The LNER Encyclopedia

I have been reading C Hamilton Ellis' 19th Century Railway Carriages (a vey interesting book) and realised again how much I like the East Coast Joint stock.
I was looking to find out more about it, and found this book http://www.transportdiversions.com/publ ... pubid=1179

First of all, is it any good? Secondly does anyone know why it starts at 1906 when ECJ stock started before then?

Tim

Why from 1905? Well that's when Gresley became C&W superintendant of the GNR.

Harris originally wrote a book called 'Gresley's Coaches' which covered this period, as well as the LNER years through to the building of the last LNER designs by BR in 1950.

Instead of a straight reprint, in the 90s Harris brought out 'LNER carriages' and 'LNER standard Gresley carriages' as well as the GN & ECJS book, allowing each aspect greater coverage than in the original volume.

Sawdust.

sawdust wrote:Why from 1905? Well that's when Gresley became C&W superintendant of the GNR.

Harris originally wrote a book called 'Gresley's Coaches' which covered this period, as well as the LNER years through to the building of the last LNER designs by BR in 1950.

Instead of a straight reprint, in the 90s Harris brought out 'LNER carriages' and 'LNER standard Gresley carriages' as well as the GN & ECJS book, allowing each aspect greater coverage than in the original volume.

Sawdust.

Thanks, I thought that might be it but didn't know when Gresley became CME (cries of "Throw him off the forum!"). Bit of a mis-leading title really, it should be Gresley's GN & ECJS)

Does anyone know the best place to get info on Bain's ECJS?

Tim

Firstly apologies for resurrecting a six year old thread - I was not a member when this was posted and is an area of interest for me. The definitive publication of this subject is Ken Hoole's last work 'An Illustrated History of ECJS' which also covers the Bain (and Howlden) designs pre Gresley period.
I have a few questions regarding the clerestory 'clippers' from the period 1894 - 1903. These handome carriages were exceptionally well built and many survived for many years pre withdrawal as use as houses and holiday homes.
What intrigued me was that these carriages ere built with timber underframes with steel flitch plates to strengthen the solebars and this probably accounted for early withdrawal (from the 1920's), but some lasted much longer and lingered on until BR days (including ECJS 12 at the NRM).
Now that no. 12 is at Shildon and not enclosed by platforms either side, I was recently able to have a close look at the construction of the underframe. I was suprrised to see that the solebars on 12 are all steel, still with a flat outer section, but having had a longitudinal plate welded along the length to make up 3 sides of box section. Now this could explain why 12 lasted much longer so the question is did the LNER modify the underframes of some ECJS vehicles to extend their life? Structural welding would not have been common place until the 1930's. The other possibility is that the underframe was modified during restortion at Carnforth in the 1980's.

I am researching some of the ECJS bodies that survived as homes and wondered if anyone has pictures or information on Open Third no. 14 that survived at Humshaugh (Chollerford) in Northumberland until the 1990's or 2 bodies used as houses on Aketon Road in Castleford.

[quote="Wavey"]Firstly apologies for resurrecting a six year old thread - I was not a member when this was posted and is an area of interest for me. The definitive publication of this subject is Ken Hoole's last work 'An Illustrated History of ECJS' which also covers the Bain (and Howlden) designs pre Gresley period.
I have a few questions regarding the clerestory 'clippers' from the period 1894 - 1903. These handome carriages were exceptionally well built and many survived for many years pre withdrawal as use as houses and holiday homes.
What intrigued me was that these carriages ere built with timber underframes with steel flitch plates to strengthen the solebars and this probably accounted for early withdrawal (from the 1920's), but some lasted much longer and lingered on until BR days (including ECJS 12 at the NRM).
Now that no. 12 is at Shildon and not enclosed by platforms either side, I was recently able to have a close look at the construction of the underframe. I was suprrised to see that the solebars on 12 are all steel, still with a flat outer section, but having had a longitudinal plate welded along the length to make up 3 sides of box section. Now this could explain why 12 lasted much longer so the question is did the LNER modify the underframes of some ECJS vehicles to extend their life? Structural welding would not have been common place until the 1930's. The other possibility is that the underframe was modified during restortion at Carnforth in the 1980's.

Was there any evidence that the wood was still sandwiched between the metal plates? Is the plate on the top as well as the bottom? I would suggest that the body had been removed to do this work or could this be a replacement underframe for thee the original underframe, did you get any pics to compare with older ones.

[quote="TRESTROL

Was there any evidence that the wood was still sandwiched between the metal plates? Is the plate on the top as well as the bottom? I would suggest that the body had been removed to do this work or could this be a replacement underframe for thee the original underframe, did you get any pics to compare with older ones.[/quote]

No there was no timber in the solebars - I ran my hand along the inside of the box section to check. Pretty sure the underframe was largely original as the centre longditudinal beams were timber as were some of the cross members. There was however some steel cross members rivetted into the solebars. The headstocks were timber with the original pattern castings for the early style Pullman gangways.

Number 12 was built at York and so has the usual channel steel frame, with the flat side of the channel outwards. Itv was those 12 wheelers built at Doncaster that had the wood frames with flitch plates. These are relatively easy to spot as the headstock is no wider than the solebars and there is a corner plate bolted to both. A few of the Doncaster built coaches were given new Gresley steel underframes in the 20s and 30s.

Thanks Bill. That is most interesting and explains the longevity of some vehicles.
Number 12 must have had a later repair though which would explain the plate welded along the bottom of the solebars. Perhaps the original suffered from corrosion at some point.