LNER Coronation Observation Car

[JASd17]

Does that not provide a few questions as to the normal 'it didn't run in the winter TT ' answer?

Who decided it should finish in early November 1937 and why?

As the service was running with the Observation Cars in the May-June TT in 1938, what decided against doing that in 1939: The 'international situation' perhaps, seems unlikely as it ran in summer 1939?

I am tempted, hopefully with the help of an auditor, to see how often the Coronation was booked with the Observation Cars. My guess is around 50% of its runs.

John

[robertcwp]

Does that not provide a few questions as to the normal 'it didn't run in the winter TT ' answer?

Who decided it should finish in early November 1937 and why?

As the service was running with the Observation Cars in the May-June TT in 1938, what decided against doing that in 1939: The 'international situation' perhaps, seems unlikely as it ran in summer 1939?

I am tempted, hopefully with the help of an auditor, to see how often the Coronation was booked with the Observation Cars. My guess is around 50% of its runs.

John

Not using the car in the winter makes sense for a train which began its journey at 4.00 pm. If anything, early November seems a bit late to be including the car. Good question about 1939 though - why wait until July?

[60117 Bois Roussel]

Clive and I described the thinking behind this train in "LNER Passenger trains etc." and the usual reasons given for detachment of the Observation Car were twofold - darker afternoons and need to reduce train weight to counter adverse weather. But a feature of the "Coronation" was that there was only a half a BG, inside the observation car. It's possible that it was kept on for longer than expected for that reason, and that the operators juggled it from season to season. Adjustments in expresses were more common than we sometimes think and with the Observation Car's seats not bookable in advance, an easy one to make. It's not as if you could stick an extra brake van on the end of this train as, for example, the down winter "Flying Scotsman" did for a while the 1930s.

[JASd17]

Steve,

I do understand your points. But why then in the winter 1937-8 public timetable (starting 27th September) advertise a service you are not intending to maintain for the full timespan of that issue?

I understand daylight saving ended on 3-10-37, which makes it even more strange. I would like some confirmation of this latter point.

Was there a change of mind on the use of the Observation Cars? I am more than happy to take on board the point about luggage. Perhaps Coronation customers were encouraged to send it in advance, if possible, but just didn't?

I do not have a public TT for the Spring of 1939, so I cannot say how the Coronation Observation Cars were advertised in that period. Presumably, they were not?

John

[robertcwp]

Clive and I described the thinking behind this train in "LNER Passenger trains etc." and the usual reasons given for detachment of the Observation Car were twofold - darker afternoons and need to reduce train weight to counter adverse weather. But a feature of the "Coronation" was that there was only a half a BG, inside the observation car. It's possible that it was kept on for longer than expected for that reason, and that the operators juggled it from season to season. Adjustments in expresses were more common than we sometimes think and with the Observation Car's seats not bookable in advance, an easy one to make. It's not as if you could stick an extra brake van on the end of this train as, for example, the down winter "Flying Scotsman" did for a while the 1930s.

Good point about the van space in the observation car. It was used for luggage and mails so perhaps seasonal heavier loadings on the train also influenced its inclusion - more passengers meaning more luggage.

[60117 Bois Roussel]

Point taken about what the Public TT said, and I've just looked in an all-line one for 1938(s) wondering if there was a legal get-out clause anywhere in the thing, and couldn't find one. There was also the colourful booklet which stated, below the seating plan, "there is an observation car (16 seats)". Should the company have gone to the trouble of reprinting that as well??

Perhaps with the "Coronation" the LNER advertised the Observation Car at the start of the winter season, knowing that it would eventually be taken off, but tried to keep it simple, knowing passengers would not view its omission in the dark as unreasonable?

I think what I'm trying to say is that the company reserved the right to change things as it felt fit, providing that it was being reasonable.

One of the problems with historical stuff is that not everything survives; it can be hard and often frustrating to find that grey (and completely blank) areas abound.

[sawdust]

There is evidence that 1719 and 1729 were built with different internal layouts. There is also evidence that the internal layout of 1729 was changed on more than one occasion.

This evidence consists of different internal profiles of the body pillars in the corridor area, mortice holes in the floor rails where the corridor partition stood, planted softwood wedges to change the profile of the corridor pillars (which are made and fitted in two distinct styles), a 13' area of mail compartment had the ceiling profile changed by means of softwood fillets fixed to the original ceiling trimmers and areas chiseled out above windows to accommodate roller blinds. Also the open portion of the body has 3/8" diameter steel tie bolts let in to the pillars (as found in TTOs), whilst the corridor portion does not.

In summery, as built the mail compartment in 1719 was approx 17'-2" long, while in 1729 it was approx 23'-9".
At some point in time 1729 had the mail compartment shortened by 6'-6", whilst the passenger compartment was enlarged and was fitted with the arch partition.
At some point in time both vehicles had the vestibule partitions moved by about nine inches increasing the width of the vestibule (it is also possible the mail compartments were originally constructed with single doors into them and that this was changed to double doors when the partition was moved.)
At some point in time the mail compartment was reduced to about 3'-3" to form a steward's compartment, the small door was screwed in place to become part of the partition while the large door was converted to a sliding door. At this time there were also added two steel ribs to the body and roof, no doubt to try and stiffen the body and roof, which must have become quite bouncy after the removal of the partitions.

The majority of these changes must have taken place during the BR rebuild but it is clear that the mail compartment was reduced by about 6'-6" at some other time possibly not long after the vehicle entered service and could have been the reason for the winter removal from the set.

Sawdust.