By the late 1930s, they must have been coming to the end of their useful life.
Evidence suggests that the LNER found them among the most useful of the pregrouping stock. When replacement steel sets were built for the NE Area, many of the ex-NER diagrams (not only clerestories) were cascaded to other Areas, most notably the GE. Even allowing for the War lengthening their service life, they were among the longest lasting pregrouping vehicles.
Does the OP have any photographs of the type of service he's looking to model?
By the late 1930s, they must have been coming to the end of their useful life.
Evidence suggests that the LNER found them among the most useful of the pre-grouping stock. When replacement steel sets were built for the NE Area, many of the ex-NER diagrams (not only clerestories) were cascaded to other Areas, most notably the GE. Even allowing for the War lengthening their service life, they were among the longest-lasting pre-grouping vehicles.
On the contrary. between 1935 and 1939 the LNER built 578 60' corridor coaches for the NEA allowing 479 ex-NER non-corridor coaches to be cascaded to other areas to replace equally ancient four and six wheelers.
Modeller's titbit: The carriages produce for the D&S range by Danny Pinnock were mainly those that could be used on his own layout set in East Anglia.
billbedford wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 11:02 am On the contrary.
I don't get how that runs contrary to what Jonathan said. Do you mean that the NER carriages were so clapped out that the LNER felt they needed to replace them, and they (the clapped-out carriages) only got a second lease of life because the carriages on the GE were even worse?
billbedford wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 11:02 am
Modeller's titbit: The carriages produce for the D&S range by Danny Pinnock were mainly those that could be used on his own layout set in East Anglia.
Interesting. But in that case why are the kits all geared to replicating the carriages in NER condition, when transfers to the GE only really began in earnest in 1936-8?
billbedford wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 11:02 am On the contrary.
I don't get how that runs contrary to what Jonathan said. Do you mean that the NER carriages were so clapped out that the LNER felt they needed to replace them, and they (the clapped-out carriages) only got a second lease of life because the carriages on the GE were even worse?
The life of coaches was usually around 40 years, so the earliest clerestories, built in 1895, would not have been expected to have a long life in the mid-30s. The clerestories that were chosen for cascading were all late built examples and so were expected to have a reasonable life thereafter.
The whole purpose of the cascading project was to eliminate non-bogie carriages rather than shuffling around old stock.
billbedford wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 11:02 am
Modeller's titbit: The carriages produce for the D&S range by Danny Pinnock were mainly those that could be used on his own layout set in East Anglia.
Interesting. But in that case, why are the kits all geared to replicating the carriages in NER condition, when transfers to the GE only really began in earnest in 1936-8?
Well here's two good reasons:
The most solid information for just about any model comes from the drawings used for building the original.
Commercial expediency, railway kits don't sell in such vast numbers that a producer can afford to ignore the majority of the potential customers.
billbedford wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 11:02 am On the contrary.
I don't get how that runs contrary to what Jonathan said. Do you mean that the NER carriages were so clapped out that the LNER felt they needed to replace them, and they (the clapped-out carriages) only got a second lease of life because the carriages on the GE were even worse?
The life of coaches was usually around 40 years, so the earliest clerestories, built in 1895, would not have been expected to have a long life in the mid-30s. The clerestories that were chosen for cascading were all late built examples and so were expected to have a reasonable life thereafter.
The whole purpose of the cascading project was to eliminate non-bogie carriages rather than shuffling around old stock.
So "yes" then...
billbedford wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 2:09 pm
Well here's two good reasons:
The most solid information for just about any model comes from the drawings used for building the original.
Commercial expediency, railway kits don't sell in such vast numbers that a producer can afford to ignore the majority of the potential customers.
Interesting, then, that Dan ignored his own needs - or was it just that nobody bothered looking to see if details changed in LNER days?
The Roxey ones are wrong for clerestories. They're the low profile ones suitable for elliptical roofs. Lanarkshire Models do some too, and I can vouch for them.
Bill,
you regularly make this allegedly definitive statement that carriages only lasted 40 years,
but in many years, you have not provided details of where this fact came from.
All my research into carriage building shows that the life of carriages had less to do with the
wood etc, rather on the changes and increases in traffic which made the smaller carriages
less valuable. It also depended on the capital and revenue accounts of the railway.
The GNR was in many ways unique, in that it had one Loco Engineer, and Carriage engineer
for almost 30 years, and of course used teak body work, which was much more hardy.
However most of us have seen the photo of the bendy GNR carriage underframes.
The NER was able to update its carriages because of its growing revenue, and thus introduce
a number of different roof profiles in the period 1890-1910, they quickly went from early flatter rooves
to clerestory, to round rooves and then Elliptical, even before the GNR.
Whereas the GNR only used 3 from 1872 until 1922. (Doncaster round roof, Clerestory, and Gresley ellipse)
Many GNR Howlden carriage lasted in to BR times, thus more than 50 years in many cases, even if only in
service use, they were obviously still strong enough to undertake the work.
john coffin wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 6:53 pm
Many GNR Howlden carriage lasted into BR times, thus more than 50 years in many cases, even if only in
service use, they were obviously still strong enough to undertake the work.
You seem to have forgotten that WW2 disrupted the normal pattern of carriage withdrawal and replacement. As a reality check, it's worth looking for the relatively few pre-grouping carriages of any description that were given BR liveries.
john coffin wrote: ↑Mon Feb 14, 2022 6:53 pm
Many GNR Howlden carriage lasted into BR times, thus more than 50 years in many cases, even if only in
service use, they were obviously still strong enough to undertake the work.
You seem to have forgotten that WW2 disrupted the normal pattern of carriage withdrawal and replacement. As a reality check, it's worth looking for the relatively few pre-grouping carriages of any description that were given BR liveries.
I doubted you at first, Bill, and looked for evidence that you were wrong on the lifespan of the NE carriages on ex-NER lines. But it was a fool's errand! The ones that survived into the 1950s were the later designs of ellipticals. Already in the mid-1930s on the Whitby and Pickering Gresley non-corridor carriages were infiltrating many trains. Though I have a photo of a D.116 with a BR number, this is very rare, and I have no idea what colour it is painted. The cover of On North Eastern Lines shows an A8 in 1954 ascending Goathland Bank with a late-period elliptical still in LNER brown. The Transport Library has photos of a number of ex-NER clerestories on the GE section in the late 1940s, but they all look to be laid up awaiting scrapping.
Both WW1 and 2 interrupted the "normal" practice, but certainly as far as the LNER went, it did not ever meet
the financial projections that the Government had projected when grouping occurred. The coal trade was hammered
within 3 years by the General Strike and then came the depression.
Hence my original statement, carriage renewal was driven by economic factors as much as anything.
Two important things to remember about the LNER carriage stock, most investment had to go on the
main line services, because prior to grouping, the only through traffic on the ECML was ECJS stock.
Little NER stock had either corridors or lavatories, until quite late, since almost all its traffic was local.
Long distance apart rom Newcastle to Liverpool, and the South West, was joint ventures.
The Capital account could not have handled all the scrapping, hence the cascading to an area like the GE, which had
in many cases very old suburban stock which was over worked.
Also worth remembering the almost all the GNR suburban stock had been articulated due to the money saving over buying new bogie stock,
and many twins, triplets and even some quads were converted from 6 and 8 wheelers, and lasted into the 1950's in regular service.
Had the LNER not been hamstrung by the ongoing effects of the 30 year hiatus in the European, which became a world war, then
maybe the 40 year idea might have worked, but it was not driven by a life span argument, rather economics.
mick b wrote: ↑Sat Feb 12, 2022 7:31 pm
[quote=JASd17 post_id=144873 time=1644585968 user_id=1926
Are there any lists of the Composition of Sets anywhere please ?.
Hi Mick
Using the Carriage Roster from 1932 the composition sets are described as:
Composition A (set 1 - 49). CL(4,3), T, 2BT(3)—-4(29F 167T)
Composition B (set 57-96). C(3-4), 2BT(4)——3(24F 120T)
Composition C (set 98-127). CL(4,3), T, 2BT(4)——4(29F 187T)
Another example would be set 321 used on Pately Bridge branch workings which had
BC(2,3), T, BT(3)——-3(16F 140T)
The roster documents which set was used on the timetabled trains. From the composition it is possible to work out which carriage diagrams fit the description. Photos are needed to be definitive...especially when looking at clerestory vs elliptical roofs.
Has anyone got a photo of a NER Diagram 26 Clerestory Brake Third please ? I need to confirm the layout of Roof vents for a D&S kit please. The drawing on the kit box shows none at all !!
mick b wrote: ↑Thu Feb 17, 2022 11:58 am
Composition A (set 1 - 49). CL(4,3), T, 2BT(3)—-4(29F 167T)
Composition B (set 57-96). C(3-4), 2BT(4)——3(24F 120T)
Composition C (set 98-127). CL(4,3), T, 2BT(4)——4(29F 187T)
T and BT , are I presume, All Third and Brake Third . C Composite?
Mick
Mick,
C = composite with (4, 3) being the ratio of 1st to 3rd compartments (or vice versa - never remember which EDIT: the first figure is the number of 1st-class comps; thus, D.5 [4-3] is four first and three third comps). CL has a lavatory. The fact that the carriage contains 4 of one class and 3 of another plus a lav helps narrow the diagram down.* The figures in brackets at the end of the line (e.g. 29F 167T) refer to the number of 1st-class seats (29) and 3rd (167), total, in the train. The "4" before these brackets [4(29F 167T)] refers to the number of carriages in the train.
T = all third, yes and BT brake third.
*The "C (3/4)" could only be:
1. D.7 or D.78 clerestories (assuming that their lockers did not exclude them - were they referred to as CGs, or counted as Cs?);
2. Arc roof D.64
3. Elliptical D.146 or D.160
In order to know what those diagrams looked like (window arrangement, etc) you'd need to get hold of the NERA diagram books, of which I believe there are at least two!
Did the photos of the D.26 I sent not help?
Last edited by Daddyman on Sat Feb 19, 2022 9:50 am, edited 6 times in total.
