Aberdonian (not THE Aberdonian)

[Norton Wood]

Ahhh,

Now I get you! I have spent quite a bit of time working through pictures and speaking to Author Steve Banks about this, we both agreed with the first 4 coaches, but because of the photo, we cannot see the last two...so I gave this as the likely set, combined with a bit of educated modelers License:

BTK (4)
TK - End Vestibule
RC -
CK - (Twin
CK - Set)
BTK (6)

I thank you for your help and I may well report back after Steve Banks has replied to me.

[JASd17]

The formation I have suggested comes from a Summer Saturdays Only working, when the rear half of the 9.0am ex-Aberdeen was attached to the 12.15pm Edinburgh to King's Cross service, and therefore appears in the East Coast Carriage Working Book. It is present in both 1936 and 1938 with the same carriage types.

BTK (4)
TK - End Vestibule
RC -
CK - (Twin
CK - Set)
BTK (6)

I am intrigued by a CK-CK twin, what did you have in mind Tom?

John

[Norton Wood]

The formation I have suggested comes from a Summer Saturdays Only working, when the rear half of the 9.0am ex-Aberdeen was attached to the 12.15pm Edinburgh to King's Cross service, and therefore appears in the East Coast Carriage Working Book. It is present in both 1936 and 1938 with the same carriage types.

I am intrigued by a CK-CK twin, what did you have in mind Tom?

John

The aim was to find as close to the set as possible show in the link, I have re-attached it.

https://railway-photography.smugmug.com ... -GWMsPRN/A

(Re-capThe aim is to have that set & locomotive built-in O Gauge, I'm willing to get the coaches specially made from Isinglass but the loco may well come from the Hattons Un-numbered & Named A3, with high-sided non-corridor tender.)

However, I've been reliably informed by S. Banks that at the CK-CK Twin never went up there?? This was interesting, and I was left in a muddle, but from his book and his comments, Those in bold we are agreed can be seen but I have no idea what the last two are likely for the rest of the train.

No.1 – BTK – (4) Compartment Brake - end vestibule type -
No.2 – TK – Dia 155 - end vestibule type -
No.3 – RC - 32565
No.4 – CK - { I assume this will be of a GNR 1st/3rd }
No.5 – TK - As you cannot see this vehicle I'll make it a generic TK
No.6 – BTK (6) Compartment Brake


It's funny really in particular for this subject...A lot can happen in 12 hours! Opinions and thoughts are welcome!

[JASd17]

I cannot argue with the first 3 carriages in Steve Banks' thoughts. although he must have a superior print to read the number of the Diagram 187 RC.

The Southern Scottish Area got a lot of End vestibuled stock from the mid 1930s onwards, so I think the 5th vehicle will be another D155, as for the last again maybe Steve has a better view. I still think either a Diagram 7 or an early build Diagram 130 for the 4th vehicle behind the catering carriage.

Not sure at all about the last carriage being a 6-compartment BTK the SSA did not use them, nor did the East Coast with perhaps one exception.

Formation of the 12.15pm ex-Edinburgh, showing the Aberdeen portion off the 9.0am ex-Aberdeen:

John

[jwealleans]

he must have a superior print to read the number of the Diagram 187 RC.

... or did they only have one allocated?

the last carriage being a 6-compartment BTK the SSA did not use them, nor did the East Coast with perhaps one exception.

I built one for Grantham, so there must have been one kicking about. From memory it went to Hull, so possibly a GN vehicle.

[JASd17]

Jonathan, the GN Section had two 41361-2, the former worked to York in the 1.40pm Down. Coming back on a Scarborough, Bridlington and Hull service.

I don't know what the EC one did.

The SSA had several D187s, something of a Scottish speciality.

Given the 9.0am from Aberdeen may have had a number of passengers for King's Cross, I wonder whether a BTK (3) would be required for luggage, especially on a Summer service?

The problem is working this out, with a limited amount of information.

John

[Norton Wood]

I cannot argue with the first 3 carriages in Steve Banks' thoughts. although he must have a superior print to read the number of the Diagram 187 RC.

The Southern Scottish Area got a lot of End vestibuled stock from the mid 1930s onwards, so I think the 5th vehicle will be another D155, as for the last again maybe Steve has a better view. I still think either a Diagram 7 or an early build Diagram 130 for the 4th vehicle behind the catering carriage.

Not sure at all about the last carriage being a 6-compartment BTK the SSA did not use them, nor did the East Coast with perhaps one exception.

Formation of the 12.15pm ex-Edinburgh, showing the Aberdeen portion off the 9.0am ex-Aberdeen:

Summer 1936 12.15pm ex-Edinburgh Waverley.jpg

John

Interesting diagram, do forgive and patient with me as I'm rather new to this and I do want to get this right (Or as close too) So the last three vehicles in the 6 car set could in fact a

Compo
Third
Third Brake

Being a portion I assume they would be marshaled into another set? Am I reading/interpreting this correctly? If I am I suppose the most accurate thing to do is to follow the diagram, would a BTK (3) rather than the BTK (6) be the better option for me?

Thanks
Tom

[JASd17]

I think following the information in the East Coast Carriage working books is the best information we have for the 9.0am, thus far.

Yes the 3-carriage portion is marshalled with the other carriages shown in the 12.15pm (SO) departure from Edinburgh.

I would suggest a BTK (3), yes. Because that is what is stated in the CWB. At other times it might be a BTK (4), like the leading carriage in the photo, the Southern Scottish Area had quite a few of those.

I don't think a BTK (6) is likely.

John

[jwealleans]

John's right. Don't forget that the brake carriage is likely to be specified with as much regard to the luggage/sundries to be carried in the brake compartment as the number of seats. Replacing a 3 compartment with a 6 might leave them with a severe problem in terms of stowage space.

[JASd17]

A BTK (3) could carry 3 Tons in the Guard's compartment.

A BTK (6) was only 15 cwt.

I calculate that if all the passengers in the through portion carried their full free luggage allowance that would be 5 Tons.

Allowing for potential mistakes in my calculations, one can see a good deal of space would be required for luggage. Indeed from Edinburgh, additional parcels traffic was totally restricted.

(If someone wants to check the calculation, First Class passengers were allowed 150lbs free, Third Class 100lbs free.)

John

[Hatfield Shed]

A BTK (3) could carry 3 Tons in the Guard's compartment.

A BTK (6) was only 15 cwt.

I calculate that if all the passengers in the through portion carried their full free luggage allowance that would be 5 Tons.

Allowing for potential mistakes in my calculations, one can see a good deal of space would be required for luggage. Indeed from Edinburgh, additional parcels traffic was totally restricted.

(If someone wants to check the calculation, First Class passengers were allowed 150lbs free, Third Class 100lbs free.)

Ah, but there is always a distribution of take up of luggage allowance, enabling a statistical methods estimate of the likely maximum requirement, in order not to have too much non-revenue earning empty space in train formations. I suspect though that on the steam railway this was an experience based estimate, as our railway came late to statistical methods, and still isn't fully at home with them. But at least on the steam railway, adding a vehicle at need for any outlier events that produced an overload was a well practised operation.

(Such baggage load take up statistical modelling was applied early in commercial aviation also. Some may know of the celebrated incident with a 747 out of Chicago circa 1970 that was reputedly 20kt past normal rotation speed before taking off, due to a full passenger complement of coin collectors departing a national event, and the then habitual negligence of baggage weighing on US internal flights. Something of a classic outlier event.)

[JASd17]

Hence my use of the, admittedly not strong, qualification 'if'.

John

[Norton Wood]

Okay,

Great thank you, JASd17 & jwealleans.


You've both answered my questions, I can go away and make this set in O Gauge. Plans are already a-foot with the Fox Decals Etched nameplates and decals arriving last week, sadly missing 1 decal set I ordered but of course, we are in difficult times so that's fine.

So we have this as the set of coaches:

No.1 – BTK – 4 Compartment Brake -
No.2 – TK – Dia 155 –
No.3 – RC – 32565 –
No.4 – CK – { I am struggling for a diagram for this, the closest I have found is the GNR CK at the Severn Valley}
No.5 – TK – Dia 155 –
No.6 – BTK 3 Compartment Brake –

I will be writing a blog on RM Web about the work I do on the Hattons A3 and the build of these coaches. I will have to speak to Isinglass and prepare an order for the first 2 coaches.

But thank you for your help & patience with me.

Regards
Tom

[JASd17]

The number in the working gives you the Diagram, sort of.

The CK will have a number relating to the number '158' for a CK. The CWBs are tricky in this respect, they do not state a diagram ever, that is engineers' territory.

What you need is passenger accommodation figures to run a railway, hence the CWB 'Class' number 158.

I am not sure which it is, but perhaps Diagram 7, that I have quoted earlier in the discussion? It is unlikely to be like the SVR carriage type, which is GN in origin.

As to that carriage D164K No.2701, I have had the privilege to travel in it several times without many other passengers, on special workings. What a super finish. See further back on the Forum for photos.

I look forward to seeing your model of the train in Princes St Gardens!

John

[Norton Wood]

The number in the working gives you the Diagram, sort of.

The CK will have a number relating to the number '158' for a CK. The CWBs are tricky in this respect, they do not state a diagram ever, that is engineers' territory.

What you need is passenger accommodation figures to run a railway, hence the CWB 'Class' number 158.

I am not sure which it is, but perhaps Diagram 7, that I have quoted earlier in the discussion? It is unlikely to be like the SVR carriage type, which is GN in origin.

As to that carriage D164K No.2701, I have had the privilege to travel in it several times without many other passengers, on special workings. What a super finish. See further back on the Forum for photos.

I look forward to seeing your model of the train in Princes St Gardens!

John

Yes, the Dia, 7 has been mentioned previously, I seem to have taken note of that, as it's in my notebook saying ' CK - Possible Dia 7?? Investigate further' I'll see if the book by Michael Harris has anything using the 158 number. As that's possibly the key to it.

I'll see what I can find with the help of Isinglass Models, and well with that, I have a title for my blog Princes St Gardens O Gauge Express. I will make mention of the help from here, I don't like taking credit for information given to me by such helpful people.

Thanks
Tom