, pre-nationalisation up to the early '60s goods were given a traffic class, in simple terms block trainloads such as minerals were class 1. Wagonload traffic / full-loads was class 2, and part-loads / sundries / goods were class 3. Question is, what was traffic class 'A2' used for ? Some British Railways wagon labels had the box around the destination 'To' details and the traffic class numeral coloured instead of plain black print. For example sugar beet and some other class 2 were orange, and such as potatoes could be red or green. These coloured labels were in circulation at the same time as the black ones. Anyone know what the colours signified ? Thanks.

I don't have any dimensions of the frames (though I could measure a coach or two), I have however spent some time sourcing glass for various Mk.1 stock, hauled or DEMU / Southern Region EMUs so have accurate dimensions for the 'see-through' bit in the middle. Early Mk.1 stock had no window frames. The glass is fitted directly behind the opening in the body skin, from the inside. The glass is sealed with a red putty strip 'Arboseal' which is squeezed up by hardwood strips onto studs welded onto the inside of the bodywork. Loads of 2 BA nuts needed for these. The thicker part of the wooden frame visible inside the coach hides most of this, so only the inner edge shows. For these 'frame-less' windows the glass is 5/16" larger all around than the opening. The large side lights (windows) are nominally 48" wide, with lower pane 26" high, and upper pane 12-3/4 high. The quarterlights (fixed, with radius in upper corner) are 12" wide. The two sliders are also 12" wide. The corner radius of the glass is 4-5/16" ( 110 mm ) to suit the 4" radius of the opening in the steel body panelling. Guards and lav fixed lights are 28" wide. There are a variety of other sizes used for saloon windows and the various catering cars. Note that because the bodyside is (an albeit large radius) curved, the glass is flat, requiring a depressed rebate on the vertical edges, visible on the outside of the coach. Old Bullied S.R. EMUs had curved glass, obviating the need for the rebate and keeping the glass flush to the body profile. Keeping these frame-less windows sealed against water ingress between the body and glass is something of a nightmare, as the putty loses its resilience and hardens. To improve the sealing and reduce the corrosion occurring around the window edges, B.R. resorted to fitting aluminium alloy window frames. These are readily visible surrounding the window. The glass is still fitted as before from the inside, held in place and sealed by Arboseal and hardwood edging. The advantage is that the alloy frame being more robust / rigid than the 16 SWG steel body plating allows a better seal to be maintained. B.R. works produced these frames to Standard Carriage drawings. Bardic also produced them to the same dimensions for coaches built by outside contractors, or B.R. workshops. They use the same glass as the original frame-less types. Later, aluminium frames were made where the frame is mounted into the bodyside opening as before , but the glass now smaller than the frame, is fitted from the outside and sealed / retained in place by special profiled rubber beading strip. There are basically two manufacturers, but are dimensionally incompatible : BECLAWAT (as in Beckett, Laycock & Watkinson), and the other more common on Eastleigh produced stock from Hallam, Sleigh & Chesterton. Other than the manufacturer's trademark label on the middle rail of the frame, the corner radius differs. BECLAWAT are 3-1/4" ( 82 mm ), whereas Hallam are 3" ( 76 mm ).

Yes, deffo amunition box. B173 is the type reference, denoting its size / use. The range of boxes were designed for different 'stores' - this one possibly grenades. It does have at least a railway connection in that someone at some stage in its post-military career had to collect it (TBCF) from Man Pic stn, although there's no red star labels on it, so I wonder if it was a railway worker ?

The colours of the springs denote their 'rate' or loading capacity. Other colours are available such as white, yellow, green, etc., but red and blue are the common ones. Note that the bogies at each end of a coach could have different (coloured) springs if the coach was heavier at one end - for example some of the catering cars. One B4 and one B5 under the same coach being the extreme case. There were different 'marks' of B4 and B5 with detail differences and different weight ranges (heavy / medium / light). The B5 under the TPO coach shows the 24 V alternator used on these, mounted on the inner end of the bogie and driven by six 'V' belts, instead of the older dynamo that was suspended under the underframe running off a flat belt.

I appreciate it's a blast from the past, but I'm intrigued. Do you have a copy of the image as the originally linked one has disappeared ? Cheers.

Ever set away to do something that on the face of it should be a fairly simple tweak to a spreadsheet, only for the 'computer says no' to fight back. Anyway, attached file lists the B.R. and TOPS Diagram Book pages. Be mindful it's most definitely a work in progress job, I will post updates when I put more info into it. I will post a Word doc later that explains the colour coding and abbreviations / conventions used. Please bear in mind it's taken me a while to collate this information, so do not use it for commercial gain. It's for personal research only. Dia Bk Index.xls

Will do - should be able to get onto the right PC tomorrow. I'm still in the middle of rearranging the lists for the B.R. books 1, 2 & 4. If it's the TOPS list you're mainly interested in, I have all the freight stock codes listed (that I'm aware of), but not put the coaching stock in yet.