[Big Dave]

I take it that all this is after the age of steam post 60/65. as have never come across this in all of my books being my interest in steam only when life was far more simple.

 

[7113]

QUOTE (Long funnel & tiresome @ 6 Feb 2013, 08:46) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>(wait a mo....is Blakey really 7113?)
'Fraid so....

QUOTE (David Todd @ 6 Feb 2013, 08:51) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Yep, He is an East Kent (Oxford die cast) Bus, Anorak..........Hence "Blakey"............
As correctly (almost) stated by dt - Oxford have yet to make a model of an East Kent bus

.

Regards

 

[Greyvoices]

There have been some very accurate replies to this question, most succinctly from Fran, Sean, John Woodall and Bear. Diagrams have been used on railways to provide a framework by which maximum use can be made of all resources, dating right back into steam days.

Diagrams have become much more visible following privatisation as each franchise seeks to perfect the optimum skein of train, rolling stock, locomotive or unit, maintenance/cleaning and driver diagrams that ensure the minimum number of resources are employed to populate the timetable. The success of each diagram is measured as a percentage, for example, the amount of time an EMU is carrying passengers or a driver is actually driving. All of these resources rotate through their diagrams which ensures that they are in the right place at the right time to progress onto the next timetable working without the need for any empty running (light or ECS movements) or a driver travelling as a passenger (on the cushions).

A good example of diagrams being used to ensure that a driver automatically retains his/her route knowledge is the rotation that sends a GN rural driver over the Hertford loop once every six months. This limits the amount of route knowledge pilot working when diversions are in force.

Freight workings also are subject to diagrams as wagons, locos and drivers rotate through their particular schedules. The impact of really tight diagramming can be the difference between profit or loss, assets still having to be paid for if they are moving or standing idle.

At risk of muddying the waters even further there is a species of diagrams that are flexible, most notably for infrastructure work. These were often called targets and were suitably recognisable by headcodes (in the days when we had such things visible) which included a "T" such as T73 or T61. These described a particular working that could be varied as to departure and destination on a daily basis under the control of the civil engineers departments. By adding an initial number the speed and brake composition could be defined, say starting out as 8T57 (fully braked 35mph) but then becoming 6T57 (now hauling a RAKE of 60mph fully fitted wagons).

Headcodes have been perpetuated within the operations system even though you no longer see them on the front of a locomotive or train. All trains have a headcode which is displayed in notices, working timetables and on TOPS.

I hope that this is of help. The word "RAKE" can be used to define the train that is being hauled and the progression of that rake through the various timetabled movements will have been organised by a "diagram".

Best regards ................ Greyvoices (alias John)

 

[Totnado]

[quote name='Norman Byrne' date='6 Feb 2013, 08:44' post='293790']
Hi dt / All,

Have to say railway & many other forms of terminology confuse the hell out of me at time LOL !

I have never come across the use of Diagram in that form, Rake being my "know" term; but that is also very very much stated as a Layman.

Based on the Layman excuse - what is "Tops"; I have heard of & come across TOC's but Tops ?

The correct description of and meaning of tops is:

The 'TOPS' numbering system was introduced following the 'D' (Diesel) & 'E' (Electric) numbering system in I think 1972 and stands for "Total Operations Processing System" the unofficial title that I have heard which is incorrect but provides a similar answer is Train Operating & Processing System.

A raft of DUCKS is correct adjectival English but a train of goods wagons is correctly known as a rake just as Passenger coach trains coaches were know as a rake. This all extends from the fact that until 1889 when the Railways Act was passed by Parliament banning the use of mixed trains, most trains were in fact of mixed traffic. Earlier it was preferred that the goods wagons were first in line and then the coaches would follow as this allowed quicker shunting of the goods vehicles while the coaches passengers disembarked and new passengers embarked. When vacuum braking came in the coaches then became first in the rake followed by the goods wagons so enabling the coaches to be 'hooked' up to the engines vacuum system. So: that's about all I can tell you other than various rakes of goods wagons when compiled they were always parred up with vacuum braking systems or no braking system and those without were known as unfitted and those with braking vacuum systems were known as 'fitted'. Hence we have 'Fitted Rakes' and 'Unfitted Rakes'.

The correct meaning of Diagram is:

During the 19th century on commencement of rail traffic hardly anybody working manually on the railway could read nor write, so that everybody concerned could understand what they had to do or work upon all descriptions of routes, engines, coaches, wagons, station layouts, sidings and all that could possibly require explanation was always committed to the staff by a drawing however these drawings were very poshly called diagrams and even when many people were becoming literate the word stuck and so even posh working signalmen had what they continued to call 'Diagrams' above there working area depicting the tracks for which they were responsible. Later these would become electronic computerised displays but still called 'Diagrams'.

Chris,
Totnado
Cheers,

 

[Norman Byrne]

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the further information / explaination - very interesting stuff . More added to fill the gapping holes in my laymans knowledge LOL ! Much appreciated.

Cheers,

Norm

 

[David Todd]

Very good answer's on how people, view/interpret/ experience, both of those words'.

Keep it going if you can, I am sure there are more to come.

Thanks to everyone for taking their time to post........

 

[John Webb]

I haven't noted anyone refering to the term "Diagram" for the specification/drawings of rolling stock etc. that were provided by railway companies for the construction of the same.

 

[Long funnel & tiresome]

QUOTE (John Webb @ 6 Feb 2013, 22:08) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I haven't noted anyone refering to the term "Diagram" for the specification/drawings of rolling stock etc. that were provided by railway companies for the construction of the same.I was hoping that spiky old LMS Society keeper of carriage diagrams might be lured into posting heavily about such diagrams.
We haven't seen any of his amazing carriage models illustrated for a while in this forum.

LF&T

 

[Totnado]

QUOTE (John Webb @ 6 Feb 2013, 22:08) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I haven't noted anyone refering to the term "Diagram" for the specification/drawings of rolling stock etc. that were provided by railway companies for the construction of the same.

John,

Don't know how much more description you want than I posted on this thread earlier which was that drawings could be of anything such as:
Reiteration: "routes, engines, coaches, wagons, station layouts, sidings" : and these drawings would be termed DIAGRAMS.

Your quite right everything and that means anything pertaining to the railways be that a draughtsman's drawing or a stationmasters sketch was referred to as a or it's "Diagram". A draughtsman's drawing would be numbered as "Diagram No. or Ref:" for sake of argument:

(Diagram Reference & No.) GWR/12 Ton Covered Goods Wagon/July 1842/ Diagram V34

The above reference is real; ie., it did exist. almost precisely as above and all as the draughtsman had drawn it.

See: http://www.gwrjournal.com/index.php?s=good...rowsperpage=100 Having seen this page you will never look back again when following inane comments as it's all there and for all to see.

Cheers
Chris
Totnado

 

[7113]

QUOTE (John Webb @ 6 Feb 2013, 22:08) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I haven't noted anyone refering to the term "Diagram" for the specification/drawings of rolling stock etc. that were provided by railway companies for the construction of the same.
Well I sort of referred to it in post #2

Oh, and by the way TOPS stands for Total Operations Processing System, in other words when the BR system got computerised, that is D501 became 50 001 etc.

Regards

 

[br1972]

Yes you are quite right TOPS stood for Total Operating Processing System...My conclusion having been intimately involved with this system in the early and mid 70's working in the Cardiff Division of BR is that the system may have worked well in the good old USA but it was hardly applicable to the denser rail network that existed in the UK. I must say that for the period the computing power of the system was amazing and at Llanwern Steelworks where I was Terminal Manager we had one of the first fax machines to send train consists from one end of the operation to the other. I seem to remember that we got through boxes of punched computer cards. Great technology but the system used to fall over when idiots in Scunthorpe tried to send pictures of trees and reindeers at Christmas time to every TOPS Office in the Country. Yo Ho Ho and quick unseasonal retribution from Marylebone.

Whilst it was useful for keeping track of trains and wagons en route; for me one of the biggest failings was that when a wagon was declared empty it automatically allocated the next destination for the empty. If local depots had ordered stock for loading then that was ok, but if orders hadn't been input into the system then the computer applied a sweep or default destination...in the case of say Bogie Bolster B's in the Newport area this was inevitably Scunthorpe...so if you weren't careful you could end up with trains of empty stock moving out of the division when you knew that within 24 hours you would need them...Competition between road and rail for steel movements was pretty fierce at that time, so it was vital that you had stock up your sleeve.

Happily there was a facility on TOPS called a 'TK', which allowed a depot to alter the destination or location even of an individual wagon. I spent many a night whilst freight controlling at Ebbw Junction getting my TOPS clerk to change the destination of empty mineral wagons from some far flung locations to go on the first 9A93 trip in the morning to a local colliery only to be rung up by some idiot in a London office telling me I didn't have the authority to do it and he was going to report me to my Divisional Controller and Area Manager...Boo Hoo...So much for computer systems...despite it we kept the trains rolling.

Bit off topic I know sorry...Diagram relates to a train working and a rake is the correct terminology for a set of coaches...

Cheers
Geoff

 

[Totnado]

QUOTE (br1972 @ 7 Feb 2013, 08:07) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Bit off topic I know sorry...Diagram relates to a train working and a rake is the correct terminology for a set of coaches...

Cheers
Geoff

Dear BR1972,

For goods wagons diagrams & rakes may I refer you to the Great Western Railways ancient log files as: http://www.gwrjournal.com/index.php?s=good...rowsperpage=100

Maybe you could also look at Great Western Railways Goods Wagons, Atkins,Beard & Tourret, 1975 Chapter 3, "The Index of Wagon Diagrams". All not some not just workings but all depictions within the old railway system were "Diagrams".

Chris
Totnado

 

[David Todd]

QUOTE Bit off topic I know sorry.................Great story........

 

[woolwinder]

Having perused some books, both official railway publications and others, I come to the conclusion:

Whilst all railway vehicles, locos, coaches and wagons, had their "diagrams", ie, official drawings, the allocation of vehicles to work was also known as "Diagramming", ie, the use of vehicles, (locos, coaches and waqons) to fullfill various duties. Rakes were the vehicles making up a train.

I agree that in many cases, the use of the words is not always correct or clear.

gresley

 

[Bill Veloz]

Yes you are quite right TOPS stood for Total Operating Processing System...My conclusion having been intimately involved with this system in the early and mid 70's working in the Cardiff Division of BR is that the system may have worked well in the good old USA but it was hardly applicable to the denser rail network that existed in the UK. I must say that for the period the computing power of the system was amazing and at Llanwern Steelworks where I was Terminal Manager we had one of the first fax machines to send train consists from one end of the operation to the other

They bought it in from the Southern Pacific in the early '60's and that reference about train consisting reminded me they rolled out a programme called ATI (Advanced Train Information) in early 1966. The idea was that every wagon was typed into the consist for the train and then sent via a central computer at Reading to various points so that the Shunters on arrival knew what wagon was where, or at least that was how it was supposed to be. Also anybody could trace the location of a particular wagon at the press of a button.

Well it never worked properly, the tickertape machines kept jumping holes and the computer at Reading was so finicky that it was just easier to send the consist via Post Office telex direct to destination and bypass Reading.

Also it was only good for long distance trains, a Temple Mills - Acton trip would arrive two hours before the consist arrived and was passed on to a now shunted yard.

How it worked was a shunter at the yard went down the train and recorded the type of wagon, its number and destination on a small tape recorder, this was plugged into a phone and then played by the Clerk in the ATI office who punched it straight onto the tickertape. We had to go to typing school for a week to learn touch typing.

The idea that a Shunter could read the consist was ok until the Shunter at Padd Goods had read his consist into his tape recorder from front to back, but the Acton Shunter who attached wagons at the front of the train read his consist out from back to front !

Hardly the best system in the world. I don't know how it got on, I left the railway about six months after it started.

Again off the subject I know but these little nuggets about how it was done years ago might be an eyeopener for some of todays enthusiasts.

The renumbering of locos took place years later, there was still steam about then.

And yes it is a rake of coaches/wagons, and they operate on a diagram.

 

[Bill Veloz]

QUOTE (woolwinder @ 12 Feb 2013, 12:52) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Whilst all railway vehicles, locos, coaches and wagons, had their "diagrams", ie, official drawings, the allocation of vehicles to work was also known as "Diagramming", ie, the use of vehicles, (locos, coaches and waqons) to fullfill various duties. Rakes were the vehicles making up a train.

I agree that in many cases, the use of the words is not always correct or clear.

gresley

I was Fleet Controller with Thames Trains for some years a while ago. Diagrams (the programme of trains a particular unit was to work on a particular day) were prepared by the Diagrammers. We had a fleet of twenty one 166 Turbo's and they were diagrammed to cycle though 21 different diagrams on consecutive days so that, in theory, at the end of three weeks each unit had done exactly the same mileage.

As with most things theory it didn't work in practise. The Turbos were notorious when they were first introduced and failed at the drop of the proverbial hat. One Saturday morning I had a failed Turbo set on each of the four through platforms at Reading at the same time, and pandemonium ensued clearing the trains of passengers, getting rid of the failed ones to depot, and trying to magic up some replacements.

Never called a rake, becuase it was either a 3 car or 2 car unit or set, but a set of loco hauled coaches was a rake.