Why did the GWR not use smoke deflectors?

That design was what was fitted from new. The Mk3s only ever had external handles.

The Mk3 incidents were initially blamed on drunken passengers misusing the doors, even after an experienced Guard had died. Eventually a HSE investigation was launched which reached the conclusion that there were major issues with the design and maintenance of the doors and locks. Basically it was possible for a door to appear to be securely locked on closing but that not to be the case, despite the door being flush with the side of the train. Whilst they concluded that a majority of incidents involved drink they also concluded that in only 13% of the incidents of falling from open doors that occurred in 1991 were passengers at fault. Reading the report I would personally judge the upper bound on passengers at fault as being around 30%.

BR had to change the way the locks and doors were maintained and, as is known, fitted the Central Door Locking feature to HSTs. I suspect that factors in this decision included the proportion of incidents occurring on HSTs, their expected remaining time in service compare to other Slam Door stock and the fact that packed vestibules and the design of the entrance to the toilets led to people regularly leaning against the doors.

Enforcement of regulations was also tightened up - as a commuter on 3rd Rail lines I had become used to occasional departures with doors 'on the catch' and how to close them in motion (I worked out a 'safe-ish' procedure that didn't involved unlatching the door) - it was routine. After the report all that stopped and I began 'doing my bit' by checking for doors on the latch at platforms I was waiting on and closing them if necessary, which saved the Guard a jog down the train and a late departure. The fact that I did this at least once a week shows how prevalent the issue was.

The HSE report:

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/HSE_TrainDoors1993.pdf

 

So it would have saved a lot of trouble if BR had fitted mortice locks like Hawksworth used then

 

Maybe not, but we must be approaching the sort of time where a significant number of passengers with children will not have experienced a vehicle - even a car - without central locking, so they will have no concept of the safety requirements of such a situation. If you have never experienced a situation where its possible for children to open doors in a moving vehicle, for example, you may not be mentally prepared for the need to monitor what they are doing.

Well the GWR was known both for long turnround times in stations and putting a high priority on safety.

 

I was on a 158 the other day, watching a fellow passenger trying to push a door open and totally ignoring the button...

 

Huskisson didn't even look for the Rocket.

 

If passengers cant work out slam doors how the hec do you expect them to understand GW locks where you need to open the window to close them. On average I have to demonstrate how doors are opened, pull down window and turn handle, at least once on a rostered turn. If I have LNER, LMS or BR stock I am vigilant re doors on the catch. If I have the GW set I might physically check each door handle is turned. My eyesight is good, I passed my medical, but spotting a turned hamdle 4 coaches away hiding behind the grab handle is easy to miss. And yes I have got it wrong band had the section signal put back on me for an insecure door seen by the signalman. Signalmans red flags are big.

 

If only they'd had central locking that accident could have been avoided...

 

An inward-opening door might have saved him ...

Tom

 

Smoke drifting along the boiler obscured the driver's view?

 

Several tens of thousands of German locos!

Duck und weg, as the Fuzzies say.

 

Many of the SR classes N and U were right hand drive. The SECR was a right hand drive railway. I dont know the proportion of left to right but someone will know

 

Good to see this thread back on topic!

 

On the original topic: I recall reading, somewhere, a suggestion that a relevant difference between the other lines and the GWR was that the latter had a much higher proportion of its track mileage running east/west rather than north/south. Hence GWR locos spent more time running (more or less) directly into or out of the prevailing (westerly) winds. It was argued this reduced the need for smoke deflectors. Presumably in running more at right angles to the wind (e.g on LNER and LMS main lines) there could be a greater area of low pressure on the lee side of the loco, where smoke and steam might more readily accumulate.

Not sure how believable this is, as other railways (e/g the Southern) had some significant lines running east/west; and the winds are rather variable everywhere! But thought the idea possibly worth mentioning.

 

A

Add Bristol - Weymouth and Cambrian Coast services to that for a start.

 

I'd have thought having your forward view obscured on the way to Birkenhead would be a positive advantage!

Tom

 

But what would a 4-6-0 locomotive from "God's wonderful Railway" look like with smoke-deflectors?

As we know the Publicity Dept. over at Paddington were a very progressive bunch and would have no doubt insisted on making a strong visual statement. Probably, an advance on the semi-streamlining of Manorbier Castle would have given us something along the lines of .......

er, this 4-6-0??..........







Now, I'm sure that you'd agree, that's the way to do smoke deflectors!! For perfect visual balance, you could even have the curved nameplate placed appropriately at the top of the deflector - job done!!

I can see the Facebook page now for the "New Build"..............

Cheers

Alan

 

Can't be a GWR engine - it's got accessible motion ...

Tom

 

Of course, the "New-Build" could incorporate such early 20th Century advances, maybe even other driver conveniences - seats maybe? If a "New-Build" is too much of a conceptual leap however, perhaps a start could be made with a "Castle" that maybe lying around awaiting a bright new future; I understand that one of the former GWR depots has a reputation for creating "New" engines out of old, it could catch on.....

Cheers

Alan

 

Mind you if you're interested in reducing drag external valve gear is not a good idea at all... put it between the frames, better yet put it between the frames in a casing. If you could manage an oil tight casing too that would be perfect...