British Railway Operations

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.)

[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.

[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]

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.

[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).

[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(]

[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 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.[;)]

[jchnhtfd]

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

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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?

[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.

[John Bakeer]

Hi Myrphy,
The leader was able to utilise its entire weight for adhesion hence its great power.
Simon answers most of your question and you have hit the rest with yiur note of the 17th. cooking the fireman and melting the shovel was due to my use of the English SOH to illustrate the point about the very high temperature endured by the poor tallow pot.
Now the communication? I wonder? My curiosity is aroused, more later!

[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

[Simon Reed]

Ah. No, the fireman was'nt totally enclosed and we can see him in thrash position in Matt's link.

Posted first, checked later. Sorry chaps!

[Simon Reed]

This communication riddle is interesting and all I can immediately assume is that it was done by bells, in the same way that Autotrains, Railmotors etc. used to work.

Was the fireman totally enclosed? A fireman needs to either know the road or be guided by the driver, so how did the fireman know where he was?

[Tulyar15]

Murphy Siding - I think I can explain. On the Leader loco the fireman worked in a central cab, and had to hand fire. Even in winter the fireman's cab got intolerably hot. During a summer heatwave the crews simply refused to work the Leader. As for communication between driver and fireman, I do not know how this was meant to be done.

On the turf burner built in Ireland, both driver and fireman worked in a central cab which took advantage of the more generous loading gauge in Ireland (Which results from their wider gauge, 5' 3") which had lots of (openable!) windows.

Thought was given to converting the Leader to oil firing (it could have used waste oil out of automobile gearboxes etc) but this never happened. Mechanical fiiring was also consider and a mechanical stoker was fitted to a Merchant Navy Pacific loco. But this needed finely ground coal and the dust from this got into passenger cars and upset passengers, particularly Pullman cars (which the Southern had a lot of!) so this was soon abandoned too.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by John Bakeer

Re. Leaders.
My memory was awakened by the article re-produced by the SR group. I believe the shape was inspired by the early ppost war electric main line loco's.
Their power to weight ratio was phenominal, but unreliability and their tendency to cook the fireman and melt his shovel (they were hand fired) meant extended trials did not happen nor were any conclusive results achieved.
John B.

John: I don't quite understand the statement about th enfiremanand his shovel. Can you explain? Thanks

[John Bakeer]

Re. Leaders.
My memory was awakened by the article re-produced by the SR group. I believe the shape was inspired by the early ppost war electric main line loco's.
Their power to weight ratio was phenominal, but unreliability and their tendency to cook the fireman and melt his shovel (they were hand fired) meant extended trials did not happen nor were any conclusive results achieved.
John B.

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

QUOTE: Originally posted by M636C

The D6100s rebuilt with the Paxman Ventura (An official Royal Navy report said the best feature of the Ventura was that the Admiralty hadn't had to pay for its development) were fitted with central four character headcode panels, so it would be easy to tell if the Barry loco had been rebuilt.

M636C

I'm fairly sure the D6100 that got in to Barry scrapyard still had the discs, so it would have been an unrebuilt.

Ah the Blue Pullmans - I remember seeing them at Paddington when I was very young. We also had two Tri-ang OO guage models - one in the original Nanking Blue and one in the later BR Corporate Pullman livery (ie reverse blue and grey).

I have a set of model Blue Pullmans in the later scheme. I remember seeing them in storage at Old Oak Common, and riding in the prototype HST in those colours. I prefer the original colours, particularly before the yellow ends, but I never saw them like that. They were the first "modern" train, at least the first after the late 1930s.

M636C

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M636C

The D6100s rebuilt with the Paxman Ventura (An official Royal Navy report said the best feature of the Ventura was that the Admiralty hadn't had to pay for its development) were fitted with central four character headcode panels, so it would be easy to tell if the Barry loco had been rebuilt.

M636C

I'm fairly sure the D6100 that got in to Barry scrapyard still had the discs, so it would have been an unrebuilt.

Ah the Blue Pullmans - I remember seeing them at Paddington when I was very young. We also had two Tri-ang OO guage models - one in the original Nanking Blue and one in the later BR Corporate Pullman livery (ie reverse blue and grey).

[Hugh Jampton]

Bullied was trying to disguise it as a diesel as he could see that steam was on the way out and wanted something modern looking..

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

Yes, for a picture of the first Leader on one of its outings, see:-
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/leader/leader.htm

Any particular,mechanical reason that this locomotive took on this sort of bread loaf shape,instead of a more traditional steam locomotive look? Thanks

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure, but one of the pages on the Semg website talks of blow-back being a risk which would suggest to me that it was hand-fired, as a mechanical stoker would usually have a cover plate of some sort surely? As for how the crew communicated I have no idea - something like a ship's telegraph would seem to be in order but there's no mention of such a thing. They may have relied on hand signals or whistle signals to co-ordinate.