Talk:Great Western Railway telegraphic codes

Codes not exclusive to GWR

I think that the main issue to be raised with this article is that it implies that the GWR was unique in using these telegraphic codes. There are a few that are unique to GW; in the 1939 code book they are printed in italics and the universal codes in bold. The LMS also issued a telegraphic code book with its own unique codes and the universal codes. The other companies would have done the same.

The universal codes would have been agreed at some level within the Railway Clearing House. At what point this was done is a matter for original research.

I suggest that this article is subordinated into an article entitled "British railway telegraphic codes" dealing with the codes of all the private companies and British Rail.

Tanya Jackson British Rail carriage steward Historical Model Railway Society

TJ (talk) 17:18, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The article was created to split (and improve) the Great Western Railway article. If you have the information to exapnd it into a more comprehensive one then that'll be fine, I just wonder hopw big it will be when it's finished! Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Wagon descriptions and Wikilinking?

Are the descriptions used taken verbatim from the code book?. I thought that a 'crocodile' was always a bogie well wagon, and would never normally use the word 'trolley' in that context.

Some of the names/descriptions express purpose, but do not really convey what the wagons looked like. For example, a 'Loriot' (machine wagon) was (I think) a low-floored, non-bogie wagon for the transport of heavy/tall vehicles and machinery (later known as a 'Lowmac'?). Or am I thinking of a 'Rectank'? Was the difference that one had a flat, planked floor with sloping ends (like a Lowmac) whereas the other had no floor and used girders to suspend the load just above rail height? (You see the problem, maybe? Although I could go and look at my books about wagons, that is not really the point here: my library is not 'on line' for others to view!)

Over time, should we be looking to explain what these wagons were? If so, it will be necessary to devise a format that retains the verbatim code meaning (assuming that is what is there now) alongside a more detailed wagon description. (NB - I am not proposing a description of every wagon sub-type -- it should be possible, within the meaning of the code, to come up with some generalisations).

On reflection maybe the answer is an article about GW freight stock that does the job of describing them in appropriate detail, to which the actual telegraphic code words can be linked. In the mean time, if an article on the basic wagon type exists (which it ought to one day, even if only as a general page on the type) such as brake van, then this is an appropriate linkage. But, should we reckon to link to other existing articles (such as 'crocodile')? It might be worth establishing a local policy on this latter point, as the worth of non-railway links could be considered dubious.

EdJogg (talk) 11:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I have come across this use of the word "trolley" elsewhere; I think it means that it is low down to the rail. The code book cited used trolley and so that is what I copied to the list. I put in links to the articles that I was aware of, and am planning to take and upload pictures of as many GWR wagon (and coach) types as I can find once the weather improves.

I don't think that adding links such as [[crocodile]] would help much - this has already caused some argument with locomotive names where I think it is valid. There is, however, a case for adding them to any disambiguation pages.

I envisaged a Wagons of the Great Western Railway article to match the carriages one that has recently been posted. In fact, I only wrote this page when I came across all the carriage telegraphic codes for that one. But it's not high on my list of priorities - the wagons do not take up too much space on Great Western Railway whcih we are still trying to get ready for a GA review. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

BR Equivalent

FYI:...Just found the following site that lists some telegraphic codes used within BR times: http://www.rodge.force9.co.uk/faq/telegraph.html "British Railway Telegraphic Codewords" – from booklet BR30064 (accessed 2009-02-12)

EdJogg (talk) 00:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The Great Western Wagons book includes all the codes used by the GWR, including the "national" codes used from 1943, but I decided not to include them as they are not GWR codes as such. A BR list would be a useful companion, although the codes have been expanded in recent years to cover more engineering wagons and so are are not strictly telegraphic.Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The above link from 2009 no longer works (unsurprisingly). Jackiespeel (talk) 10:59, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Try http://www.railwaycodes.org.uk/misc/telegraph.shtm --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:13, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

What are the Wikipedia equivalents of Mystex and Q-train? Jackiespeel (talk) 13:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Road trailer codes

In Janet K. L. Russell's G.W.R. Company Servants p.205 there is a picture of a road trailer labelled 'TITAN D'. On p.202 is pictured another trailer possibly labelled 'DYAK G'. There is however, no sign of such codes on on lorries or tractor units. It suggests to me that there was an extended set of codes referring to road trailers. Can anyone confirm or contradict this, or even find a list of such? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 20:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

@Verbarson: The GWR - like other railways - didn't just code the wagons and carriages, it coded everything. There were codes for each of the phrases likely to be sent by telegraph, including codes describing various objects, not just rolling stock. So a station master who needed something (more wagons, or more lorries) or somebody (perhaps three of the booking clerks had reported sick) could send a brief but accurate message to control. Messages were sent letter by letter so the fewer letters there were, the quicker the message could be sent and then the telegraph operator would then be able to send the next message. A message like "Despatch with all speed a wagon to carry glass in crates" would become the telegram "OHIO ONE CORAL". There may be a book on railway telegraphs; if not, there ought to be. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:21, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

The 1939 GWR code book has 120 pages, 10 of which are an index with codes set out alphabetically in three columns. I don't propose to transcribe the whole lot!

PS a 'Dyak G' is a six-ton Scammell A.L. traier. Geof Sheppard (talk) 14:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both. Did locos or powered road vehicles get codes? I suppose a loco was either an individual with a number, or a requirement specified by power and route class. I can see no codes on the lorries in the photographs. How did you ask for a 10-ton flatbed lorry? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 22:18, 9 October 2022 (UTC)