General Discussion

Railway Man:

I can assure you, from the rest of the world's point of view, they think we are definitely the weirdest country on earth.

No problem with anything you had in your response.  But I retain my opinion of wheither something like what we're talking about should have a headlight{s}.

I believe we rate a bit highter in the world than weirdest country on earth.....

You are also correct, I have never ridden an engine to experience what a headlight{s}, does for the track view ahead.

I have been in the United Kingdom and Asia.  And on steel wheel to rail in both areas.  But that doesn't make me an expert at all.  All I'm saying is that is my opinion of the headlight issue.

I have ridden locomotives at night, and the headlight helps very little. My first experience was on the City of New Orleans, from Memphis to Grenada (with the blessing of the IC Tennessee Division superintendent), back in 1965. While I could see, I blew the horn for the public crossings, but when the sun was setting, I could not tell a mile post from a whistle post, so I gave the cord back to the engineer. My other two experiences on passenger engines (conductor or flagman and engineer blessing) were the same. I could read the signals, and that was about all. I did see the waterfall inside the Lookout Mountain tunnel, but it was "there it is, and it's gone." Even when proceeding at the maximum speed of ten miles an hour on the AT&N, not much could be seen (there was also conversation in the cab with the crews, to take my attention).

You can wonder how much help the fire on the car in front of the Best Friend of Charleston really helped the engineer.

Johnny

Deggesty:

You can wonder how much help the fire on the car in front of the Best Friend of Charleston really helped the engineer

.....I thought about that very same "headlight" as I was writing on my headlight opinion.....

By the way....How is the performance of the later ditch lights.....?  Do they help to "see" much closer to the engine along the R of W.....I realize the main headlights shine a distance down the track.

TH&B, Not to get off topic, for which I already am. I am a fan of all muscle cars not to mention cars in general. Trains are still my number one hobby though. The reason why I asked was because my grandfather had one. But, it had an automatic tranny. I don't remember if it had a slant 6 or a V8. I was only 7 at the time. Back to the subject. Could the other engine been the Coronation Special or the Mallard?

I, too, recall reading that British railways, being almost free of highway grade crossings and well fenced, did not develop a need for headlights as American and other railroads did. I also seem to recall that the placement of the lights indicated something about the type of train (as mentioned above, something akin to marker lights) but I can't find anything about it offhand right now. Maybe someone with A) a better organiazed library (who am I kidding? any organized library...), B) a better memory (again, who am I kidding? any memory) or C) way too much time on their hands (for once, I'm in the clear) can find/post it?

Railway Man:

I can assure you, from the rest of the world's point of view, they think we are definitely the weirdest country on earth.
RWM

Off-hand I think North-Korea and Bhutan are weirder than the US. And if you pressure me I might admit that my own country (the Netherlands) is as weird if not weirder than the US but I can't think of more countries. Note that they are all more or less social experiments....

Back to the topic. Remember that British railways and many continental European railways as well were fenced in or had watercarrying ditches like in the Netherlands. Makes it harder for say livestock to wander onto the tracks. Distances between places are small compared to the US so it is easy to guess where you are in the dark from sounds like crossing roads or small bridges in combination with timing. Add to that the fact that most engineers and firemen ran the same routes day in day out, day and night and often many times a day. You get a feel for the road that way and I believe that was part of the training of enginemen.

greetings,

Kevin C. Smith:

I, too, recall reading that British railways, being almost free of highway grade crossings and well fenced, did not develop a need for headlights as American and other railroads did. I also seem to recall that the placement of the lights indicated something about the type of train (as mentioned above, something akin to marker lights) but I can't find anything about it offhand right now. Maybe someone with A) a better organiazed library (who am I kidding? any organized library...), B) a better memory (again, who am I kidding? any memory) or C) way too much time on their hands (for once, I'm in the clear) can find/post it?

At one point in time the codes were as here:

http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/basic16.htm

The earliest diesels used the same codes but with white disks, then they went to an illuminated display of the headcode, including the train class, then to pure marker lights.

The main reason the UK's locomotives didn't need headlights dated back to the Enclosure Acts, which forced landowners to fence in their holdings, so other than few pockets of "common land," agricultural land is fenced off, and we don't have an open range. Likewise, the enabling Parliamentary legislation for railway lines stipulated that lines be fenced off. So trespass by humans or animals is thankfully less common than it might be.

Another factor would have been the the obligation in the Reglation of Railways Acts of 1880 something on drivers to sign a route card to acknowledge which segments of routes on which they were confident to work any kind of train, in any weather, at any time of day or night. So drivers didn't need a big light to tell them where they were at any time. They were expected to know by experience, which would mean the lie of the land, what lights would normally be visible, also sounds and smells! (I'm told one landmark for Great Western steam enginemen working into and out of London Paddington was the Nestles Instant Coffee factory in the outer suburbs)

The situation these days, however, is somewhat different. Back in the 1970s/1980s, the costs of running the Central Wales line were slashed by relaxing the signalling requirements for road crossings. British Rail accomplished this by turing the route into a "Light Railway" as defined in legislation back at the turn of the last century. Crossing keepers would be dispnsed with, speed restrictions (whose severity depended on ease of sighting) were imposed at what would now become "open crossings," and trains would be fitted with Headlights to enable road vehicle drivers to spot trains easier.

The working of that same route was later amended by the use of NSKT (non-signaller key token) controlled from just the one signalbox controlling movements along 80 or so miles of route. At the same time, all conventional BR signals (other than those controlling access to and from the main lines at each end) were removed, and were replaced by fixed signals in the shape of simple signs, and which were made of a very reflective material such that drivers could read them a long way off.

The effectiveness of that reflective material for speed limit signs has seen widespread use of headlights / marker lights to help drivers read same. So although our trains and locomtives don't have Headlights as powerful as those used in the US, our modern trains and locomotives are kitted out with lighting good enough to read our fixed lineside signs.

Perhaps a UK driver might put things over better than I can.

Hwyl,

Martin

All this info regarding British steam engines not to have headlights is really fascinating.  It seems all kinds of money was spent to install fences and crossing protection, etc.....and I just am amazed some of this {might}, have been done to prevent the need of a headlight on an engine....That boggles the mind....!

None of this was done to "get around having to have a headlight."  Fencing and crossing separations were done because it made for a more efficient, more reliable, and safer railway.  If in the 19th century, you needed to mount a headlight on your locomotives, it's because your railway was cheaply built, inefficient, and unsafe.  And considering just how little a 19th century headlight illuminated of the track ahead, it was a desperation move.  All that the headlight really enabled the engineer to do was know whether the animal he was about to run over was a deer, a cow, or a mule.

The logic question was never "How do we get rid of the need for a headlight."  The logic question was much more fundamental, and was "How can we make our railways efficient, safe, and reliable."  The answer was "flat, straight, fenced, and grade-separated, so cows and wagons and people don't wander onto them, get hit, and disrupt our schedules."  British railways being built in a compact and industrialized nation could afford to make the necessary investment in grade-separations.  U.S. railways were development railways and could not, so had to suffer with crooked, steep, and unfenced railways.  Today, grade-crossing collisions and trespasser collisions are an immense problem for U.S. railways.  One of the Class 1s recently told me that it had added up all the causes of train delay and their costs and found that grade-crossing collisions were the single biggest cause of train delay.  In the future, all important U.S. railways will be 100% grade separated and fenced.

But we will still have headlights, because now the U.S., auto-centric culture thinks that all proper vehicles have to have them.  The decision will not be made on an engineering, scientific, or economic basis, it will be made on a security-blanket basis.

RWM

Modelcar:

All this info regarding British steam engines not to have headlights is really fascinating.  It seems all kinds of money was spent to install fences and crossing protection, etc.....and I just am amazed some of this {might}, have been done to prevent the need of a headlight on an engine....That boggles the mind....!

You are putting the cart before the horse.  In Britain the concept of the railways being a private right of way is much stronger, and also historic public rights of way HAD to be respected.  Many of the lines were built through already very well settled areas and the train frequency was high.  Just about all road crossings were grade separated.  Level crossings were very few in number, each fully gated, interlocked with the signals, and manned full time.  These gates were normally left blocking the road, and would be opened, if safe to do so, when a vehicle or shepherd with his flock of sheep needed to cross.  Waits could be lengthy on major lines, since delaying an express by giving it a caution signal because the crossing was still open was a cardinal sin. 

By the time things like electric lights and generators were invented, British railway practice was already well established.  As other posters have pointed out, experience had shown there was little real need for headlights so there was no value to add them. 

 Perhaps forgotten by many, even here in the steam era headlights were often turned off during daylight hours.  Their constant use started with diesels.  I presume the trains were no longer as visible without the plume of exhaust from the steam engine.  So even this side of the Atlantic you can see that a major purpose of the headlight was visibility by others.  In Britain, with a controlled right of way, this was not an issue.

 John

cx500:

 Perhaps forgotten by many, even here in the steam era headlights were often turned off during daylight hours.  Their constant use started with diesels.  I presume the trains were no longer as visible without the plume of exhaust from the steam engine.  So even this side of the Atlantic you can see that a major purpose of the headlight was visibility by others.  In Britain, with a controlled right of way, this was not an issue.

 John

The "always-on headlight" was indeed a grade-crossing safety device in the U.S., but on many railways it started firmly in the steam era.  I think it was more a reaction to the rapidly increasing fatality rate as motor vehicle traffic ramped up than the lack of visibility of the diesel-electric. (And as our steam brethern will tell us, the steam engine was supposed to be fired with a clear exhaust.)  In 1938, a D&RGW fast freight pulled by a 4-6-6-4 collided with a school bus at a crossing in Midvale, Utah, during daylight, killing 23 children and the bus driver, the single-worst motor vehicle wreck in the U.S. to that time in terms of fatalities.  That was a significant impetus for turning the headlight on during daylight hours.

RWM

Railway Man:

But we will still have headlights, because now the U.S., auto-centric culture thinks that all proper vehicles have to have them

Yes, I'm sure our RR's here in the US will always have headlights.....Why wouldn't they..."security-blanket basis.......", Is that the reason, doubt it.

Having lived next to railroads for all my life, I can't really believe that the incredibly bright headlight doesn't help the engineer see ahead. Seems to me in my old house on the tracks that when a train was coming at night, the tracks would be lit up like by a floodlight for a block or more ahead of the engine.

As noted, headlights, Mars lights etc. help people see the engine too. Ditch Lights aren't really meant to light up the ditches...older diesels had "ditch lights" that shone under the front and rear steps, largely to help crewmen getting on and off in the dark (although they did help light up the area a bit). Modern ditch lights are there to help make the engine more visible at grade crossings etc. much more than to help the crew see ahead.

BTW British engines don't have bells either.