OK, bear with me please for the potential numpty question....;)
When a diesel loco hauls a passenger train into a terminus station (with no run around), whats the deal for getting those coaches back out?
Does the said loco now push them back out (seems strange to me) or does said loco uncouple then another loco couple up at the head & pull the carriages out.....????
I'm trying to plan a terminus station & just wondered the protocol?
Dave
My understanding is that there was normally a set of "release points" so the loco could roll forward and then run-round.
Not as common or necessary today with multiple units, however the "Night Riveara" sleeper which is hauled by a Class 57 does not reverse out of London Paddington and there are no run-round points. This train is one of the last in the UK to use another loco (an 08) to shunt the coaches out of the station.
I think the choice is yours, but it would be prototypical to use either a run-round loop or an 03 / 08 or similar.
Skyline2uk
Dependent on location, both can be prototypically correct.
On the Southern Region, Class 33's could often be seen propelling multiple unit stock.
I think, in general, uncoupling and having another loco pull the stock out was more widespread :hmmm:
Not always - at big termini, another loco, or maybe a shunting engine if the stock was to be taken for cleaning, would couple up, and the original loco would follow closely behind the departing train, and go to shed.
As I understand it this was under the same signal as the train!
I have seen this happen at Euston, though with electric locos.
Cheers Jon :)
Thanks for the swift replies:)
I'm aiming to model early 80's BR Midlands(ish) region. So, DMU's are an option but I wouldn't want to use them exclusively.
Adding a run around adds a lot of length...hence my question...but I guess is the more practical option.
I saw the issue on the fab Penzance layout station, but didnt really want to crash he's layout thread with my question....;)
As Jon says the trapped loco could follow the departing train out. I also remember this well with electrics, at Manchester Piccadilly in my case.
The loco would have to follow the train immediately and if it couldn't do so would have to remain on the stops, otherwise it might still be gently ambling down the platform as the next train came in - embarrassing and potentially dangerous. Also the train would have to stop at the platform starter signal and wait for its own route to be set, as even if it was following the train down the line once beyond the platform there would need to be only one train between each set of signals.
This practice was banned sometime around 1990 when the spread of multiple units and push-pull meant it was no longer regularly used, and occasional use would probably have been seen as risky because drivers wouldn't be familiar with it.
Not an easy thing to model, unless you have DCC!
At other stations the arriving loco would push the train back. Probably all depends on things like whether trains went to sidings between workings, how far away the sidings were and how good the driver's view would be. If the sidings were all loops then probably a pilot engine would work the empties and use the exit at the far end of the loops to avoid itself becoming trapped.
A very enjoyable evening at Paddington in about 1991, saw a large number of locomotive movements: at that time NSE liveried class 47s on the Thames Valley services.
The train would come in, shortly followed by a light engine, which would couple up to the end. When the train departed, the original train engine was released, before dropping onto the rear of the next arrival in an adjacent platform. And so it continued, with I guess some interchanging of engines between diagrams.
I believe Waterloo did a similar type of exercise, albeit with a much reduced volume of traffic. If there were ECS movements, then the original train engine stayed coupled and was dragged back to Clapham sidings.
In some locations there would be a fairly short period between a train arriving and another loco arriving to take the coaches out on another service, the original loco would ften act as banker to get the new departure away smartly, especially if the location had a gradient soon after the start,the "banker" would.
At Waterloo in steam days a tank loco (often an M7) would bring the ECS in from the carriage sidings and remain coupled to the train (supplying carriage heating in winter) until just before departure then uncouple and bank the train out from the platform to the starter, then move to a siding and wait for a train to arrive and take the newly arrived stock to the carriage sidings releasing the train loco to move to shed. I would imagine something similar would still happen with diesel or electric loco hauled trains, substituting the M7 by an 08.
At Bournemouth West again steam days the train loco would push the stock back up to the carriage sidings, then either turn on the triangle or proceed to shed at Bournemouth Central, ECS for a new departure was often run downhill by gravity from the sidings, one day there was a non corridi=or coach in the middle of the train the shunter was unable to get to the brake van with this result
http://www.semgonline.com/misc/bomow-acc.html (http://www.semgonline.com/misc/bomow-acc.html)
Normal evening practice now at Paddington with the down Riviera is for a 57 to drag the stock in with the train loco on the rear. Then the trapped loco is uncoupled, and the train departs as normal. The light engine then returns to the Oak.
In the morning the up Riviera arrives, and the light 57 arrives on the rear. It couples up, the train loco is shut down, and when given the road, the whole formation departs for the Oak dragging the dead 57 on the rear.
Of course, as mentioned above, if no light 57 is available, one of the two 08s will deputise for the drags.
On one occasion, 57604 dragged the evening sleeper in, uncoupled, and was shut down. Then after the sleeper departed, 604 wouldn't start, and was declared a failure. No 08 was available, so a pair of back to back HST power cars were dispatched to drag the errant body snatcher back to the Oak. That was some sight.
Cheers, Timmo
FWIW:
As has been already stated, there are two options:
1. Either a 'headshunt' (the term will vary from country to country) which is 'just' long enough for a single loco to run forwards, clear the relevant set of points and 'fouling point' with the train it has just brought-in, and then reverse around and come back onto its train from the other end.
2. After arrival at the terminus. the 'lead' ('head-end') locomotive uncouples, but remains stationary while another loco comes up behind the train and couples onto it. After completing the required air-brake tests, the train then departs (the carriages / wagons now being in 'reverse' if you will), with the now-former 'head-end' locomotive waiting until the appropriate signal gives it authority to move-out to 'wherever' it may be required (loco depot, another car set or...).
Casual observation indicates that these actions seem to be common practice internationally.
BTW, and FWIW: In situation 2, it HAS been known, that for various reasons, the original train loco can 'forget' to uncouple from its train and then be dragged 'kicking and screaming' when the 'new' locomotive at the other end takes the train away.
Let's just say that the situation can have 'interesting' 'consequences' as a result.
Hope this helps.
There are a number of different scenarios based on different locations. I'll be happy to give a few examples here. Lets start off with the above mentioned Manchester Piccadilly. Trains would arrive and the locomotive would be uncoupled. Another locomotive would couple to the other end and the train would eventually depart for it's destination. The original locomotive would follow the departing train to the signal at the end of the platform and wait for it's own route and then either 1) wait outside the station to attach to the head of another train or 2) go light engine to somewhere else usually Longsight.
Platform 5 & 6 at Manchester had a set of points connecting the 2 platforms near the stop blocks allowing the arriving loco to release itself. It would arrive in platform 5 and stop short. Uncouple and pull ahead to the stop blocks clearing the points. The points would be set and the loco would run around it's train to go back out (normally) with the same stock. 2 examples of this were the Harwich - Manchester boat train and the Swansea - Manchester in the mid 80's.
Most terminus stations in London, Paddington, Kings Cross, Euston, Liverpool St etc had the loco wait at the blocks and another would couple to the head of the train. When the train departed the loco would follow. If the loco was unable to follow immediately, the driver would have to obtain permission to proceed to the signal at the end of the platform. The same applied at Manchester too.
Norwich..... For many years Norwich had a class 03 with a match truck that would shunt the stock out of the station to release the loco and then the loco would work the next service back to London. Yarmouth services were just re-engined and the original loco would follow the train out to the signal as previously mentioned.
Glasgow Queen St..... For many years the locomotive that brought the train into the station would be uncoupled at the stop blocks. Another loco would then be coupled to the other end to take the train out of the staion for it's next departure. Either a service train to Inverness/Aberdeen/Dundee/West Highland Line or ECS to Cowlairs etc. Upon departure it was normal for the loco on the stop blocks to bank the train out of the station up the hill to cowlairs and drop away from the train near the top of the hill. I believe this practice was stopped in the mid-late 80's.
So, as you can see there are many different was of operating at terminus stations across the network.
Hope this helps.
Jamie
Quote from: fordpop on December 21, 2013, 10:15:53 PM
OK, bear with me please for the potential numpty question....;)
When a diesel loco hauls a passenger train into a terminus station (with no run around), whats the deal for getting those coaches back out?
Does the said loco now push them back out (seems strange to me) or does said loco uncouple then another loco couple up at the head & pull the carriages out.....????
I'm trying to plan a terminus station & just wondered the protocol?
Dave
Hi
In the late 70s at Manchester a second loco would couple up to the coaches and the train would leave for its destination with the original loco following the departing train slowly up the platform.
Cheers
Paul
Thanks for all the replies & info guys, very interesting:)
Dave
In steam days (at least) if there was a triangle near the terminus, like at Bradford Exchange (Great Northern side) or New Holland, the whole train including the incoming engine could be reversed out of the station, around the triangle and back into the station again - pointing the right way for the departure.
There's how they used to do it at Penzance
[smg id=8953 type=av align=center caption="Class 08 08644 50034 shunting Penzance Station 4th May 1984"]
These days the 57's push back the sleeper to Long Rock for servicing.
[smg id=8956 type=av align=center caption="FGW Night Riviera Departing Penzance Station 57604 17/12/11"]
Well you could do it like the scarborough spa express does...
Train pulls into platform,
Passengers get off
Loco propells the stock out the platform into a siding
Loco uncouples and runs round (via turntable if its steam)
Loco propells stock back into platform
Or you could have a shunter pick the stock up, pull it out the way, let the ciesel come out, shunter puts stock back in platform, diesel comes back on...simples :)
Quote from: Jack9465 on December 22, 2013, 11:18:56 AM
These days the 57's push back the sleeper to Long Rock for servicing.
I wonder how the orange man communicates with the driver - and whose fault would it be if there was a SPAD!
Cheers Jon :)
Hand held radios between front and rear, same as nymr at whitby really
Quote from: PaulCheffus on December 22, 2013, 08:37:49 AM
Hi
In the late 70s at Manchester a second loco would couple up to the coaches and the train would leave for its destination with the original loco following the departing train slowly up the platform.
Cheers
Paul
I have had that info from many sources, and I think it even applied to the steam age.
But from a model railway point of view, I am (unfortunately, because of the age of my layout) stuck with DC operation. What I am hoping to convey here is that DCC is not necessary to duplicate such a move.
Simple section break with a switch at the end of the platform so loco can be isolated when it comes to a halt, another loco pulls up and couples to end of train, and draws it away. When a suitable distance away (and it can be eyeballed) switch the section back on, and original locomotive follows on the same controller quite obediently. It can then be routed onto an MPD road, or whatever.
I have performed this many times on the terminus of my layout and get immense satisfaction in doing so.
DCC would obviously make such an operation a breeze, but to get the two moving together would possibly require two operators! One person can do it alone with DC!
The older I get, the more I realise I'm stuck with DC. No big prob..... work with whatya got! :thumbsup:
:beers: Cheers, George.
Hi
BR Inter City &Virgin when they had loco hauled trains used a class 86\\87 and 90 at one end and a Driving Van Trailer the other end.out of Euston
BR at Paddington used class 31 to haul empty stock to Old Oak Common,the incoming loco would either go to Old Oak Common,or Ranligh Road loco siding the later if it was due to haul another Train.
BR Kings X Empty stock would be hauled back to Finsbury Park,incoming loco would also either go to Finsbury Park if going on shed,or to Kings X loco siding.
Scot Rail used a cl47 and Driving Brake second,these were a conversion,they had a driving cab installed at the gaurds van end,these were cascaded to Anglia,and used on the Liverpool St-Norwich route.
Current GE Anglia use class 90's and ex Virgin Driving van trailers,East Coast use a class 91 Loco and a Driving Van Trailer,these started life as BR Inter City 225 sets.
Mike
One very interesting variation on this theme was at Manchester Victoria in the days before the DMU's appeared in about 1959/1960. At this time most local services from Rochdale, Royton and Ashton used the bay platforms at the east end of the station, (now the area occupied by Metrolink.) These platforms were at the bottom of a rather steep incline know as Miles Platting bank. On arrival, the steam loco would be uncoupled and, after the passengers had alighted, the vacuum brakes on the stock would be released and the loco would then push the train out of the station to a point outside Footbridge signalbox. The Guard would secure the train with the handbrake and the loco would drop down into the centre road between the platforms. The stock would then be gravitated back into the station controlled only by the Guard's handbrake!! The loco would then be dropped back on the other end ready for departure.
Such movements would take place several times an hour throughout the day and, as far as I know, there was never a problem such was the skill of the Guards. The whole thing only took a few minutes and was much quicker than running round but the efficiency very much depended on the slick team working of the Driver, Fireman, Guard and Signalman. Of course it would never be allowed today but I would love to see it modelled.
Ron
How did locos get out of terminus stations? Much the same way that the passengers did... through the main entrance.
(http://i1063.photobucket.com/albums/t508/mrmusings/montparnasse_zps0bbfdb40.jpg)
(The famous train wreck at the Gare Montparnasse in 1895).
:laughabovepost: :laughabovepost: :laughabovepost:
:laughabovepost:
Probably the inspiration for that Gene Wilder movie... what was it? The Silver Streak or something like that?
The original Stourbridge Town station had a couple of 'DMU through end wall' incidents, although both cases it stopped hanging over the road and no lives were lost.
The weirdest terminus turn around I am aware of is the use of a crane. This is documented as having occurred on one inspection day for a new line. Having discovered they forgot to put the run-around points in the railway management took the inspector for a very good lunch and while he was safely away the locomotive was craned to the other end without him noting the ommission!
Gravity shunting was another scheme used on a few branches including in some cases for passenger stock (empty). The train arrived and the coach was then pushed back up hill past a suitable siding. The locomotive was put in the siding and the brakes on the coach released to allow it to roll past, and be braked into the platform by the guard. The locomotive then rejoined the train.
It was used for passenger services on places such as Yelverton for the Princetown branch, at Cowes and sometimes at Bodmin Road. In BR diesel days there were a couple of obscure freight branches where gravity shunting was used t run around wagons. The Manx electric only gave it up in 2006, and elsewhere in Europe (notably Switzerland) t is still done.
There was a DMU through the wall at Middleton in about 1960 and there have been similar incidents with EMUs at Shepperton and Largs. There was also the one in Sweden recently when I think a cleaner managed to start the train accidentally because the controls hadn't been secured properly.
In its early days up to 1844 or thereabouts London Euston used a cable-hauled incline to depart trains. Arrivals detached the loco at the top of the hill at Camden where the passengers' tickets were collected. The fully loaded string of coaches was then allowed to roll down the hill under control of the brakemen. For departures, the brakemen pushed the coaches up to the start of the incline, attached them to the messenger rope, then up the hill they went.
Its really a shame all of this predated the invention of the movie camera.
Fascinating replies & stories:)
OK, now thinking about my modelling dilemma, how do you think the use of magnetic uncouplers would work on a terminus station model?
So, loco & stock in to the uncoupler, then a second loco couples at the head & hauls the stock out, the orignial loco then moves out.
I run DCC so it's no issue to do, just wondered if it would a) ware thin quickly & b) is too far removed from prototype?
Thanks in advance.....& merry crimbo:)
Dave
I think it is an excellent idea, and one I hope to incorporate into my own layout - one day.... :envy:
And mine ain't DCC either!
Merry Christmas! :beers:
George
Quote from: fordpop on December 24, 2013, 11:32:15 AM
Fascinating replies & stories:)
OK, now thinking about my modelling dilemma, how do you think the use of magnetic uncouplers would work on a terminus station model?
So, loco & stock in to the uncoupler, then a second loco couples at the head & hauls the stock out, the orignial loco then moves out.
I run DCC so it's no issue to do, just wondered if it would a) ware thin quickly & b) is too far removed from prototype?
Thanks in advance.....& merry crimbo:)
Dave
I'm DCC as well, my terminus has a central release road for the express trains and I have programmed Train Controller to drive the train to near the buffers, wait for the passengers to get off, it then backs the coaches clear of the the release crossover, uncouples the coaches and then moves forward to the head shunt. Points change, loco moves down release road to the turntable, the next loco to take the train out backs onto the coaches, couples up and is ready to go or the station shunter moves then to where needed.
That is what I love about DCC, so much is possible.
Quote from: whiteswan on December 24, 2013, 01:03:29 PM
I'm DCC as well, my terminus has a central release road for the express trains and I have programmed Train Controller to drive the train to near the buffers, wait for the passengers to get off, it then backs the coaches clear of the the release crossover, uncouples the coaches and then moves forward to the head shunt. Points change, loco moves down release road to the turntable, the next loco to take the train out backs onto the coaches, couples up and is ready to go or the station shunter moves then to where needed.
That is what I love about DCC, so much is possible.
:drool: That sounds amazing!
Quote from: fordpop on December 24, 2013, 11:32:15 AM
how do you think the use of magnetic uncouplers would work on a terminus station model?
So, loco & stock in to the uncoupler, then a second loco couples at the head & hauls the stock out, the orignial loco then moves out.
This is how I operate my Penzance themed layout, which is DCC as well. At exhibitions, to have something running more quickly, I skip shunting the incoming train into a siding and another stabled loco is directly attached to the front of the rake, then leaves the station so the original loco can move out to a stabling position. This also justifies an amount of stabled diesels in the station itself :)
A properly working uncoupling device was the central issue since now with the trainshed roof in place there is no easy access for a helping hand from the sky. Following a test on several alternatives with rapido style decoupler units, none proved as reliable as the Dapol EasiShunt magnetic depoupling device. I know there may be issues about costs, but if you operate loco hauled trains and the main feature of your layout is a terminus, I'd say the effect and the joy of operation is worth it and recommend the Dapol offerings again.
Matthias
Quote from: haeckmaen on December 27, 2013, 12:26:23 PM
A properly working uncoupling device was the central issue since now with the trainshed roof in place there is no easy access for a helping hand from the sky. Following a test on several alternatives with rapido style decoupler units, none proved as reliable as the Dapol EasiShunt magnetic depoupling device. I know there may be issues about costs, but if you operate loco hauled trains and the main feature of your layout is a terminus, I'd say the effect and the joy of operation is worth it and recommend the Dapol offerings again.
What types of magnet are you using? I've experimented quite a bit with permanent magnets (actually an array of 8 rare earth ones) but have not tries any electromagnets.
Cheers
Dave
Hi Dave
I'm using Dapol's own permanent magnets successfully; but I do need to try half length just for the visual impact.
Bob
I installed three of the original Dapol magnets inside the trainshed. Yes, if mounted between the tracks straight from the box they are obtrusive. However if they are located at the very end of the line just to enable a single loco to release from the train, it is perfectly possible to disguise the magnet below that amount of soot that occured regularly where locos tended to take longer rests.
For this reason I haven't dabbled in shortening the Dapol magnet and also didn't try neodym magnets. Both methods seem to work, however more precision in shunting is required when utilising shorter versions of magnets since this will only work faultlessly when the coupings are directly positioned above the magnets, and the shorter the magnets are the more difficult will it be to match their position.
Regards, Matthias
How about recessing the magnets below the sleepers, therefore laying track over them? May need a pair doubled up?
Just a thought?
Dave
Hi Dave,
as far as I know placing Dapol magnets below the track has been tested unsuccessfully, there was an article about this and other questions concerning EasiShunt in the NGS journal. It may work with neodym magnets, but worries occured neodym magnets which are just too strong might affect DCC decoders.
Matthias
I seem to remember a post on here where someone had semi recessed the magnets in the baseboard, then thinned the sleepers over it so there was, once ballasted, a continuous row of sleepers, but the magnet was just below the surface and so more effective.
You can fit small (2mm) Rare earth magnets between the sleepers, just below ballast level. Fit 3 or four rows to provide a bigger target area.
Don't know about impact on DCC decoders though.
Cheers Jon :)
The Club trains to Blackpool used to reverse out to the carriage sidings to run round the stock then reverse back into the station. The guard would be in the leading coach on the "butterfly" as with this pic of 37278 below 13/06/92 which worked in with the 10:33 from Manchester before working the 13:25 to Liverpool:
(http://i1157.photobucket.com/albums/p600/SD35ngf/130692-1_zps3393e345.jpg)
As a DCC decoder will quite happily sit on top of an electric motor, I think it's highly unlikely that it would be affected by a magnet in the track.
I've just finished fitting the standard Dapol magnets chopped to half their length so that they replace the sleepers. They work absolutely fine and look quite a bit better than when full length. Train control is fine enough for realistic operation but you do need to see where they are so use under an overall roof isn't really feasible.
This is fascinating stuff. If the rolling stock was to be used again didn't the brake coach have to be removed and turned as I thought that in those days the last carriage was always at the back and the guard's part of said carriage at the end
Sort of know what you mean, don't have an answer but 'the last carriage was always at the back' made me a laugh. Maybe it's a railway term. Don't know to be sure to be sure!
Cheers weave :beers:
Quote from: weave on January 31, 2014, 10:52:20 PM
Sort of know what you mean, don't have an answer but 'the last carriage was always at the back' made me a laugh. Maybe it's a railway term. Don't know to be sure to be sure!
Cheers weave :beers:
Well, technically the last coach is always at the back... Doesn't say which coach, but it's always there...
Cheers, Timmo
Quote from: 1018509 on January 31, 2014, 09:35:36 PM
This is fascinating stuff. If the rolling stock was to be used again didn't the brake coach have to be removed and turned as I thought that in those days the last carriage was always at the back and the guard's part of said carriage at the end
If we're talking about the Southern then fixed coach sets could often mean a brake at both ends, so definitely no turning around needed.
Hi
Typically passenger rakes were made up with a brake coach at each end, so whichever way it was going there was always a brake coach at the rear of the train.
Sometimes a brake would not be at the very end - especially if there were slip coaches to be dropped off along the way.
Neil
Quote from: class37025 on December 30, 2013, 07:20:41 PM
I seem to remember a post on here where someone had semi recessed the magnets in the baseboard, then thinned the sleepers over it so there was, once ballasted, a continuous row of sleepers, but the magnet was just below the surface and so more effective.
I've recessed mine into the foam underlay rather than the baseboard: http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=3660.msg100430#msg100430 (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=3660.msg100430#msg100430), near the bottom.
They need cardboard shims to bring them right up below the sleepers, and I think I'll have to ballast around rather than over the top, but they are working through the plastic.
Quote from: 1018509 on January 31, 2014, 09:35:36 PM
This is fascinating stuff. If the rolling stock was to be used again didn't the brake coach have to be removed and turned as I thought that in those days the last carriage was always at the back and the guard's part of said carriage at the end
Let's replace "last" with "brake" shall we; a lot less amusing but what I meant. :sorrysign:
In the days when the last coaching had to be a brake (subject to certain exceptions that aren't relevant here) the rakes of coaching stock would have been formed with a brake coach at each end. This ceased to be the rule in about 1970 since when trains have only needed one brake coach.
Quote from: edwin_m on February 01, 2014, 09:56:58 PM
In the days when the last coaching had to be a brake (subject to certain exceptions that aren't relevant here) the rakes of coaching stock would have been formed with a brake coach at each end. This ceased to be the rule in about 1970 since when trains have only needed one brake coach.
if you look at the photographic evidence I think that the last vehicle HAD to be a brake coach only really up to the time that fully automatic brake was universal- sometime around 1890 give or take a few years. Certainly the little album included in the latest Railway Magazine has nine passenger trains in which the last vehicle can be clearly identified, and three of these are NOT brake coaches, and not all branch trains.
I'm also old enough to remember the Tees-Tyne Pullman as a 100% Pullman train before they put maroon full brakes on the ends, and seeing the Northbound train hammer round the back of Darlington station with two Met-Camm pullmans at the back- behind the traditional brake car- this wasn't the "correct" formation but it ran like that for over a week. Similarly if travelling South out of Darlington we used to try to get in the last coach of the train (better to get a pic of the loco coming round the curves into York) and about 1 in 3 or 4 journeys we would be behind the brake coach.
Similarly the East Coast line had a number of trains that split en-route, sometimes twice, but I don't see photos of four or more brakes in the train.
I suspect "normally ran with brakes at each end" is more accurate than "had to have", at least outside those areas where fixed rakes were the rule.
All the very best
Les
All locomotive hauled passenger trains had a brake van at the rear until the late 1960's or early 1970's. This was to provide some protection to the passegner accommodation in the event of a rear end collision.
There were exceptions such as branch trains or long commutor trains stopping at short platforms where the rear guards compartment had to be on the platform. These had to be approved by the Department of Transport.
The regulations were changed sometime after the great cull of 1962 when the older weaker coaches were withdrawn and all underframes were of the 200 Ton type.
Dodger
:thankyousign:
What a wealth of absolutely fascinating information - thanks guys and gals!
You wouldn't get a tenth of this from Google or Wikipedia...!
Chris
Quote from: dodger on February 05, 2014, 08:09:59 AM
All locomotive hauled passenger trains had a brake van at the rear until the late 1960's or early 1970's. This was to provide some protection to the passegner accommodation in the event of a rear end collision.
The current rules also provide that you need a suitably strong vehicle at each end of older coaches. This is one reason you'll see end vehicles on heritage trains using Mark 1 stock. They effectively act as barriers to protect the Mark 1 coaches and their contents.
While the Mark 1 coaches were much better than most of the older stock they replaced it was found that in high speed accidents the separate body/chassis meant they were vulnerable to some types of catastrophic failure.
Modern stock is a lot stronger and the construction means they don't have a separate underframe.
Alan
monocoque (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocoque (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocoque)), same as *most* modern cars rather than a separate chassis and body
Quote from: Les1952 on February 04, 2014, 07:57:38 PM
Quote from: edwin_m on February 01, 2014, 09:56:58 PM
In the days when the last coaching had to be a brake (subject to certain exceptions that aren't relevant here) the rakes of coaching stock would have been formed with a brake coach at each end. This ceased to be the rule in about 1970 since when trains have only needed one brake coach.
if you look at the photographic evidence I think that the last vehicle HAD to be a brake coach only really up to the time that fully automatic brake was universal- sometime around 1890 give or take a few years. Certainly the little album included in the latest Railway Magazine has nine passenger trains in which the last vehicle can be clearly identified, and three of these are NOT brake coaches, and not all branch trains.
I'm also old enough to remember the Tees-Tyne Pullman as a 100% Pullman train before they put maroon full brakes on the ends, and seeing the Northbound train hammer round the back of Darlington station with two Met-Camm pullmans at the back- behind the traditional brake car- this wasn't the "correct" formation but it ran like that for over a week. Similarly if travelling South out of Darlington we used to try to get in the last coach of the train (better to get a pic of the loco coming round the curves into York) and about 1 in 3 or 4 journeys we would be behind the brake coach.
Similarly the East Coast line had a number of trains that split en-route, sometimes twice, but I don't see photos of four or more brakes in the train.
I suspect "normally ran with brakes at each end" is more accurate than "had to have", at least outside those areas where fixed rakes were the rule.
All the very best
Les
This thread has drifted off terminus station engine release a bit! But as we are on the subject here is my tuppence.
I think once the continuous brake became universal most companies introduced a rule regarding a limit on the maximum number of axles behind the rearmost hand-brake fitted vehicle, (ie brake van in a passenger coach or freight stock brake van. I think this was 8 or 10 axles.
This allowed Parcels stock and the like to be attached to formations en-route without re-mashalling or complicated and time consuming. Stock could be added to the front without restriction. I believe some Fish trains on the LNER had an exemption from this rule to expedite working the traffic, presumably the exception to prove the rule!
There is a difference between axles behind and passenger axles behind.
Mind you its well established that the shunting rules about the differences were ignored a safe distance from HQ. A passenger train with a van behind the guards van was for example supposed not to have the passengers on board while the entire train was reversed into a siding and the van uncoupled (or added)
Needless to say every record shows it didn't happen that way
Alan