42ft Luggage and Parcels Van in passenger trains

[ejstubbs]

In their single volume tome on LMS coaches, in regard to the D1870 luggage and parcels van Jenkinson and Essery state: "The early examples were given full livery and with their generally coach-like styling, looked very much at home in passenger trains."  Given that the van has no corridor connections, where would it have been marshalled within a corridor train?  The obvious options are either immediately behind the loco, or at the tail end of the train.  Would one or other of these options have been the preferred one - either for convenience, or in order to comply with the regulations?

[bécasse]

Any vans, whether gangwayed or not, would normally have been marshalled at one end of a train or the other (depending mainly on convenience), whether the train was formed of gangwayed stock or not. Where trains were heading for a major passenger terminal destination (eg London or Blackpool) and a van was provided to help with the conveyance of passenger luggage, that van would normally be positioned between the loco and the carriages so that passengers could collect their luggage from the van as they walked forward to the platform exit.

 

Although a thorough search will doubtless find the odd photo which appears to contradict this, it should be remembered that in the days when every photo shot had to be paid for photographers often took shots because there was something out of the ordinary about a train and that this gives a false image of "normality" in former times.

 

Empty coaching stock trains could have just about any mixture of carriages and NPCS vehicles, again according to convenience and need, and even booked parcels trains could have carriages added to their consist when the need arose (remembering that until the 1960s it was commonplace for strengthening vehicles to be added to passenger trains to meet peaks in demand and this often required positioning moves).

[Derekl]

This may point you in the right direction: from the report on the 1952 Harrow and Wealdstone collision:

 

"89. The two bogie vans at the front of the Perth express undoubtedly saved serious damage to the
passenger coach marshalled 6th and to the following sleeping car. The value of such protection has been
recognised, and instructions were issued to all Regions in 1948 that a brake van or vehicle with a brake
compartment at the leading or trailing end should be marshalled at the front or rear of passenger trains
wherever practicable. "

[ejstubbs]

@Derekl Thanks for that.  It does make me wonder whether a "brake van or vehicle with a brake compartment at the leading or trailing end" would include a luggage & parcels van (GUV in BR parlance) which wouldn't seem to meet the 'brake' criteria but would surely provide equivalent protection?

 

I found a report on an incident at Crewe in 1939 which involved a luggage & parcels van and a corridor third being involved in a collision while being shunted by the train engine - another example of the van being marshalled behind the loco.

 

@bécasse Thanks also.  Might the 'convenience' aspect potentially include being able to drop off the van from the rear of the train at an intermediate station, if it was not going to be required for the remainder of the trip?

[Derekl]

49 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

@Derekl Thanks for that.  It does make me wonder whether a "brake van or vehicle with a brake compartment at the leading or trailing end" would include a luggage & parcels van (GUV in BR parlance) which wouldn't seem to meet the 'brake' criteria but would surely provide equivalent protection?

 

 

I have a vague recollection of reading that the 50' vans  were built by teh LMS specifically for the purpose of being marshalled behind the locomotive to reduce damage to passenger carrying vehicles in as collision. I would have thought any passenger rated stock would be suitable.

[Compound2632]

On 21/12/2021 at 17:42, Derekl said:

I have a vague recollection of reading that the 50' vans  were built by teh LMS specifically for the purpose of being marshalled behind the locomotive to reduce damage to passenger carrying vehicles in as collision. 

 

It had become standard practice, I think after the Leighton Buzzard accident in 1931. That train had a vestibule first brake and vestibule first leading, which were wrecked.

[billbedford]

Parcel vans had their own circuits which were interlocked with passenger services. They could be added to the front or rear of a train. The usual reason they were added to the front was that they could be removed by the train engine at stations where engines were changed or that the train had a reversal somewhere. Otherwise a pilot engine was needed to deal with the addition and removal of vans. 

 

Any parcel vans built by the early grouping years would almost certainly be replacements for similar elderly pre-grouping designs. 

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, billbedford said:

Any parcel vans built by the early grouping years would almost certainly be replacements for similar elderly pre-grouping designs. 

 

Taking the LMS, the LNWR had been building bogie passenger brake vans (PBVs) since the end of the 19th century, with vast numbers of 6-wheelers before that; the Midland built comparatively few bogie PBVs but had a large number of clerestory 6-wheelers from around the turn of the century, which would be due for renewal by the late 1920s. (The 6-wheelers had in their turn largely replaced 4-wheelers of 1870s/80s vintage.)

[Lms14509]

From what I have read, the first official notice of any relation to placement of Passenger Vans in collisions came after the Dinwoodie Accident in October 1928, where the "Royal Highlander(Euston to Inverness) hauled by an LMS Compound and Caledonian Dunalastair III 4-4-0 ran into a Freight only a few miles from the scene of the Gretna accident of 1915.The leading vehicle in the train was a steel sided LMS Full Brake. The locomtives were very badly damaged-(the Caley 4-4-0 written -off).However; there were no deaths,and slight injury to the passengers.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Lms14509 said:

From what I have read, the first official notice of any relation to placement of Passenger Vans in collisions came after the Dinwoodie Accident in October 1928, where the "Royal Highlander(Euston to Inverness) hauled by an LMS Compound and Caledonian Dunalastair III 4-4-0 ran into a Freight only a few miles from the scene of the Gretna accident of 1915.The leading vehicle in the train was a steel sided LMS Full Brake. The locomtives were very badly damaged-(the Caley 4-4-0 written -off).However; there were no deaths,and slight injury to the passengers.

 

Lt.-Col. Mount's report. No passengers died but the four enginemen were killed instantly.

 

In fact Mount makes no reference to any consequence of the leading vehicle being a full brake.

[Steamport Southport]

Useful article on detailing the Lima model in the current RM (September 2022) and includes 4mm scale drawings.

 

Maybe a bit basic for some, but looks a good article for those that want a small quick project or wanting to improve their skills.

 

 

 

Jason