The Suburban B Set Coaches?

[Saddletank]

Thanks, that's great information. I'm a little hobbled working in N and preferably mid-30s, restricts RTR choice somewhat - so if I want to run a B set rake of 4 I'm looking for a pair of non gangwayed full 3rd coaches in addition to a B set.

 

The autotrailer option sounds interesting as a less modelled train. So that's 4x autocoaches required, I presume that's because they already had all the necessary push-pull operating linkages installed rather than retrofitting standard coaches to use on the inner ends nearest the engine? And is that with brake ends together for each 'set' of autocoaches either side of the engine?

 

Thanks again!

[Coach bogie]

The actual BC (not BCK which was the BR code for gangwayed brake composites) would not have been the same as the one modelled by Airfix and Hornby, but this isn't an accurate model anyway.

 

The non corridor brake compos were not all used in fixed pairs. There were a small number from different lots used as single vehicles with standard buffers and draw gear at each end.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[OnTheBranchline]

For the first question, the 4 coach sets would have had non-gangwayed brake third or brake composite coaches at the outer ends and non-gangwayed full thirds or composites as the two in the middle of the set. The actual BC (not BCK which was the BR code for gangwayed brake composites) would not have been the same as the one modelled by Airfix and Hornby, but this isn't an accurate model anyway. The Collett 1938 gangwayed stock wasn't normally used with non-gangwayed stock on suburban workings, but at the end they did form part of gangwayed sets to entirely replace the non-gangwayed stock on some Birmingham area workings, the ones that had/t already gone over to DMUs.

The 4 coach autotrains were usually 4 separate autotrailers coupled 2 each side of the loco.

 

Are those in RTR form?

[Karhedron]

Thanks, that's great information. I'm a little hobbled working in N and preferably mid-30s, restricts RTR choice somewhat - so if I want to run a B set rake of 4 I'm looking for a pair of non gangwayed full 3rd coaches in addition to a B set.

The term B-set normally refers to the 2 coach train of 2 brake compos. The 4-coach trains were sometimes known as D-sets in some divisions but not all. Sadly the coaches needed for other GWR suburban rakes are not available RTR in N gauge. Bernie Taylor at TPM was planning some overlays to convert the Dapol B-sets into the other suburban diagrams but I do not know if or when they are likely to be released.

 

The autotrailer option sounds interesting as a less modelled train. So that's 4x autocoaches required, I presume that's because they already had all the necessary push-pull operating linkages installed rather than retrofitting standard coaches to use on the inner ends nearest the engine? And is that with brake ends together for each 'set' of autocoaches either side of the engine?

Yes, that is an easier option if you prefer to stick to RTR. Farish are planning to release both the 6400 class of auto-fitted pannier tanks. They are also releasing the Hawksworth pattern auto-coaches but these are BR-era vehicles. For the 1930s you would probably need to pair this with the Dapol auto-coaches which are the earlier Collett pattern vehicles.

 

The auto-coaches would normally be marshalled with the cabs pointing away from the loco.

 

Dapol have produced both the 1400 class auto-tank but it is oen of their older models and was normally used on branchline workings rather than the multiple autocoach suburban workings you seem to be interested in.

Edited December 21, 2013 by Karhedron

[Kris]

In Plymouth you could get 4 auto coaches in a train, 2 either side of the loco (later a 64xx).

[Danemouth]

In Plymouth you could get 4 auto coaches in a train, 2 either side of the loco (later a 64xx).

I remember the same formation on the Pyle/Porthcawl branch in the 50's - can't remember what loco.

 

 

Dave

[Karhedron]

I remember the same formation on the Pyle/Porthcawl branch in the 50's - can't remember what loco.

Might have been a 6400 there as well. About a dozen 4575 small prairies were also fitted with auto-gear for working the valleys trains in the early 50s so that would be the other possibility.

[Danemouth]

Might have been a 6400 there as well. About a dozen 4575 small prairies were also fitted with auto-gear for working the valleys trains in the early 50s so that would be the other possibility.

I've been racking my brain cell (singular)

 

I think a Prairie rather than a Pannier - 'strewth it's only 55+ years ago !!!!

 

Dave

[Siberian Snooper]

In Plymouth you could get 4 auto coaches in a train, 2 either side of the loco (later a 64xx).

Plymouth set auto coaches had a corridor connection between each pair. There were 4+ diagrams in use from the early 1900's until the mid '50's when they were scraped, I can't remember the diag no's and I'm not at home to have a look in the John Lewis book' published by Wild Swan to check.

 

How ever a couple of years ago I commissioned Worsley Works to produce the etches for the two most numerous diag's. I get the odd email enquiring if I still want them,but so far no luck.

 

SS

[Joseph_Pestell]

and, writing with some annoyance from the USA, just received the re-leased Hornby set from Hattons.  Alas, the bogies are incorrect - totally!  How Hornby hopes to compete with Bachmann and the energetic Dapol is a great mystery if they can't get the right wheels/bogies on a well-known coach!!

 

B-t-w, Hattons advises sitting tight until Hornby announces what it plans to do to rectify the error.

 

I once purchased a Hornby Period 3 Stanier in LMS livery that had BR B4 bogies! That must be about 25 years ago.

 

Massive mess up all round. Bad from Hornby but also how did Hattons not notice? Especially annoying when you are an overseas customer with all the extra postage and customs costs to cope with.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Joseph_Pestell

[Fat Controller]

I've been racking my brain cell (singular)

 

I think a Prairie rather than a Pannier - 'strewth it's only 55+ years ago !!!!

 

Dave

From 'Great Western Steam in South Wales'

page 92 5524 propelling one, and hauling two, autocoaches.

page 63 4580 and 4580, each with a two-coach set, at Maerdy in 1958.

page 53 5529 hauling two autocoaches at Creigau in 1955

From 'More Great western Steam in South Wales'

page 12 5555 propelling two towards Porthcawl from Pyle.

[Danemouth]

From 'Great Western Steam in South Wales'

page 92 5524 propelling one, and hauling two, autocoaches.

page 63 4580 and 4580, each with a two-coach set, at Maerdy in 1958.

page 53 5529 hauling two autocoaches at Creigau in 1955

From 'More Great western Steam in South Wales'

page 12 5555 propelling two towards Porthcawl from Pyle.

Thanks for information Brian, I will try to get my hands on that book,

 

Happy Christmas,

 

Dave

 

Edit: Found the book on Amazon - now ordered - again many thanks

Edited December 23, 2013 by Danemouth

[Saddletank]

Stacks of pictures of autocoaches on this page about the Plymouth - Launceston line. http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/plymouth-to-launceston-the-gw-route.html

 

I'm going to have a look for that book, thanks for the information.

 

By the way, was there any specific reason they operated longer Autotrains in this configuration rather than all coaches one end of the loco? All I can think of is that the linkages might have been harder to operate the longer they were, beyond that it seems like a bit of a hassle to position a loco between the coaches. Maybe the driver just wanted a nice warm seated driving position in both directions!

Edited December 23, 2013 by Saddletank

[Kris]

I think that the maximum length for auto working was two coaches. 

[buffalo]

In his Great Western Autotrailers, Part 1 (Wild Swan 1991), John Lewis ascribes the limit of two trailers with the TRG (through regulator gear) coupled to the "...limitations of the mechanical control grar (principally due to friction and lost motion)..."

 

Nick

 

ps. if you really want to know about GWR autotrailers, these two volumes are essential reading.

[Saddletank]

Just had a check on amazon last night, at £40 ish each I think I'll be pointlessly hoping one is under the tree! Might have to keep an eye and wait for one at a more realistic price.

 

Thanks for the info about formations, I thought that would likely be the reason as I think I remember reading something about the linkages being quite slack and difficult to control from the carriage.

[phil-b259]

Stacks of pictures of autocoaches on this page about the Plymouth - Launceston line. http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/plymouth-to-launceston-the-gw-route.html

 

I'm going to have a look for that book, thanks for the information.

 

By the way, was there any specific reason they operated longer Autotrains in this configuration rather than all coaches one end of the loco? All I can think of is that the linkages might have been harder to operate the longer they were, beyond that it seems like a bit of a hassle to position a loco between the coaches. Maybe the driver just wanted a nice warm seated driving position in both directions!

 

I think thats basically the case. IIRC speaking to preservation era drivers, especially those not used them, the regulator handle in just one autocoach was a bit of a pig to move what with all the mechanical linkages involved - adding a second coach must make it twice as hard.

 

Of course a more advanced railway * would have gone for a compressed air system rather than cumbersome mechanical linkages in the first place

 

* (the LBSCR then the SR that is)

[57xx]

I think thats basically the case. IIRC speaking to preservation era drivers, especially those not used them, the regulator handle in just one autocoach was a bit of a pig to move what with all the mechanical linkages involved - adding a second coach must make it twice as hard

There is a dvd showing a day in the life of the Dart Valley Railway which shows exactly that. It takes a lot of tweaking (well, tugging back and forth) to get the regulator in the autocoach at the right setting. The driver need the window open to hear the loco to know it was right.

[Siberian Snooper]

Just had a check on amazon last night, at £40 ish each I think I'll be pointlessly hoping one is under the tree! Might have to keep an eye and wait for one at a more realistic price.

Thanks for the info about formations, I thought that would likely be the reason as I think I remember reading something about the linkages being quite slack and difficult to control from the carriage.

I believe that the regulator linkage was rarely connected to the regulator and that the fireman did all the driving. A waggle of the linkage being the command to open the regulator and another one to close it again. The fireman was usually passed for driving.

 

SS

[buffalo]

I believe that the regulator linkage was rarely connected to the regulator and that the fireman did all the driving. A waggle of the linkage being the command to open the regulator and another one to close it again. The fireman was usually passed for driving.

I'm sure many of us have heard such tales of linkages being disconnected because they were either too stiff or sloppy, but to turn them into universal practice accross most crews over a period of more than fifty years might require a little in the way of evidence

 

btw, even if the regulator were left to the fireman, the driver would, I hope, have retained the rather important role or operating the vacuum brake setter in the vestibule.

 

Nick

[Siberian Snooper]

I'm sure many of us have heard such tales of linkages being disconnected because they were either too stiff or sloppy, but to turn them into universal practice accross most crews over a period of more than fifty years might require a little in the way of evidence

 

btw, even if the regulator were left to the fireman, the driver would, I hope, have retained the rather important role or operating the vacuum brake setter in the vestibule.

 

Nick

 

 

I think that was the case, but I've also heard tales of the hand brake being more useful than the vac.

 

SS

 

PS. Merry Christmas All

[The Stationmaster]

I believe that the regulator linkage was rarely connected to the regulator and that the fireman did all the driving. A waggle of the linkage being the command to open the regulator and another one to close it again. The fireman was usually passed for driving.

 

SS

 

I think not.  In some places it was not entirely unknown for the linkage not to be connected - between the engine and the trailer, so moving the regulator handle in the trailer wouldn't waggle anything on the engine.  And as I have previously posted it was not unknown for Passed Cleaners to be sent out as the Fireman on an auto train; there might well have been an official preference somewhere in a CM&EE letter or Instruction but Swindon was an awful long way from a running shed that was short of Firemen.

[The Stationmaster]

I'm sure many of us have heard such tales of linkages being disconnected because they were either too stiff or sloppy, but to turn them into universal practice accross most crews over a period of more than fifty years might require a little in the way of evidence

 

btw, even if the regulator were left to the fireman, the driver would, I hope, have retained the rather important role or operating the vacuum brake setter in the vestibule.

 

Nick

 

I have never heard of an instance of a vacuum pipe not being connected on an auto train - that one never came up in the 'old boys' stories anywhere I've had anything to do with men who'd worked on such trains.  

[57xx]

even if the regulator were left to the fireman, the driver would, I hope, have retained the rather important role or operating the vacuum brake setter in the vestibule.

 

Nick

Whilst the driver was able to apply the brakes from the trailer, he had to reply on the fireman to blow them off. Edited December 25, 2013 by 57xx

[Siberian Snooper]

Whilst the driver was able to apply the brakes from the trailer, he had to reply on the fireman to blow them off.

 

That's why I believe there was extensive use of the hand brake.