BSK Carriages

[Andy873]

Superb photos, mind you I think with the birdcage vans I would be tempted to duck my head before going into a tunnel! I had no idea there were vans like the birdcage.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

I would be tempted to duck my head before going into a tunnel!

Know what you mean . Reading the superb book 'Bogie Carriages of the SECR' by David Gould/Oakwood Press/1993, S3363 was one of six such 50' vehicles, that seem to have been an add-on to the build of similar vehicles that formed the 3 Set Type A sets at the time, and were used to bolster other set formations on a random basis presumably.
The overall rail to roof height was (is) 11 ft 9 inches, but the observatory (Birdcage) part measured 12 ft, 6 and a half inches from rail level.

 

[edwin_m]

Duckets survived longest on goods brake vans, long after passenger carrying vehicles so fitted were withdrawn. Ex SR pillbox, ex SR Queen Mary's, ex LM 20T, BR standard 20T etc.

Almost every brake van design had duckets, the best known exception being the GWR Toad. As well as observing signals, a freight guard had more need to keep an eye on the train itself. I guess duckets on passenger stock disappeared in part because the width of the body itself increased close to the maximum allowed by the gauge, but there was no reason to make a goods brake van body the maximum width.

 

[LowLevel]

At Exeter Central there were scissor crossovers half way up the Up platform which made combining the portions much easier: there was no equivalent on the Down. Some trains lost their North Cornwall portions at Okehampton: from a story I read (*) the train was split just behind the dining saloon.

* - The story went roughly that they split a train at Okehampton and the front portion departed, only for a waiter to be seen in the gangway as they had split between the kitchen and saloon. Someone in Exeter had telegraphed the wrong number of vehicles in each portion, and at Okehampton they had just counted the number and uncoupled without checking the type. (That was roughly the story: I may have got the kitchen car and dining saloon the wrong way round.)

Jack Warland's superb memoir Light Relief.

As a modern day railwayman I was absolutely astounded what a Southern relief signalman in the West Country got up to back in the day. Covering boxes across a huge area, relief station staff and clerking, guard, shunter and so on.

The detail he goes into about workings is superb.

I was lucky enough to be passed it to read by a gentleman who was a signalman in Lincolnshire during the 60s onwards and recognised many of the exploits to be relatable!

Another friend then loaned me the Southern Railway's operating appendices and sectional appendix which made a lot of sense when used as reference.

 

[Magdalia]

The Plymouth Portion would typically consist of an RB+FO+TSO. The Penzance Portion, usually 5 vehicles, would have a BG at the extreme Cornish end.

Some Plymouth portions were RB+2FO+TSO, notably the Golden Hind and Cornish Riviera in each direction.

I have Penzance portions as 6 cars, BG+TSO+FO+3TSO.

In the mid-1970s there weren’t many through trains to Hereford and one was the nine-coach whole set. The others split at Worcester, with three or four coaches going on to Hereford and four (including the buffet) staying in Worcester: the only brake vehicle was in the Hereford portion.

Two trains detached/attached in each direction, 1235 and 1505 down, 0808 and 1805 up. The Hereford portions were a mix of 3 and 4 cars with a BFK in the middle and the rest TSOs. The Worcester portions were FK+RB+2TSO, with detaching/attaching similar to Plymouth. As with the Plymouth portions of Penzance trains, the Worcester portions of Hereford trains did not have brake vehicles.

0700 up and 1715 down all the train ran from/to Hereford.

I still haven't worked out exactly how the Hereford portions balanced up!

 

[Merle Haggard]

There were 3 ex S.R. 4 wheeled passenger brake vans with 'Birdcages' in the centre - S1S to S3S. Under the grime, I'm pretty sure that some achieved Rail Blue - because they were so distinctive I noticed them around, in parcels trains on the West Coast; lasted until about 1970 at least.
Possibly originally built for the 'Orient Express'.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Possibly originally built for the 'Orient Express'.

Yes, I recall the vans you mention. Never saw (any) of them myself, but do recall reading about them, and believe (as you say) they were originally formed in to the SE Boat Train formations.

the best known exception being the GWR Toad

Funny you mention them. As I was typing that post, in my mind was an image of a Toad b/van, it crossing my mind, typical GWR, had to be different from everyone else...

 

[Gloster]

There were 3 ex S.R. 4 wheeled passenger brake vans with 'Birdcages' in the centre - S1S to S3S. Under the grime, I'm pretty sure that some achieved Rail Blue - because they were so distinctive I noticed them around, in parcels trains on the West Coast; lasted until about 1970 at least.
Possibly originally built for the 'Orient Express'.

S1S-S3S were built in 1936 as 1-3 for the introduction of the Night Ferry to Paris. They worked on this service until 1960, except for 1939-1947 when, for some reason, the Night Ferry didn’t run. In 1960 they ceased to go abroad and lost their continental fittings, but continued in use on domestic traffic; they eventually lost their lighting and were no longer used as guards accommodation. S1S and S2S were withdrawn in 1969, but the third lasted until 1974.

(Source: Southern Railway Passenger Vans; Gould; Oakwood;1992.)

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Thats interesting, whats the 33 doing with the tube stock, im guessing its an eastleigh drag for overhaul or scrap, or the stock selected for island line conversion?

 

[Taunton]

mind you I think with the birdcage vans I would be tempted to duck my head before going into a tunnel!

Regarding "birdcages" and ducking in tunnels, I wonder if the forward-facing glass in them was ever broken in deep winter by icicles hanging down, particularly from tunnel ventilation shafts. This was a considerable problem with "dome cars" in the USA when introduced, also built to the extremities of the loading gauge with forward-facing windows, and eventually those diesel locomotives which hauled such trains were fitted on top with heavy steel frameworks of the same dimensions, known as "icicle cutters" (often mistaken for radio aerials).

About the BSK term, the BR classification codes of coaches were based on that of the former LNER, who had devised this approach. From the first Mk1 stock in 1951 until the change in 1956, normal seating was known as third class, and only changed then to second class, so in the first five years of this stock production they were BTK, changed to BSK at the switchover, along with all the pre-nationalisation stock of this type.

 

[Rescars]

Funny you mention them. As I was typing that post, in my mind was an image of a Toad b/van, it crossing my mind, typical GWR, had to be different from everyone else...

As the Toads had a verandah at one end only, does anyone know if there was a preference for these vans to face one way or the other in regard to the direction of travel? Were Toads ever turned routinely before commencing running in the opposite direction? If this was the case, it would surely have made for a lot of unnecessary and costly activity.

 

[Gloster]

As the Toads had a verandah at one end only, does anyone know if there was a preference for these vans to face one way or the other in regard to the direction of travel? Were Toads ever turned routinely before commencing running in the opposite direction? If this was the case, it would surely have made for a lot of unnecessary and costly activity.

From what I have read, they tried to turn them where possible when they were diagrammed on fast and long-distance turns, but did not always do so when they were working other turns. Of course, in many situations it was just not possible or just too disruptive to turn them. The preference was veranda to the rear: one reason was that it meant that the guard did not get the full blast of locomotive smoke, coal dust etc. from the load, or just rain and wind, a major reason for the final blacking by the NUR in the 1960s.

 

[randyrippley]

As the Toads had a verandah at one end only, does anyone know if there was a preference for these vans to face one way or the other in regard to the direction of travel? Were Toads ever turned routinely before commencing running in the opposite direction? If this was the case, it would surely have made for a lot of unnecessary and costly activity.

there's a whole thread about that from last year somewhere

 

[Gloster]

there's a whole thread about that from last year somewhere

Just found it after a second search: GWR Toad Brake Vans direction of running

(Sorry, as ever, I can’t do a link.)

 

[randyrippley]

Just found it after a second search: GWR Toad Brake Vans direction of running

(Sorry, as ever, I can’t do a link.)

its here

GWR Toad Brake Vans direction of running

Hello All The GWR-designed 'Toad' brake/guards vans clearly have a front and a rear, and presumably guards preferred having the 'veranda' pointing towards the rear of the train. This would have reduced draughts bringing in cold air, coal dust, etc, and giving a clear view behind the train. Are...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Rescars]

its here

GWR Toad Brake Vans direction of running

Hello All The GWR-designed 'Toad' brake/guards vans clearly have a front and a rear, and presumably guards preferred having the 'veranda' pointing towards the rear of the train. This would have reduced draughts bringing in cold air, coal dust, etc, and giving a clear view behind the train. Are...

www.railforums.co.uk

Many thanks all!

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Thats interesting, whats the 33 doing with the tube stock

Part of the IoW conversion programme of the late '80s. I only used that image (didn't take that many) as it shows a clear-ish close up of the Queen Mary's lookout ducket. With hindsight wish I'd taken a few other detailed views (interior etc) of the van, but at the time it was just part of the job in hand. But at least several are preserved IIRC.

I guess duckets on passenger stock disappeared in part because the width of the body itself increased close to the maximum allowed by the gauge,

Just as an add on to the image I took (up thread), this particular trip concerned needed additional brake force by way of a couple of BR CCT's just in front of the brake van, and although a poor image, this one was taken on straight track, and the comparative narrow body of the Queen Mary as against the CCT's ahead can be clearly seen.

Regarding "birdcages" and ducking in tunnels, I wonder if the forward-facing glass in them was ever broken in deep winter by icicles hanging down

On the occasion I took the image of S3363 on the Bluebell (above), a run was had behind a WR 4-6-0 (Castle or Hall?) with the brake end of the Birdcage immediately behind the tender. I wasn't the only one sitting in the vehicle to notice something hitting the roof of the coach as we made our way along in the open countryside. Came to the conclusion small lumps of coal were flying back off the tender, but can't confirm that either way!

 

[Taunton]

On the occasion I took the image of S3363 on the Bluebell (above), a run was had behind a WR 4-6-0 (Castle or Hall?) with the brake end of the Birdcage immediately behind the tender. I wasn't the only one sitting in the vehicle to notice something hitting the roof of the coach as we made our way along in the open countryside. Came to the conclusion small lumps of coal were flying back off the tender, but can't confirm that either way!

I don't know if it was a feature of WR tenders, but at an early dieselisation stage the Western, maybe before others, issued an instruction that steam locomotives were not to assist diesels in front of them, but were to be placed behind, even though this involved some shunting moves, because of a history of lumps of coal blowing back from the tender and breaking the windscreen of the diesel behind. Not a Bluebell issue, but it happened particularly passing water troughs where an overfill might wash a number of lumps off the tender.

This gave an interesting (if you weren't driving it) issue where the Newton Abbot pilot over the banks to Plymouth changed from a Hall to a D63xx Class 22 North British mini-Warship, assisting maybe a King over Dainton, and then the tumultuous descent down to Totnes to storm Rattery bank up the other side, with the King at full throttle right behind. Not for the faint-hearted.

 

[Merle Haggard]

On the unresolved subject of whether there was a Ministry regulation about the number of coaches behind the brake; there's an interesting paragraph in Maunsell's S.R. Steam Stock. I will quote it verbatim:

"A rather odd set of 8 coaches, no 194, was made ups in about 1947 for London - Tunbridge Wells West services. A real break with tradition, it was formed with a Corridor Third at each end, and the Third Brakes, whose brake-ends faced inwards, were the 2nd and 7th coaches. Most platforms on the Oxted lines could only accommodate 6 coaches, so this ensured the guard was also alongside the platform when the train stopped. Special dispensation had to be obtained from the Ministry of Transport to form Set 194 like this, its view having been that the end coach ought to be a brake without passenger accommodation to minimise injuries in the event of a collision, but many trains had been running trains with loose* Thirds at the ends anyway!"

So it seems that no-one, not even the Ministry, knew how the regulations applied.

But I distinctly recollect that the 2 x 110mph BGs that were on West Coast trains in the 1970s and 80s were intended as 'crumple zones' - they usually contained only Red Stars, hardly likely to trouble a BSO/BFK

*Southern practice of former coaches into permanent sets, with strengthening by 'loose' or un-allocated coaches.

 

[Taunton]

I don't recall TWO BGs, one each end, on the WCML in this period. The BG always appeared to be at the London end, just for the guard often but also to facilitate parcels handling at Euston, followed by the firsts, the refreshment vehicle, and the seconds. Few brake seconds were built for Mk2, and none for Mk3.

 

[Gloster]

I don't know if it was a feature of WR tenders, but at an early dieselisation stage the Western, maybe before others, issued an instruction that steam locomotives were not to assist diesels in front of them, but were to be placed behind, even though this involved some shunting moves, because of a history of lumps of coal blowing back from the tender and breaking the windscreen of the diesel behind. Not a Bluebell issue, but it happened particularly passing water troughs where an overfill might wash a number of lumps off the tender.

I always though that the reason was because smoke, particularly those bits of ash and unused coal that got through the steam loco when it was working hard, would be drawn in through the diesels‘ vents. This would do the diesel no good at all.

 

[Taunton]

I always though that the reason was because smoke, particularly those bits of ash and unused coal that got through the steam loco when it was working hard, would be drawn in through the diesels‘ vents. This would do the diesel no good at all.

They have air filters for that. In Washington State USA when volcano Mount St Helens blew up in 1980 and the atmosphere was ash-laden for weeks (they were using snowploughs for the ash in some places) Burlington Northern, whose diesel loco air filters normally lasted for thousands of operating hours, were getting changed daily. General Motors were sending boxcars of filters over. Most images are of the explosion, but there are a few of the resulting ash.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I don't recall TWO BGs, one each end, on the WCML in this period. The BG always appeared to be at the London end, just for the guard often but also to facilitate parcels handling at Euston, followed by the firsts, the refreshment vehicle, and the seconds. Few brake seconds were built for Mk2, and none for Mk3.

I commuted daily into Euston at the time and, though my recollection is hazy, I recollect 2 together at one end on at least some Inter-City sets. I'll dig out my marshalling circulars, see if they provide a clue.

 

[hexagon789]

I commuted daily into Euston at the time and, though my recollection is hazy, I recollect 2 together at one end on at least some Inter-City sets. I'll dig out my marshalling circulars, see if they provide a clue.

There are certainly plenty of pictures of such, but I don't see any booked for two NEA or NHA, at least not in the 1986 marshalling book.

I can check others but I have a feeling that there was such a practice on some sets in the 70s and earlier 80s but not so by the mid-80s when set formations started getting rationalised a bit.

 

[Rescars]

My recollection is that the Birmingham / Wolverhampton workings in the late 1970s normally only had one BG in the consist - at the London end, as described by Taunton upthread.

Occasionally there might be two RBRs coupled together in the consist. This was to facilitate the substitution of one RBR with another when the works attention was required and enabled the catering staff to move all their kitchen and service equipment from one vehicle to the other during the course of their normal shift. I don't ever recall seeing two BGs, but memories fade.

 

[Friary Yard]

On the unresolved subject of whether there was a Ministry regulation about the number of coaches behind the brake; there's an interesting paragraph in Maunsell's S.R. Steam Stock. I will quote it verbatim:

"A rather odd set of 8 coaches, no 194, was made ups in about 1947 for London - Tunbridge Wells West services. A real break with tradition, it was formed with a Corridor Third at each end, and the Third Brakes, whose brake-ends faced inwards, were the 2nd and 7th coaches. Most platforms on the Oxted lines could only accommodate 6 coaches, so this ensured the guard was also alongside the platform when the train stopped. Special dispensation had to be obtained from the Ministry of Transport to form Set 194 like this, its view having been that the end coach ought to be a brake without passenger accommodation to minimise injuries in the event of a collision, but many trains had been running trains with loose* Thirds at the ends anyway!"

So it seems that no-one, not even the Ministry, knew how the regulations applied.

But I distinctly recollect that the 2 x 110mph BGs that were on West Coast trains in the 1970s and 80s were intended as 'crumple zones' - they usually contained only Red Stars, hardly likely to trouble a BSO/BFK

*Southern practice of former coaches into permanent sets, with strengthening by 'loose' or un-allocated coaches.

I was a Movements Supervisor on the WR in the mid 1970's and there were no restrictions at that time.

I have a copy of the WR Regional Appendix dated 1st October 1960 which has a section headlined

WHEELS BEHIND THE BRAKE
"..... the maximum number of wheels behind the brake in which the rear Guard rides to be as follows :-
Gradient rising not steeper than 1 in 100 40 wheels,
Gradient steeper than 1 in 100 but not steeper than 1 in 40 24 wheels,
Gradient steeper than 1 in 40 1 vehicle "

In the section headlines NUMBER OF GUARDS ON TRAINS
" .... Loaded passenger trains must not exceed 136 wheels ...... Loaded passenger trains having more than 96 wheels must always be formed with two vans or brake compartment vehicles"
" A brake van or vehicle with a brake compartment leading should, as far as practicable, be marshalled next to the engine ...... similarly a brake van or vehicle with a brake compartment trailing .... at the rear ....
When passenger-carrying vehicles are attached en route to either the front or rear of the train, they should be marshalled within the brake van ....."

The 1960 Sectional Appendix makes no mention of "Wheels" but still has the instruction concerning Brake Vans front and rear but this had disappeared by the time of the publication of the 1972 Sectional Appendix.

I don't know if it was a feature of WR tenders, but at an early dieselisation stage the Western, maybe before others, issued an instruction that steam locomotives were not to assist diesels in front of them, but were to be placed behind, even though this involved some shunting moves, because of a history of lumps of coal blowing back from the tender and breaking the windscreen of the diesel behind. Not a Bluebell issue, but it happened particularly passing water troughs where an overfill might wash a number of lumps off the tender.

This gave an interesting (if you weren't driving it) issue where the Newton Abbot pilot over the banks to Plymouth changed from a Hall to a D63xx Class 22 North British mini-Warship, assisting maybe a King over Dainton, and then the tumultuous descent down to Totnes to storm Rattery bank up the other side, with the King at full throttle right behind. Not for the faint-hearted.

The WR Regional Appendix of 1960 has instructions for steam/diesel hydraulic double heading. It is shown as only allowed between Newton Abbot and Penzance\Kingswear\Newquay with a King/Castle/County/Hall/Grange or Manor. No mention as to the position of the steam locomotive except that 2 x D63xx in multiple can only be assisted in front. Steam crews are reminded of various things including not to use water pickup and careful use of the coal watering pipe to avoid water and coal dust covering the diesel windscreen.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

In this context, does "wheels" mean axles or literally the number of wheels?

 

[hexagon789]

In this context, does "wheels" mean axles or literally the number of wheels?

136 wheels would be 17 bogie coaches, so I think it is wheels.

I commuted daily into Euston at the time and, though my recollection is hazy, I recollect 2 together at one end on at least some Inter-City sets. I'll dig out my marshalling circulars, see if they provide a clue.

I've actually since found one example in the 1986 CWN at second glance.

Set OY268:

BSO, 4 TSO, RBR, 4 FO, 2 NEA

The other EBW sets are only one van except that sets OY263 and OY267 conveyed an NEX at the London end for parts of their diagrams.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

136 wheels would be 17 bogie coaches, so I think it is wheels.

Makes sense when looked at that way...

 

[Andy873]

This seems to be a very popular subject, thank for all the replies.

While we're on the subject of brake vans, could someone please explain the attached for me, it's from a 1960 sectional appendix.

For the route from Rose Grove West to Blackburn via Padiham it states "loco' store van" under Number of Vehicles and Special Instructions heading... that is, working without a brake van.

Does this mean the only permitted working along the up line on this route without a brake van is an engine and a stores van? and all other workings including ECS must have a brake van in the formation?