British Railway Operations

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

Try these http://www.semg.org.uk/steam/leader_01.html

Interesting read, thanks for the link. If i read that correctly, the driver was in front, then the boiler,firebox, fireman and the tender. What would be the advantage of putting all this into one unit, verses a locomotive and a tender? Thanks

Murphy the other reason for this locomotive configuration is that it was intended as an updated "Tank" engine, one able to operate at maximum speed in either direction. Steam locomotives equipped with tenders required turning on a wye track or turntable.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by beaulieu

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

Try these http://www.semg.org.uk/steam/leader_01.html

Interesting read, thanks for the link. If i read that correctly, the driver was in front, then the boiler,firebox, fireman and the tender. What would be the advantage of putting all this into one unit, verses a locomotive and a tender? Thanks

Murphy the other reason for this locomotive configuration is that it was intended as an updated "Tank" engine, one able to operate at maximum speed in either direction. Steam locomotives equipped with tenders required turning on a wye track or turntable.

Was it bi-directional, with engineer's controls at both ends?

[jchnhtfd]

Not to change the subject...
But I was reading the Scotsman today, which had an article on bringing steam tourist trains to the Waverley line from Edinburgh into the Borders when it is rebuilt. Which is a splendid idea, in my humble opinion. But the article went on to state that bringing steam tourist operations onto the line would require changes to the track infrastructure. Eh? Perhaps they mean a facility for turning the steam engine ("Flying Scotsman" is a possibility)? Such as a wye? Or...

Can someone enlighten me?

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding
[
Was it bi-directional, with engineer's controls at both ends?

Yes, look at the side drawing at the bottom of the first page.

[Anonymous]

I would guess that they mean things such as loop tracks and possibly some means of turning the loco, although on many lines they simply operate tender-first in one direction. Many branch lines are now genuinely single-track with no sidings or loops as most of their traffic is DMU sets, so removing unneeded trackwork saves on MOW costs. They may also mean attacking the lineside foliage - steam locos have been banned in the past in some areas due to the risk of grass fires, usually during summer heatwaves. The usual response is to mangle the greenery (we're not talking neat pruning here - they use a large flail which leaves an appalling mess behind) so there's not enough to catch fire.

[jchnhtfd]

Thanks Matt -- that's rather what I thought... I know those flails you mention. The do leave a mess, don't they?

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by beaulieu

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding
[
Was it bi-directional, with engineer's controls at both ends?

Yes, look at the side drawing at the bottom of the first page.

I see that now. It looks like a long walk for the engineer from one end to the other.[;)]

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd

Not to change the subject...
But I was reading the Scotsman today, which had an article on bringing steam tourist trains to the Waverley line from Edinburgh into the Borders when it is rebuilt. Which is a splendid idea, in my humble opinion. But the article went on to state that bringing steam tourist operations onto the line would require changes to the track infrastructure. Eh? Perhaps they mean a facility for turning the steam engine ("Flying Scotsman" is a possibility)? Such as a wye? Or...
Can someone enlighten me?

I thought the Flying Scotsman was in a museum. Is it still brought out and run occasionally?

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd

Thanks Matt -- that's rather what I thought... I know those flails you mention. The do leave a mess, don't they?

Is a flail what the BNSF uses here to trim trackside trees? It looks like a lawn mower deck turned on it's side. It buzzes a verticle line through the branches at set distance out from the rails. These things are about as neat and clean as a tornado.[xx(]

[BR60103]

Murphy: Flying Scotsman is out and free. She changes hands regularly, but has never been stuck in a museum; she does visit some.
Flying Scotsman was the first (only?) loco sold by BR with a clause that she was allowed to be operated on BR track. She has operated for over 40 years as a private loco on BR (with time outs for boiler rebuilding and tours of faraway places -- even farther than Sodor).

[John Bakeer]

Flying Scotsman visited the States early in its private ownership days and restrictive practices by the american unions caused the bancruptcy of its then owner (Allan Pegler).
It was almost cut up for scrap to pay debts, but a man called McAlpine (I think) rescued it and brought it home. It then went to Australia and got into trouble again, It is now in the custody of the Nation Railway Museum at York (after being puschased by public subscription) and remains active.
John B.

[John Bakeer]

Leader Comm's.
I suspect that a system similar to that used on ships (telegraph and vioce pipe) may have been employed.
Any better ideas/ information would be welcome.
John B.

[John Bakeer]

In pre-grouping days dedicated fire trains were retained to deal with line side fires by some companies, The Lancashire and Yorkshire for example.
John B.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by beaulieu

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

Try these http://www.semg.org.uk/steam/leader_01.html

Interesting read, thanks for the link. If i read that correctly, the driver was in front, then the boiler,firebox, fireman and the tender. What would be the advantage of putting all this into one unit, verses a locomotive and a tender? Thanks

Murphy the other reason for this locomotive configuration is that it was intended as an updated "Tank" engine, one able to operate at maximum speed in either direction. Steam locomotives equipped with tenders required turning on a wye track or turntable.

Was it bi-directional, with engineer's controls at both ends?

Yes, in orde to match the operating convenience of a diesel loco. (Most diesel locos on this side of the pond are double ended.)

[jchnhtfd]

Right, Murphy -- that's the gadget. Does a quick job, but the resulting aesthetics leave something to be desired.

The fire problem with steam engines is not trivial (it does exist for diesel, but much less severe, and not at all for electric). I wasn't aware of the fire trains in the UK, although I can easily imagine areas where they might well have been useful (heather and gorse are astonishingly flammable...) but a similar idea is used on the Cumbres & Toltec in New Mexico and Colorado.

[John Bakeer]

Yes, I know the C&T is a bit flamey.
The diesel was virtually non-existant on BR in the 50's, apart from two LMS main liners and a number of shunters (switchers). As previously mentioned, shortage of materials and ideas stopped railroad development until well into the 50's. When political interference screwed up the British system(s).
Although the privatisation has been a disaster in the short term, some benefits are beginning to show through.
I feel that the USA can teach us something about financing railroads, or can they? I don't know.

[John Bakeer]

Jamie,
A friend of mine was a fireman at Edgeley and worked on tender loco's, when I asked him about reverse running, he replied and I quote "John, you don't want to be on the footplate when running tender first. Even with a sheet, you are blinded by the (coal) dust". Most preserved lines do indeed have a means of turning engines, and those without make use of tanks whenever possible, and of course the deisel is beginning to feature in the preservation field.
John B.

[jchnhtfd]

Thanks John! Actually, there is another reason for not being on the footplate when running tender first -- or anywhere: most tender locos track rather poorly backing; the tender itself isn't too bad, but the trailing truck (if any!) just isn't designed the same way as the engine truck. So your speeds are usually way down -- which is why you try to have some means of turning the engine. Which takes up space...

And I do think that North America (not just the USA) has some good ideas about financing rail operations -- for freight service. I don't think much of the USA approach to passenger service, but that's another long and involved story (let's just say that the US Federal government closely resembles an ostrich in some ways...). On the other hand, the UK approach has some fundamental differences, not only in rail operations, but in legislative philosophy, which get into the mix. My own personal opinion, however, is that closely examining how VIA is managed, as well as BNSF and CN, could bring up some very sound principles.

[Murphy Siding]

A book I found today-Steam Railways of the World, mentions a *steam ban* in Great Britain from late 1967 to 1971. What was that all about? Thanks

[BR60103]

Mr Siding:
British Railways took an extreme dislike to steam locomotives in the 60s. There was an extreme haste to get rid of anything that might remind the public of locmotives that actually worked. The last steam locos were built in 1959 and retired by 1967.
Privately owned steamers were not permitted on BR track -- except for Flying Scotsman which had been purchased with a long term running permit. Many locos were sent to the scrap dealers with explicit instructions that they were to be made unrestorable -- usually a cutting torch through the spokes on the drivers.
I don't recall what made them finally come round.

[Anonymous]

The funny part is, the attempts to make them unrestorable failed miserably. 6023 (a GWR King class 4-6-0) had the rear drivers cut but has had a new set made. According to this website http://6024.com/ it was a King class that broke the BR steam ban - King George V (6000) ran on the main line in 1971.

[Tulyar15]

In 1971 the then Chairman of Bulmers Cider, Peter Prior persuaded the then British Rail chairman to allow GWR 4-6-0 "King George V" to haul a special train promoting Bulmers products. Bulmers had just sponsored the restoration of the loco to main line running condition and they thought it would be an ideal way to promote their products. British Rail eventually agreed and the special train went without a hitch. So BR relented on their steam ban and started allowing preserved steam locos on the main line again.

30 Years on and King George V is now in a museum and Bulmers no longer support preservation, but steam still lives on our main lines. Sister loco 6024 "King Edward I" is about to be joined by 6023 "King Edward II" so for the first time in preservation we'll have to Kings on the main line.

[mhurley87f]

Talking of Kings, my sources tell me that a Ferro-Equus Rex is expected to be on the loose down in our corner of the world (Swansea - Carmarthen) next Saturday.

Which Rex is it to be, and where will the train be coming from and going to?

Martin

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BR60103

Mr Siding:
British Railways took an extreme dislike to steam locomotives in the 60s. There was an extreme haste to get rid of anything that might remind the public of locmotives that actually worked. The last steam locos were built in 1959 and retired by 1967.

Extreme haste by whom? Or why? I guess I just don't quite understand.

[Simon Reed]

There were always allegations of a hidden agenda to the re-appearance of KGV on the main line.

Bulmers had traditionally shipped their products by rail but were giving serious consideration in 1971 to a switch to road distribution.

Peter Prior and another board member at Bulmers, Godfrey Barton, were steam enthusiasts and dangled a major carrot over BR's head...

The rest is history.

To clarify a post on the last page - only a handful of the preserved railways in this country have the facilities to turn an engine, so steam runs tender first in one direction as a matter of course.

As the preserved railways run under Light Railway Orders, restricting speed to 25MPH, this is'nt particularly problematic although I can tell you from experience that tender first on an ex LMS 4F, at 20 on a relatively secluded line (KWVR) in middling December weather is'nt much fun!

[BR60103]

Murph: the extreme haste was by the British Railways board, egged on by the government of the day. If you do the math, you see that some locos ran for less than 8 years. The other aspect is that Diesels were ordered by the score from inexperienced builders without adequate testing. Some of the early classes didn't last much longer than some of the steamers.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mhurley87f

Talking of Kings, my sources tell me that a Ferro-Equus Rex is expected to be on the loose down in our corner of the world (Swansea - Carmarthen) next Saturday.

Which Rex is it to be, and where will the train be coming from and going to?

Martin

I should think it will be #6024 KE1 as I dont think #6023 KE2 is ready yet. Duke of Gloucester is coming your way on Monday, 1st May (May Day bank holiday)

Talking of S. Wales my brother Adrian and I popped over there a few Saturdays ago and saw a couple of coal trains within an hour at Aberthaw, one of them worked by a class 60. My brother has put some photos of the GW signals which survive at Aberthaw and Tondu (pronounced T-on-dee) on his website at:-

http://www.roscalen.com/signals/Aberthaw/index.htm

http://www.roscalen.com/signals/Tondu/index.htm

[Murphy Siding]

Tylyar15: Enjoyed the links with some interesting photography. The lines remind me of Thomas the Tank Engine programs. I don't understand some of the captions: down station platform/up platform/up goods starter/down homes/ etc. Could you give me a thumbnail explanation of what it's all about? Thanks

[BR60103]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

I don't understand some of the captions: down station platform/up platform/up goods starter/down homes/ etc. Could you give me a thumbnail explanation of what it's all about? Thanks

The terms "up" and "down" refer to the two directions the line runs. UP is towards the most important city on the railroad. Usually London, but not always. So the up platform will be the platform on the track that goes to London.
When there are more than 2 tracks, the are distinguished by direction and function. There may be fast and slow, or a goods (freight) line.
The other references are to signals. A signal with a red arm is a "home" signal, a yellow arm is a "distant" signal. The home signal controls the section of track immediately beyond it. A distant signal is located a stopping distance before the home signal. A station with pointwork will have a series of home signals at the appropriate places. There is frequently a signal at the end of the platform and this is the starter.
Also, they use signals for each route that is coming up; a facing point will have 2 signals.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Tylyar15: Enjoyed the links with some interesting photography. The lines remind me of Thomas the Tank Engine programs. I don't understand some of the captions: down station platform/up platform/up goods starter/down homes/ etc. Could you give me a thumbnail explanation of what it's all about? Thanks

In the S. Wales valleys, "up" tends to mean up into the hills.

As BR60103 has pointed out, "up" generally means towards London. What they do on cross country lines I'm not sure. On the Brsitol - Birmingham line I know "up" is towards Birmingham (ie going north) and I gather on the Somerset & Dorset line "up" was towards Bath (ie north bound).