The price of our pleasures!

The Triang Royal Mail coach of the early 1950's also had off-set corridor connections.

Keith Parkin's "BR Mark 1 Coaches" contains quite a bit of useful information, including the following:

Post Office vehicles were not early targets for standardisation. By 1958 a number of older coaches needed to be retired and the standard 63' 6" undeframe with BR2 heavy bogies was used. Most had "standard" ends. This was unusual for Post Office stock because, for security when marshalled with other stock and to give maximum width for sorting tables, it had become regular practice to fir an offset side gangway. The new vehicles entered service in batches because this feature required them to work in self-contained sets as they could not connect with older stock.

The scale drawings which accompany the text show that, for the Mark 1 coaches, only the Stowage Vans to Diagram 725 (Venhicle Nos 80403 - 6 and

80411 - 14) had the offset gangway.

Hope this helps,

David Costigan

I know of one model shop that has a large cupboard upstairs full (and I mean full) of locos and coaches purchased and paid for some future layout.. For whatever reason the owner hasn't even taken a lot of his collection home!

Nigel

But in a letter to modellers backtrack fellow states less a security feature more for better use of interior layout and also as they were wider than normal to allow passage of handcarts loaded with mailbags. Now thats an interesting point, if they were wide and central they would definately interfere with sorting desks.

Cheers, Simon

Don't want the wife to know

Not on the LMS according to Jenkinson & Essery. There were 2 vehicle types - sorting and stowage - both had offset connections at both ends and pick-up equipment was on the sorting coach.

Cheers, Simon

I see what you mean now - I was trying to picture a corridor connection mounted diagonally. Only Marty Feldmann could hope to see both connections at the same time!

Greg.P.

Jerry, I wasn't the person who made the rules for Postal vehicles. I'm merely commenting on what was, not whether or not something simpler would had the same effect. Postal vehicles DID have offset corridor connections in spite of the fact that I've never had one up my arse.

Regards, Greg.P. NZ

They were always coupled together the right way around. (AFAIK)

: > : >>

: > : >> "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. : >

: : Jerry, I wasn't the person who made the rules for Postal vehicles. : I'm merely commenting on what was, not whether or not something : simpler would had the same effect.

Except that *you* are posting crap as a fact. If a simple, suitable, could secure the side doors why would the same not be true for the doors protecting the corridor connections.

Postal vehicles DID have offset : corridor connections in spite of the fact that I've never had one : up my arse. :

No one is suggesting that they didn't, the question was *why* did they, try actually reading the thread rather than just firing off the first troll, that comes out of your arse!

: If the pickup coaches were differently handed on the train then wouldnt be

Err?! (hope the ASCII arts works, "V" and "^" = pick-up/set-down apparatus)

__ [[[[[[^}}}__

is a mirror image of __ {{{V]]]]]]__

: 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. :

But they didn't, these pick-up/set-down coaches had other functions besides the obvious, even if it was just storage.

In article , Jerry writes

No, it is a rotation;

__ __ [[[[[^}}}__ is a mirror image of __{{{^]]]]]

The two symmetry operations are quite different.

David

OK, am still only talking about LMS designs, but the pickup (may be on sorting coaches or stowage vans) and it was always on the same side in relation to the corridor offset. That means if you had two GPO coaches in the same train with pickup appuratus on opposite sides then the corridors would be on opposite sides. Consequently there would be no way of passing between them - unless we're talking James Bond - except where train stops. Have looked at some formations of passenger services that contain PO coaches and can see most of them have an odd number of sorting coaches (based on destination) not the two you idea would require. Usually where a stowage van is present there is normally only one. Conclusion is that normally the GPO coaches were turned for each journey.

cheers, Simon

I haven't read through all of it, but

at least has some interesting photo's of interiors.

and

againi I've not read though it, but past excursions to absoluteastronomy.com have provide good info on other subjects. Presumably astronomers have quite a lot of spare time on their hands - waiting for the clouds to clear?

Cheers Richard

Cheers Richard

One of the benefits of modelling in N gauge is that you can hide the models in your pocket!

Fred X

Given that it's about 135 years since the first off-set corridor connections went into service and that someone whose opinions I respected at the time (50 years ago) wrote that the purpose was to deny entrance/exit to all but postal staff, I'm not going to get into an argument as to whether 1874 locks were or were not sufficiently robust. I will admit that the suggestion that the offset corridor would allow more room for sorting equipment has considerable merit.

We now have two possibilities/probibilities. However, I do know for a fact that the interiors of Post Office vehicles were not allowed access by other than Postal employees.

Not suggesting you are wrong, but the first LNWR train of corridor coaches wasnt built till 1893. Which raises at least 2 questions, were there any other coaches on passenger trains that had connections and when did the other companies introduce corridor coaches ?

Cheers, Simon

The GWR ran Britain's first corridor train between Paddington and Birkenhead in 1892.

This had the connections at the side in line with the corridors. But it was found to be operationally inconvenient so they went to central connections pretty quickly.

Some of the carriages were easy to convert if they had lavatories at the end of the coach - they just made these smaller to make room for the connection. Others finished up as clerestory roofed auto-trailers.

"Riddles" wrote

OK thanks for that; I stand corrected.

John.

"Fred X" wrote

Indeed, but there are few other benefits! ;-)

John.