If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Maunsell Restriction Coaches

Discussion in 'Heritage Rolling Stock' started by WesternRegionHampshireman, Nov 10, 2021.

  1. Wenlock

    Wenlock Well-Known Member Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,825
    Likes Received:
    1,114
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Bus Driver
    Location:
    Loughton Essex
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    That's interesting. The railway press always used to refer to the kinetic envelope, seems the mistake was earlier in my education then.

    https://www.britannica.com/science/kinetics

    I get the impression from the linked entry, that different branches of science use kinetics, kinematics and dynamics for subtly different meanings. I am a 'bear of little brain' but it seems that the difference is down to whether one considers the forces applied or just the actual motions?

    Kinematic (no s) has always meant to me an old fashioned word for 'to do with the cinema'.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2021
  2. bluetrain

    bluetrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2019
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    1,036
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wiltshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I agree that gauging is complex. The more one delves into the subject, the more seem to be the complications. A further factor is that loading gauges do change over time and have been doing so since railways began.
    The LBSC fitted many of its brake coaches with very wide guards’ side look-outs. When these were applied to the longer bogie coaches, the greater overhang appears to have created problems in certain locations, leading to some of the guards’ look-outs being reduced in overall width (from 9ft 2in to 8ft 9in).
    https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/pics/coach949.html

    Maunsell built a number of rakes of “Restriction 1” corridor stock for services to the Kent Coast on the SECR section and to Eastbourne via the curved Lewes tunnel on the LBSC section. These were 8ft 6in over body sides, presumably about 8ft 9in over door handles & hinges and 9ft over foot-boards. Interestingly, the Maunsell N15/ King Arthur class engines were within gauge to haul these services in spite of having fairly large outside cylinders.
    In later years, the wider “Restriction 4” stock became acceptable on nearly all routes, but the Class 207 “East Sussex” DEMUs were built to “Restriction 1” widths as late as 1962.

    I have never seen any diagrams that illustrate the height and width limits of the SR carriage “Restriction Codes”, which leaves open the question of exactly how they related to published loading gauge diagrams (such as those on @Jimc web-site). I think that “Restriction 1” may have been closely aligned to the SECR loading gauge.
     
  3. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,378
    Likes Received:
    3,401
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    As you say its complex. I know most about the GWR. They had a standard loading gauge, but beyond that the General Appendix to the rule book listed all sorts of exceptions. So for example:
    73' * 9'6 stock was not permitted off the GWR nor on most lines that had never been broad gauge.
    73' * 9'0 stock was allowed to Salisbury SR, but nowhere else on the Southern.
    63'6 * 9'3 stock was not allowed on SR at all
    60' * 9' stock was allowed on LSW section and most LBSC, but not SEC.
    and there were a whole set of max measurements for Tonbridge and Crowhurst, Hastings and Winchelsea and a list of other lines, which included no longer than 50'.
    So that implies you're correct that restriction 1 closely matched SEC.
     
  4. torgormaig

    torgormaig Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    3,647
    I do not think there was ever any particular problem with Lewes Tunnel. The Newhaven boat trains used to be made up of Bulleid and Mark 1 Restriction 4 stock. As a child in the early 60's we travelled annually on the Eastbourne - Glasgow car sleeper with Mark 1 Sleeping cars in the consist. I'm pretty sure that the entire former LBSCR system could handle Restriction 4 stock. Indeed were not the 1930s 6PUL and 6PAN electric units Restriction 4 stock?

    Peter
     
  5. bluetrain

    bluetrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2019
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    1,036
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wiltshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Please see this web-page:

    https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/cw/restriction.html

    Lewes Tunnel was barred to Restriction 4 carriages in March 1927 after problems had been experienced with the then new Maunsell stock. An exception was made for the Newhaven Boat Train of R4 stock, which was allowed to pass provided that no other train was in the tunnel at the same time. Info from David Gould - "Maunsell's SR Steam Carriage Stock".

    The prohibition on R4 stock was lifted in 1935. It seems likely that the tracks in the tunnel were realigned as part of the 1935 Eastbourne electrification scheme.
     
  6. torgormaig

    torgormaig Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    3,647
    Well I never knew that. It is suprising what you learn on NP. Every day a school day.:)

    Thanks

    Peter
     
  7. bluetrain

    bluetrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2019
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    1,036
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wiltshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I have a query for Southern carriage experts.

    Apart from the Lynton & Barnstaple, the SR route with the most severe clearance restrictions was the Canterbury & Whitstable. Tyler Hill tunnel had only 12 ft headroom, with vehicles limited to a maximum height of 11ft 6in.

    The attached photo is said to show a train at Whitstable Harbour in 1927 (Passenger trains were withdrawn from the line in 1931). We see a Stirling R-class 0-6-0T with cut-down chimney, hauling 2 bogie coaches.

    But what is the origin of those coaches? Looking through the David Gould book "Bogie Carriages of the SE&CR", I can find no mention of any bogie carriages being built or modified for use on the "Crab & Winkle" line. The carriages in the photo have arc roofs and are unlike standard Wainwright vehicles with their elliptical roofs.

    Possibly they are of LC&DR origin? Thanks in advance to anyone who can shed any light.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. RLinkinS

    RLinkinS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2008
    Messages:
    669
    Likes Received:
    698
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    While I cannot answer your question my Grandfather, who started on the railway at Canterbury West, told me that when those coaches were cut down no allowance was made for the ventilators on the roofs. They were knocked of on the first trip through the tunnel.

    Sent from my SM-A105FN using Tapatalk
     
    bluetrain likes this.

Share This Page