British Railway Operations

[Murphy Siding]

Are grade-seperated rail-highway crossings common in Britain? I believe I read that Britain puts a little more emphasis on this than American railroads. With a few miles of my home are 7 grade seperated crossings, and 50+ grade crossings.

[Simon Reed]

Well maybe we could help each other here. What's the difference between a grade crossing and a grade seperated crossing?

I suspect that we're talking about what we would call level crossings and occupation crossings. A level crossing would be the crossing of a public road over the right of way, whereas an occupation crossing would usually be the crossing of private access (to a single property or industry, or between agricultural fields for instance) over the right of way.

Generically both are referred to as level crossings.

Have I got the right idea?

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Lucky thing for the British "establishment" that they were able to shun American technology vs. having to *embrace* the technology of the Third Reich[;)] Oh well-water under the bridge. Didn't the Royal Navy have any other diesel experience that could be used for locomotive engines? Why didn't the actual production of engines go to someone with longtime engine building experience-Avro,Rolls Royce, Bristol, etc?

Sadly, success in the marine enviroment isn't a guarantee of good performance on the rails, but the converse does apply, a good rail engine will work in a ship.

The Fairbanks Morse OP and the EMD 201 didn't work as well in diesel locomotives as they did in ships. In Britain, the stabdard post war submarine engine was the "Admiralty Standard Range 1" built in small numbers (relatively) at high cost by Vickers. When World War III was still a possibility, two commercial builders made engines to the same specification, the Paxman YL and the Mirlees JVS-12, for use in expanding the fleet on mobilisation.

The Paxman YL found its way into Italian locomotives, but not in Britain, but the Mirlees JVS-12 was used in the Bru***ype 2 (now Class 31). It started off well. but was found to suffer from crankcase cracking (like the Sulzer) and all 263 locomotives were rebuilt using English Electric 12 SVT engines.

The reason that EMD missed out in Britain was the insistence that the engines be built in the UK. This was not a concern for Ireland.

The Crossley engines lasted until the mid 1980s in Western Australia, partly because the locomotives had a very low axle load, and could work on lighter track than the EMD (and English Electric) locomotives of comparable power.

M636C

[owlsroost]

Grade crossing (US) = Level crossing (UK).
Grade separated crossing (US) = Crossing using a bridge.
(also a 'grade separated junction' would be a fly-over or dive-under junction in the UK)

We do have quite a lot of level crossings in the UK, but they are frowned on these days because of accident potential and the expense of maintaining the equipment (safety requirements for them are more onerous than in the US). There are a lot in my part of the country because it's flat and the rail lines were built cheaply 150 years ago, whereas in other areas there are very few. My guess is that the majority of crossings are bridges.

Flat rail/rail crossings ('diamonds') are also very rare in the UK.

Tony

[daveklepper]

I am very pleased that in the last days of Deltic diesel operation on the East Coast main line, I did get a cab ride from London to Newcastle and it was exactly at 100mph most of the way. Poles for the catenary were already in place on most of the line.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by owlsroost

Grade crossing (US) = Level crossing (UK).
Grade separated crossing (US) = Crossing using a bridge.
(also a 'grade separated junction' would be a fly-over or dive-under junction in the UK)

We do have quite a lot of level crossings in the UK, but they are frowned on these days because of accident potential and the expense of maintaining the equipment (safety requirements for them are more onerous than in the US). There are a lot in my part of the country because it's flat and the rail lines were built cheaply 150 years ago, whereas in other areas there are very few. My guess is that the majority of crossings are bridges.

Flat rail/rail crossings ('diamonds') are also very rare in the UK.

Tony

Thanks for translating my words into English[;)]. Sorry I wasn't a little more clear on that. Can you expand on what you mean about safety requirements being more onerous? Why are diamonds so rare? I would have thought that there would be lots of rail lines going every which way in Britain.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

As I understand it, level crossings on public roads here have to have flashing lights and barriers - railways in this country have had to be fully fenced-in by law since the earliest days to keep people, animals, etc off the rails (they do still find their way onto the tracks but it's not that common). You will find the occasional farm crossing on branch lines which just has a pair of 5-bar gates and some old sleepers (ties) between the rails - using these is a little risky, you have to open both gates, then cross as quickly as possible while listening for trains. I think some of them may now have a phone to allow farmers moving animals to check that nothing's coming their way - I've not looked closely at one.

[owlsroost]

QUOTE: Why are diamonds so rare? I would have thought that there would be lots of rail lines going every which way in Britain.

There are lots of lines in the UK, but when they were built competitors generally crossed each other on bridges (or built bridges later when traffic levels made flat crossings hopelessly congested). If they were friendly then they would build a junction. The only US-style flat crossing on an important current route I can think of is at Newark where the Nottingham-Lincoln secondary line crosses the London-Edinburgh main line 'at grade' (both lines are double track, and were originally built by different private railway companies).

Note that I'm talking here about situations where one route crosses another one - there are obviously lots of simple diamond crossings as part of double track junction and complex station track layouts.

Tony

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M636C


The reason that EMD missed out in Britain was the insistence that the engines be built in the UK.



M636C

Interesting. A dozen years before, Rolls-Royce was letting Packard build Merlins, but EMD wouldn't licence their diesels to be built in Britain. Looking back, I would think having them licence built in Britain would have helped the British railroad system, and given EMD a big foot in the door for the future.

[mhurley87f]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed

I think that there are two keys to the failure of US Diesel manufacturers to impact on the UK market.

As has been suggested in previous posts the nationalisation of Britain's railways in 1948 was in part necessitated by the huge investment required at that stage following WW2, and in part a highly politicised reinforcement of the economy. Although Britain did not suffer the same degree of collateral damage as mainland Europe during WW2, the war and the increasing industrialisation of the commonwealth countries meant that the immediate postwar years effectively saw the end of the British empire.

This led to a tremendously parochial and insular approach as Britain effectively set out to rebuild itself as an independent trading nation. The nationalised industries (and you must understand that nationalisation encompassed more or less all significant production and services) were very much pressured into using home grown resources to progress and modernise, even though in many situations the technology and expertise was not available domestically. As an example, British Steel plodded along with basic Bessemer technology well into the 1970's, when huge advances had been made elsewhere.

I think the simple answer, therefore, is that established US diesel manufacturers were not approached to assist in implementing the modernisation programme because it was against policy to do so. To measure how costly that instance of "stiff upper lip" was, look at some of the locomotive disasters mentioned by M636, then look at CIE, the nationalised transport operator in Ireland. Their Crossley (UK) engined A and C class diesels were such an abject disaster that they looked to GM. The result - the "B" class - are largely still in traffic today and the original A and C classes were re-engined with GM products.

It's also worth mentioning that the British "establishment" were, in the 1950's, still smarting over the fact that the US Army effectively brought about the end of WW2, and in certain circles there was a marked antipathy toward all things American.

The second key? Try sending a Double Stack down any route in Britain....

Simon,

At the end of WW2, the UK owed the US big time for the materiel etc lend leased / sold on tick over the 6 years. That single fact shaped Public Policy for Post War Governments for several years.

The UK didn't suffer as badly as France and the Low Countries, but then we didn't qualify for Marshall Plan Aid, and we had to repay the war debts in US Dollars, not Pounds Sterling !!

Let's not forget also that while the Hot War had mercifully ended, the Cold War was very much on, vide the Berlin Blockade of 1948, and the Korean War shorlty afterwards., even in comparative peace time, military spending was considerably higher than it had been prior to 1939.

Check out your history, the Government's message at the time was export or die, domestic demand had to be damped down by Purchase Taxes to encourage exports, especially if they were paid in Dollars.

How were the Railways affected by this - there's the story of the Oil Firing initiative kicked off by the GWR, and later seized on by BR, only for the whole thing to founder as the Nation couldn't spare the foreign exchange (i.e. Dollars) to buy the 26 tanker loads of that time of Bunker C !!

How did Nationalisation work, well it allowed the Govt to ration out funds to all the Sectors desperate to repair war damage and get back to some form of normality.

I don't suppose the man in the street honestly cared a toss about what type of locomtive pulled his train, or where it had been built, his concern was more probably, "when can I get the bomb damage repairs to my home finished?, or where can I get a home for my family (and not have live in apartments with my in-laws)?, or has her indoors enough points to get a joint of beef from the butcher?

Against that backdrop, significant bombing damage, industries worn out by 6 years of war, and 6 years of maintenance arrears, housing shortages, and no Doolars to buy the GM diesels that BR did at the time acknowledge as the best around at the time, the only answer was to carry on with steam, using coal, the fuel that was thankfully spread out fairly well around the mainland, until times got better.

I can assure you that parochialism wasn't our problem in those difficult years, rather it was pressure on the exchequer to repay the war debt, and use what foreign exchange was available for the greatest good of the Nation as a whole.

By the way, where on earth did you read about Bessemer converters still in widespread use in the UK in the 1970s? Your Geography Text Book must have been years out of date as any left were on British Steel's Closure List.

[Murphy Siding]

mhurley87f: Thanks for that little insight into British post WW II economic history. It makes sense to me. I sometimes can focus on something pretty tightly. and not see it in the big picture.

As always Thanks

[Simon Reed]

Mr. Hurley - I think we're roughly saying the same thing from two different perspectives. I am an unashamed Socialist with a deep regret that neither World War was able to generate sufficient momentum to depose the invidious influence of class that this country still suffers.

As for Bessemer converters - I'm guessing from your shed plate that you're South Wales based. I'm the son of a BSC (and later British Shipbuilding - even worse) manager based initially at Workington and latterly Barrow Hoopworks, where in the mid 70's they were still working with an unmodified 1924 plant. Can you help me with some info about my ALCo?

Back to railways - thanks for the clarification on grade seperated/grade crossings. Had'nt realised it was that simple. As a signaller Cogload may be able to help us but as I recall after the Ufton Nervet incident last year (in which a suicidal man drove his car onto a grade/level crossing leading to a derailment with multiple fatalities) the figure given for remaining grade/level crossings in the UK was something like 1400.

[Murphy Siding]

Simon Reed: About your ALCO-what is the intended use for it, once it is returned to running condition?

Thanks

[Murphy Siding]

In Brian Solomon's excellent book "Locomotive" , there is a short chapter about the EMD Class 66 locomotive. It seems to be somewhat of a British version of an SD-40 with double ended cabs. The book says that Ed Burkhardt (of Wisconsin Central fame) came to control the English, Welsch & Scottish Railway. He purchased 250 Class 66 locomotives for EW&S, starting in 1998. Are these locomotives familiar to any of you Brits? I'm curious how they are performing. What about EW&S? I've not heard that name before, has it been succesful?

Thanks

[Hugh Jampton]

I dunno about anyone else but I'm gettin a bit sick of the sight of them class 66s. They only come in 3 colours and all.. EWS maroon and gold, Freightliner green or GBRF blue. They've also started selling them in Europe and I saw a couple of Dutch ones when I was there last.
They're OK, but not perfect. They don't like starting at temps below 35, and they're having problems with the engine mountings. The drivers seem to like hem, but think they're a bit underpowered in some situations.

EWS was created at privatisation and they got the bulk of the UK freight business. It's been reasonably sucessfull, and they're quite agressive at trying to get more freight back onto the rails.

[Simon Reed]

The ALCo will intially be used in service on the Nene Valley Railway - www.nvr.org.uk/ - as an additional member of their diesel fleet.

A feature of the UK railway preservation scene is that preserved locomotives often move from their home bases for "guest" visits to other railways and this may be an option.

This, however, is running before we walk, and there is a LOT of time, effort and, of course, money to be expended before we get to that point. Right at the moment simply getting the group off the ground is proving troublesome due to a variety of factors but I hope to have a press release, backed up by an operational website and a binding constitution, in place shortly.

The Class 66 is pretty much ubiquitous in this country now. All four of the principle UK frieght operators own at least several, and more are on order for a fifth operator. I think their operation, and the status of the UK railfreight market, has been covered earlier in this topic.

I'm not a railwayman but as I understand it they are favoured for their reliability and relatively low running costs but are disliked for their lack of acceleration and pulling power compared to the BR types that they have replaced, in particular the Paxman engined Class 56.

[Simon Reed]

A few links may help to explain the intentions for 804 the ALCo.

www.preserved-diesels.co.uk

www.preservedshunters.co.uk

www.railcar.co.uk

www.ukhrail.uel.ac.uk

The last, if you follow the navigation through UK Heritage Railways, might be very informative for you.

[Murphy Siding]

Simon Reed: Thanks for the links. It's pouring rain here, which gave me a lot of time to check them out.[^]



Cogload: What is a signaller? Maybe we call them something different here?

Thanks

[owlsroost]

signaller/signalman/signalwoman(UK) = interlocking tower operator/despatcher(US)

signalbox(UK) = interlocking tower(US)

Tony

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

In Brian Solomon's excellent book "Locomotive" , there is a short chapter about the EMD Class 66 locomotive. It seems to be somewhat of a British version of an SD-40 with double ended cabs. The book says that Ed Burkhardt (of Wisconsin Central fame) came to control the English, Welsch & Scottish Railway. He purchased 250 Class 66 locomotives for EW&S, starting in 1998. Are these locomotives familiar to any of you Brits? I'm curious how they are performing. What about EW&S? I've not heard that name before, has it been succesful?

Thanks

The original EMD freight locomotives for the UK, the class 59, was indeed an SD40-2 with cabs on each end, and a 16-645E3B engine and conventional trucks.

The class 66 uses the same body as a class 59, but uses a 12-710G3 engine (the same engine as an F59PHI), and radial trucks (similar to, but modified from those of an SD70M) and uses narrow gauge traction motors of type D43, while the older class 59 used D77 motors, like US locomotives.

I've lost track of the EW&S class 66 numbers, but I thought they now have more than 300, and the next big operator, Freightliner, have about 100 units. These numbers alone make these the biggest class of locomotive since the class 47 which numbered 512.

EW&S is the biggest freight operator in Britain, having taken over most of the former BR freight traffic, Freightliner getting most of the remainder.

M636C

[owlsroost]

The Class 66 also have a lower-rated AR8 alternator - basically they are general purpose/fast freight locos rather than heavy-haul (which the original class 59's and the ex-BR class 60's are used for).

The basic idea was to keep the weight down to maximise the route availability and allow the biggest possible fuel tanks to be fitted (a '59' has 4500 litre fuel tanks, a '66' has 6500 litres). They also have design top speed of 85 mph versus 60 for the '59' - but lower tractive effort of course.

EWS have 250 class 66 (plus six class 59's), Freightliner about 100 (some of which are a lower-geared, high tractive effort variant) and other operators about another 30.

Tony

(and I agree with the other UK members about the boredom factor when almost every freight train these days is hauled by a '66'......)

[Murphy Siding]

How common are the Class 66's? Are you meaning 90% of the freight trains? What other diesels are still common on freight trains?


Thanks

[Hugh Jampton]

Common as muck they are.

Here's a list of basically what's what on EWS;
http://www.railfaneurope.net/list/uk/uk_ews.html
There are a couple of other classes operated by some different operators, i.e. DRS have a few Class 20s and some other odballs.

[owlsroost]

The proportion of freght trains hauled by 66's is probably more than 95%.

In US terms, it's like every freight train being hauled by a single (quiet, well-muffled) identical modern EMD loco, with only a very occasional old GE or Alco loco for variety (and then only if you are in the right area).

Tony

[Murphy Siding]

I see what you're saying. It looks like EWS goes to great extremes to make all their diesels look alike too.

You mention that most freight trains are hauled by a single loco. What factors determine this? Weight,length,speed,or general amount of freight to be hauled? Around here, it's always 2 or more locomotives on a train. Even switchers(shunters) that run near my house hauling rocks from a quarry run in pairs. Three to five is much more common. A couple days ago, I saw a train come through with 10 locomotives on the head end of a mile long train of empties! That was,of course, the exception-probably just moving locos back to the main yard.



Thanks

[owlsroost]

QUOTE: You mention that most freight trains are hauled by a single loco. What factors determine this? Weight,length,speed,or general amount of freight to be hauled?

The length of passing loops, yards, terminals etc limits train lengths (and hence weight) so a single 3000 hp loco is normally sufficient. Occasionally trains are double-headed but it's unusual - I can't remember the last time I saw one here....

Tony

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Lucky thing for the British "establishment" that they were able to shun American technology vs. having to *embrace* the technology of the Third Reich[;)]

Ironically the Deltic engine was developed from an opposed piston two stroke engine originally developed in Germany. Likewise the now defunct British motorcycle maker BSA copied the design of the two stroke engine used in its highly successful "Bantam" model from the German firm DKW. As has already been mentioned, the Maybach engines used in the Western Region's diesel hydraulics were made under licence by Bristol-Siddeley, part of the Hawker Siddeley group. Brush, who built the Sulzer engined
class 47's also used Maybach engines in a couple of prototype diesel locos they built in the 1960's.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Oh well-water under the bridge. Didn't the Royal Navy have any other diesel experience that could be used for locomotive engines? Why didn't the actual production of engines go to someone with longtime engine building experience-Avro,Rolls Royce, Bristol, etc?

Quite a few Naval engines have been used in rail applications. The Deltic engine was also used in Motor Torepdo Boats (MTB's). In the 1960's the Navy shared the development cost of the Paxman "Valenta" with British Rail and the Navy still use the Valenta in a variety of ships. Alsthom also used in some diesel locos they built recently for Syria and Iran - one of the reasons being that its good power to weight ratio meant they could offer a loco with a ligher axle weight than the competition, which was a significant consideration for these countries.

[M636C]

Tulyar,

The recent Alstom locomotives for Syria and Iran use the Ruston RK215, which is a scaled down version of the old English Electric RK and V series, and while similar in size and power, is heavier than the Valenta. These were used because the US Government would not allow the export of EMD engines to these countries. Similar locomotives in Israel and the UK (class 67) use EMD 12-710 engines.

The Valenta has been largely superseded by the VP185, a smaller but faster running engine. All the Valentas in the Australian XPT trains have been replaced by 12VP185 engines, and a few are under test in HSTs.

M636C

[Tulyar15]

Yes, I know about the VP185. I've also seen the two HST Power cars that have been re-engined with MTU engines several times recently. They really are quiet. If GNER re-engine their HST's with this engine they really will be stealth trains!

I'm surprised about the export restrictions concerning EMD engines. Back in the 1960's a lot of EMD powered locos were built in Sweden and exported to quite a few countries including Communist Hungary. I believe the former Yugoslavia bought a lot of GM locos directly from the US.

[Isambard]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

Yes, I know about the VP185. I've also seen the two HST Power cars that have been re-engined with MTU engines several times recently. They really are quiet. If GNER re-engine their HST's with this engine they really will be stealth trains!

I'm surprised about the export restrictions concerning EMD engines. Back in the 1960's a lot of EMD powered locos were built in Sweden and exported to quite a few countries including Communist Hungary. I believe the former Yugoslavia bought a lot of GM locos directly from the US.

I photographed new looking GM/EMD locomotives at the Belgrade railway station in the mid '80's, without being challenged. Not the case several days later, when an impressively uniformed security guard stopped me as I tried to take a photo of a beautifully restored steamer from the early 1900's standing on a display track at a small local station.
[:)]