Initially British Railways adopted an official basic goods livery of grey for unfitted stock, that is for wagons with only a hand brake, and a red-brown called 'bauxite' for fitted stock, that is for wagons fitted with a vacuum brake. British Railways adopted the vacuum brake as standard and following the 1955 Modernisation Plan, they fitted this to most new stock (other than the steel mineral wagons). The flexible brake pipe connections were red. Some wagons with only a hand brake had pipes and connectors for vacuum brakes, this allowed them to be marshalled into a train of 'fitted' stock. These 'piped' wagons were painted bauxite with white pipe connections.
Piped wagons were bauxite, same as fitted wagons, but the pipes were painted different colours, one was white, the other red but I never remember which was which. Keith
I tried to find the original reference to this practice, I am fairly sure it related to long coal trains in South Wales but with so much of my stuff in storage I couldn't find it. I asked around and I understand this practice is demonstrated and explained on the Dartmoor scene at Pendon. Then I aksed on uk.railways to see of anyone there was old enough to remember the practice with unfitted stock. Got two good answeres there -
Charles Ellson - ITYF you get round that problem by moving off at walking pace until the couplings are tight, then giving it full welly. The stove is bolted down anyway and the train will have moved off after the guard has signalled the driver, the guard then being prepared for what's coming unless he is particularly dozy.
Kevin Allsop - The ideals when working a loose-coupled or partially fitted train are to avoid snatches and bumps. If properly driven the guard will get a reasonable ride.
The basic rule for attaining this happy state is "Don't do anything suddenly". Starting away should be steady, taking up coupling slack (assuming that the train isn't already 'at the stretch' at a constant rate. This is achieved by the gradual increasing of power as the weight of wagons is taken up. Similarly, when stopping, a gentle brake application should be made to buffer the wagons up before applying the brake more fully.
So far as the van brake is concerned, unless the guard is well-experienced and competent it's usually best if he leaves it alone. Handling the van brake badly means that the guard is making a rod for his own back. If the driver really needs the assistance of the van brake he will whistle for it.
Keeping the train stretched when passing through dips or over humps is the best way to avoid snatches.
There are exceptions to this - if a train is put into a loop where it will only just fit it makes sense for the guard to apply his brake in order to avoid the possibility of the train 'springing back'. Similarly, it can be helpful to have the van brake partially on when setting back into some sidings.
So far as setting back to start is concerned, that would usually indicate that the train is stretched because of a rising gradient, so setting back means relying on the van brake to stop the whole train moving back, so is generally avoided if possible.
Loose coupled trains are an art with so many variables as to make absolute rules impossible to state - factors include variations in loading through the train (most of the weight at the back isn't good news); fitted head, if any (often ignored, and just kept in reserve); state of the rail; etc.
Descending inclines with the train controlled by wagon brakes pinned down is another important aspect. The train should be dragged onto the incline as brakes are pinned down, and be controlled during the descent solely by the wagon brakes, with loco and van brakes in reserve. (It also provided a standard rules examination question: "When is the only time that the driver of a goods train is given a green flag by the guard?" A: "When sufficient wagon brakes are pinned down to control the descent of an incline".)
COR? Do you mean GWR, John? Interesting point you make make though.
*No one* else made any comment about pre nationalisation standards. Everyone else has assumed (perhaps correctly - but the OP never asked or clarified later) that the initial question related to post 1948 practice. It was quite a major and logical change to differentiate fitted & unfitted by painting them different colours.
Pity some of the other opportunities available with Nationalisation weren't as well thought out.
Are you sure about that? From the Goods & Not So Goods web site
formatting link
Also in
1936 the body colour was changed to Bauxite, a reddish brown, however some wagons had already received the new lettering style on a grey body, hence one may introduce some variation into ones stock in this way.
There is also a mention (and photos) in Official Drawings of LMS Wagons vol
1 on page 52 and Official Drawings of LMS Wagons vol pages 5, 24 and 69 that the livery was changed from grey with large letters to bauxite with small letters.
You are of course correct about bauxite becoming standard in 1936, don't know why I wrote 1934. However I would take issue about the new lettering style appearing on some grey wagons. Essery speculates about the possiblity, but does not include a photo of one in his books.
According Essery & Morgan, there was a change in 1934.
"In 1934 the block numbering system was adopted for all new construction, the lowest number under this scheme being 400000".
So ended the horrible & misleading (at least to modellers) of reusing old numbers.
There is a photo (Plate 139 in Illustrated History of LMS wagons Vol 1) which clearly shows the *new number scheme in old style lettering* on a grey wagon. But no cases of new style lettering on a grey wagon.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.