GWR Autocoach sets

[hoppy504]

I have just managed to obtain a A30 Autocoach to go with a 14xx for my plank. As my knowledge of the prototype is basically nil, I wonder if one of our GWR devotees can answer the following.
Did these sets ever have additional stock added, either goods vans or an extra coach if so where were these added. Between the loco and coach or at the end?

Many thanks for any help.

John

 

[Pannier Tank]

There are many combinations for adding extra loads.
A common formation was a 14xx in the middle of two Auto-coaches, one being propelled and the other being pulled.
A typical Mix Goods train could consist of an auto-coach being propelled by the 14xx and the Goods Train being pullled from behind.

 

[The Great Bear]

(Catching a ride onto this thread, finding it on google was what found this site for me)

Where does a tail load finish and a mixed train start: how many/what type of wagons then required a brake van being added? Is it that fitted vans/tanks could be tail load and no brake van because the brakes would apply automatically if they became uncoupled but unfiited stock needed the brake van. Or is it more complex than that. Sorry if my terminology is a bit off.

The photos in the books I have to date (Paul Karau's  GWR Branch Line Termini, Wallingford Branch, Marlow Branch) have few pictures of mixed trains. My proposed little layout takes its inspiration from these branches hence the query.

So say a milk tank (or two) as a tail load would need no brake van? (Thinking of the creamery on the Wallingford Branch.)

Thanks

Jon

 

[Simon Dunkley]

Where does a tail load finish and a mixed train start: how many/what type of wagons then required a brake van being added? Is it that fitted vans/tanks could be tail load and no brake van because the brakes would apply automatically if they became uncoupled but unfiitted stock needed the brake van. Or is it more complex than that. Sorry if my terminology is a bit off.

Hi Jon and welcome,

You have almost answered your own question, but being fitted may not be enough (I say may as there are bound to be local variations). The essential requirement would be for the stock to be passenger train rated, not just fitted with power brakes, and able to travel at passenger train speeds. On many branchlines that would be a fine distinction, to be sure, but there would also be a load limit to the number of vehicles, and they would be unlikely (but not definitely so) to be shunted en route. So fish vans (if rated), horseboxes, parcels vans, milk tankers and maybe prize cattle vans could all be carried as a tail load, but possibly only on certain services in the timetable as some shunting would be required at each end of the branch - think of bloaters added to the auto train on the Brixham branch between there and Churston.

A mixed train has a (goods) brake van at the end, as you rightly say, and is essentially a passenger train with any old wagons trundling along behind it. A passenger brake van (with seats or a full brake) could be used as the brake van, but it would not carry passengers and would be using the handbrake only.

To return to the OP, the extra stock would be hauled behind the auto train, this could be behind the loco or behind an autocoach, but would be a trailing load. The reason for this is that to be interposed between loco and autocoach, the vehicles would have to have the requisite apparatus for connecting up the regulator as well as brake and steam heat pipes, and probably be limited to a single vehicle in any case (I am willing to be proved wrong, but it seems that the GWR ran no more than 2 autocoaches either side of a loco). Also, on a normal days running with the freight service operated by a separate loco (think of the Ashburton branch), the coach and loco would remain coupled for most of the day, and having to uncouple, insert an extra vehicle, recouple at both ends and then reverse all this just a few miles down the line would be a right PITA...

Hope that helps,

 

[28ten]

Simon has pretty much answered that, but as an example horseboxes at Lambourn were added behind railcars and autocoaches without a brake van

 

[The Great Bear]

Thanks for responses, yes they do help. I have a couple of related questions...

If it was an auto train and there was tail load or it was mixed train at the terminus, would the shunting be done with the coach attached of preference then to save disconnecting the control gear? So the loco and coach might have to both go around a run around loop to get the right side of the wagons to shunt?

From the books I have this seems to have been the case at Marlow, but not at Wallingford where the engine was detached as it wasn't allowed to enter the yard, for some reason. What would determine where the coach could or could not go? Could it get shoved into the engine shed out of the way perhaps to give more room for shunting or another train?

Thanks

Jon

 

[Simon Dunkley]

Thanks for responses, yes they do help. I have a couple of related questions...

If it was an auto train and there was tail load or it was mixed train at the terminus, would the shunting be done with the coach attached of preference then to save disconnecting the control gear? So the loco and coach might have to both go around a run around loop to get the right side of the wagons to shunt?

From the books I have this seems to have been the case at Marlow, but not at Wallingford where the engine was detached as it wasn't allowed to enter the yard, for some reason. What would determine where the coach could or could not go? Could it get shoved into the engine shed out of the way perhaps to give more room for shunting or another train?

Thanks

Jon

Hi Jon,

From the crew's point of view, leaving the coach attached would be preferred. However, it may not be practical due to tight curvature or clearances in the goods yard, or a combination of both. The "loco release" at Ashburton was long enough for an autocoach and a 48XX, useful when swapping the autocoaches over.

Most railway operating practices were based on getting a balance between efficent working and not impinging on safety, and can be deduced from a bit of common sense, to be honest - a lot of the safety issues were identified in the first 50 or so years of the railways by tiral and error combined with an increased respect for human life, and by late Victorian times a train was a pretty safe place to be, but railways were and are dangerous places to be for the unwary or stupid.

Simon

 

[28ten]

It very much depends on the branch in question. Disconnecting auto gear was a pain and crews would avoid if at all possible.

 

[The Great Bear]

Thanks to both of you for your responses.

Jon