The price of our pleasures!

The offset corridor is an extra precaution. A simple lock wouldn't deter criminals.

I don't think it was an operation problem because trains were handed, eg the pickup apparatus was only on one side so the train needed to be turned anyway.

Interestingly the first corridor train in the country (GWR, 1892) had the connections at the side.

What did they "stack" to create it??? ;-)

Greg.P.

I don't know about the UK, but in Germany it's been estimated that most railway models are bought for either "the future layout" or for the display cabinet. If they are for the display cabinet then the loco will be the focus and any unpowered stock will simply be in a supporting role. As the display cabinet fills the owner will stop buying the supporting rolling stock. (well that's my opinion)

Greg.P.

Mail coaches were a total "no-go" area for the Public and railway staff. The offset corridor connections ensured that there could be no "accidental" thoroughfare. OTOH sorting coaches needed additional storage areas for both sorted and unsorted mail so the corridor connections were a neccessity. Sorting and storage coaches normally ran as fixed groups and every major station had a turntable, so correct handing wasn't a major problem.

I've never seen/spotted that!?!

Greg.P.

But wouldnt the lack of a corridor connection be sufficient to ensure no accidental access ? Seems a bit excessive to offset the corridor as well.

Cheers, Simon

: > wrote: : >

: >>

: >> "simon" wrote : >>

: >>> This may sound stupid but it clicked that you can recognise a non : >>> corridor : >>> coach by the missing corridor connections ! : >>

: >> I'm going off at a tangent here, but talking about corridor connections, : >> can : >> anyone explain the logic of off-set corridor connections on the end of : >> mail : >> coaches? : >>

: >

: > Mail coaches were a total "no-go" area for the Public and railway staff. : > The offset corridor connections ensured that there could be no : > "accidental" : > thoroughfare. OTOH sorting coaches needed additional storage areas : > for both sorted and unsorted mail so the corridor connections were a : > neccessity. Sorting and storage coaches normally ran as fixed groups : > and every major station had a turntable, so correct handing wasn't a : > major problem. : >

: >> I understand that you may want to excluded 'Joe Public' from walking : >> from a : >> passenger coach into a mail coach (although I'd have thought a simple : >> lock : >> would serve that purpose), but the off-setting of corridor connections : >> must : >> make marshalling of mail coaches difficult. : >>

: >> Some also appear to be off-set diagonally, which would mean they wouldn't : >> connect with any other coach. : >>

: >

: > I've never seen/spotted that!?! : >

: > Greg.P. : : But wouldnt the lack of a corridor connection be sufficient to ensure no : accidental access ? Seems a bit excessive to offset the corridor as well. :

Greg is talking out of his arse, as John said, a simple lock would have secured the corridor connections, just as locks prevented unauthorised access from the side door. As for turning the fixed formations, if that was indeed required they would have been turned on the nearest triangle - as most carriage sidings didn't have turntables - and considering that they ran both up and down mail-trains why not just have two mail pick up coaches in each formation, one for each direction.

If the pickup coaches were differently handed on the train then wouldnt be able to go from one to the other. Cant see em carrying the cost of having a coach unused on every post train. So seems unlikely.

Cheers, Simon

Mail "trains" were either a complete train or a part which would travel coupled to public services but not part of the train per se.

The mail section was handed for working convenience and not intended for connection to the public domain. Having some without connections of any kind (barrier coach) was hardly convenient for marshalling longer or shorter trains (as we did depending on the season). All destinations had a triangle within usable distance and proper reception facilities ( ie trains did not wander off willy nilly like some kind of mad excursion).

A good example was the Bristol to Newcastle ( and vice versa ) which at quiet times was about I/3 mail and at peak demand ran as a full train with the passenger section also as a full train.

"simon" wrote

Ronnie Biggs & company managed it quite well.

John.

"Greg.Procter" wrote

I think from memory the old Hornby Dublo mail coach features diagonally opposed corridor connections.

John.

The wagons did not have vestibules and so the corridor space was simply continued through the end bulk heads thus maximising the work space. The exceptions were a stock coach which also had toilet facilities for the crew and this occupied one corner.

I thought the robbery involved ordinary parcels vans carrying scrap notes.

True, but first they stopped the train and second it wasnt accidental. Not the same as passenger wandering down finding door locked, forcing it open, finding 4 ft or so gap to another door that should have been locked, forcing that open. I recon that matches 'enemy action' on the Goldfinger scale. :-)

Oh and it was an article in Modellers Backtrack on passenger train working on LNWR that said they used to ensure corridors on same side up until 1908.

Cheers, Simon

Not sure what you mean by stock coach, but on LMS there appears to be no such distinction. Some had toilets, some had lockers, some had pickup gear. There was no real standard and bits were added or removed throughout their lives.

Cheers, Simon

I refer to a wagon which had a divided floor space (using open mesh grills ) from which unsorted mail was passed down to the sorting wagon. The sorted mail was then sacked up and placed into the bays in order of delivery. There was usually one of these which had personal lockers and toilets. The idea that all mail trains had pick up and set down gear is erroneous. Most mail was actually carried by non TPOs and simply locked in the luggage cage.

"Sailor" wrote

There were many 'mixed trains' some of which had portions for multiple locations. The Newcastle (later York) to Swansea (later Shrewsbury) mail being a classic case in point.

The formation during the 1950's was:

Loco: BG (Newcastle - Salop), 2 TPO (York - Salop), BSK, 2SK, BCK, BG (York - Swansea), BG (Stockport - Neyland), BG(Stockport - Aberystwyth), BG (Crewe - Aberystwyth), Vanfit (Stockport - Aberystwyth), Vanfit (Crewe - Oswestry), BCK, SK, BSK. TPO, BG (York - Liverpool), BG (Bradford - Liverpool).

So there was clearly plenty of shunting & or re-marshalling going on.

John.

"Greg.Procter" wrote

I suppose that's feasible, but certainly the model train enthusaists I know in Germany all have working layouts, albeit most of them still using Marklin's antiquated 3-rail set-up.

There's evidence to suggest that the same happens here in the UK. I remember one of the major loco kit manufacturers claiming that 90% of their kit output never got constructed, and certainly Hornby refer to their customer base as 'collectors' rather than 'modellers'.

John.

Judging by pictures on ebay, of those that are 10% shouldnt have been. Reputedly of some manufacturers eg Jidenco they couldnt be. But for some of us now its great, a ready supply of un, part and almost built kits of all types, sometimes at reasonable prices.

cheers, Simon

Even some of the "reputable" ones. A Crownline "complete" kit is a case in point. it seemed to be a collection of bits for imroving a Hornby RTR model with a few extra bits to make it "complete". Never mind the usual "wheels, gears and motors" not included, there was no thought whatsoever given to actually motorising the resulting construction.

MBQ

The Hornby-Dublo TPO Mail Van had both gangways on the same side of the coach, i.e. the same side as the "pick up net" and ejection hatch.

Riddles