British Railway Operations

[Isambard]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Isambard

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

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

Thanks for posting the link Matt. A fascinating story. They were obviously pushing the envelope, to use an aerospace expression.

[:)]

PS: Was the leader hand fired or mechnaically stoked by that poor blessed fireman?
How did the driver and the fireman communicate - electro-mechanical telegraph?

[Anonymous]

Level crossings are not uncommon here - the main difference is that all main line ones here have to have lights and barriers, so ending up on the tracks is difficult. There's an interesting situation near me where a narrow-gauge steam railway has just the flashing lights while the standard gauge main line next to it has both lights and barriers. I'm not sure that it's a cultural thing - I see plenty of idiots who take no notice of their surroundings when on foot or in a car so I suspect the barriers prevent a higher accident rate.

The particularly sad part is that narrow gauge lines don't have to have barriers but face the same risks. The difference being that a full-size loco will usually shrug off an impact while the narrow gauge will be seriously damaged along with the crew. The Romney Hythe and Dymchurch Railway (they use 15in gauge large-scale replicas of full size locos) have lost two loco drivers in recent years due to people ignoring the crossing lights.

[M636C]

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

With regard to the D600 Warships, some time ago there was a letter from a former North British employee which suggested that originally 30+ D600's were to have been ordered. But problems with the first one and the fact that the D800 Warships had a much better power to weight ratio resulted in the order for D600s being cut to 5 locos and instead NB got an order for some D800's using the MAN engines originally ordered for the D600's.

Talking of North British , I understand most of the MAN engines used in the diesels they built were built by NB themselves under licence. But I read somewhere that after NB went bust the Scottish Region bought some genuine German MAN engines to try and make the D6100 class more reliable. Can anyone confirm this? In due course some of the D6100's were rebuilt with the same Paxman engines that had been tried out in D830. But I believe the D6100 that got into to Barry scrapyard was one that was not re-engined.

I just checked my copy of "The Diesel Impact on British Rail" by R M Tuffnell, published by MEP (the Institution of Mechanical Engineers) regarding NBL and MAN. It doesn't actually say that the ScR bought German engines but it does say that they had much more difficulty with corrosion than the WR, so it follows that they would need new crankcases which would only be available from MAN themselves. Whether they bought complete engines or assembled them from German parts the result is the same. It is indicated that the Blue Pullmans always had German built engines. NBL built 33 D800s. This was easy because the original V200 had been designed to take either the Maybach or MAN engines interchangeably.

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

[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

With regard to the D600 Warships, some time ago there was a letter from a former North British employee which suggested that originally 30+ D600's were to have been ordered. But problems with the first one and the fact that the D800 Warships had a much better power to weight ratio resulted in the order for D600s being cut to 5 locos and instead NB got an order for some D800's using the MAN engines originally ordered for the D600's.

Talking of North British , I understand most of the MAN engines used in the diesels they built were built by NB themselves under licence. But I read somewhere that after NB went bust the Scottish Region bought some genuine German MAN engines to try and make the D6100 class more reliable. Can anyone confirm this? In due course some of the D6100's were rebuilt with the same Paxman engines that had been tried out in D830. But I believe the D6100 that got into to Barry scrapyard was one that was not re-engined.

[Murphy Siding]

On a fair number of the threads on this forum, there is news of yet another train hitting yet another car at a grade crossing.[V] As I understand it, level grade crossings (for autos over railroad tracks) are much less common in Britain(?) Could one of you Brits expand on that subject a little? Thanks

[Isambard]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

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

Thanks for posting the link Matt. A fascinating story. They were obviously pushing the envelope, to use an aerospace expression.

[:)]

[Anonymous]

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

[Isambard]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed

There's a book by Kevin Robertson called "Leader - Steam's Last Chance."

I don't own a copy but I have another Robertson book with a photo of the second "Leader" in it.

It was 95% complete, but had never steamed, when the decision was made to abandon the Leader project. As a result it was towed almost straight from works to scrapyard, and was broken up in June 1951.

Not so! The first Leader WAS steamed, and undertook a number of test runs. But even if the purely technical problems with it had been over come, there were more fundamental problems. For instance the poor fireman had to work in an enclose compartment amidships, which got intolerably hot even in winter. The purely technical problems included the fact that the boiler was offset to one side of the frames and so a complex arrangement of balance weights was needed.

Although British Rail quickly scrapped the Leader project, the above problems did not deter Bulleid from persuading the Iarnrod Eireann (the Irish Republic's state owned rail company) to build a similar loco, intended to run on peat in 1955. Like the leader it was an articled loco with two power bogies - 0-6-6-0T - with each bogie having 3 cylinders and Bulleid chain valve gear. But whereas the Leader had a cab at each end, like a diesel loco, the turfer burner had a central cab with lots of windows where both driver and fireman were positioned. But the turf burner was no more successful than the Leader and after Bulleid's retirement it was scrapped in 1965. By the time it had been built IE were already buying lots of diesel locos; Bulleid being unconvinced of the advantages of diesels was making a last ditch attempt to persuade IE to stick with steam.

Are there any photos of the Leader available on-line?

[:)]

[Simon Reed]

A question of tautology!

The first leader certainly was steamed - my comments were a transcript of a photo-caption of leader 2.

Steam Railway Magazine tends towards the "Print first, Check the facts later" school of journalism; this has caused great embarrasment to a good friend of mine in the past, and doubtless others besides.

Having said that - there's probably far more than a grain of truth in they say in Matt's report.

Doncaster Works, to name but one, used to build two or three more loco's than were actually specified, but not erect them so there was always a set of ex-works spares. I'd be surprised if this extended to frames though.

There are also photo's from the North British Queen's Park Works showing enough drag boxes for at least SEVEN D600 series "Warship" diesels, when only five were built!

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed

There's a book by Kevin Robertson called "Leader - Steam's Last Chance."

I don't own a copy but I have another Robertson book with a photo of the second "Leader" in it.

It was 95% complete, but had never steamed, when the decision was made to abandon the Leader project. As a result it was towed almost straight from works to scrapyard, and was broken up in June 1951.

Not so! The first Leader WAS steamed, and undertook a number of test runs. But even if the purely technical problems with it had been over come, there were more fundamental problems. For instance the poor fireman had to work in an enclose compartment amidships, which got intolerably hot even in winter. The purely technical problems included the fact that the boiler was offset to one side of the frames and so a complex arrangement of balance weights was needed.

Although British Rail quickly scrapped the Leader project, the above problems did not deter Bulleid from persuading the Iarnrod Eireann (the Irish Republic's state owned rail company) to build a similar loco, intended to run on peat in 1955. Like the leader it was an articled loco with two power bogies - 0-6-6-0T - with each bogie having 3 cylinders and Bulleid chain valve gear. But whereas the Leader had a cab at each end, like a diesel loco, the turfer burner had a central cab with lots of windows where both driver and fireman were positioned. But the turf burner was no more successful than the Leader and after Bulleid's retirement it was scrapped in 1965. By the time it had been built IE were already buying lots of diesel locos; Bulleid being unconvinced of the advantages of diesels was making a last ditch attempt to persuade IE to stick with steam.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed

If those stories came from Steam Railway - the Enthusiast press equivalent of the Sport / Weekly World News - you can probably dismiss them....

Roughly translated for our American hosts: It's like the National Enquirer

Please expand on that explanation, if you could. Do they report Elvis look-a-like babies parachuting onto train platforms? I'm having a hard time visualizing a Railway publication with low credibitity(?) Thanks

[Hugh Jampton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed

If those stories came from Steam Railway - the Enthusiast press equivalent of the Sport / Weekly World News - you can probably dismiss them....

Roughly translated for our American hosts: It's like the National Enquirer

[Simon Reed]

If those stories came from Steam Railway - the Enthusiast press equivalent of the Sport / Weekly World News - you can probably dismiss them....

[Anonymous]

That wasn't uncommon from what I've heard - I recall reading that the frames for another batch of locos (not sure if it was the "Clan" class or the A1) got as far as the first set being built before the order was cancelled, the frames were then dumped behind the works and eventually cut up. I've also read somewhere that "Duke of Gloucester" recieved the trailing truck intended for a Clan that was never built. Not sure how accurate these are, I think they came from a copy of "Steam Railway" I read a few years ago.

[Simon Reed]

There's a book by Kevin Robertson called "Leader - Steam's Last Chance."

I don't own a copy but I have another Robertson book with a photo of the second "Leader" in it.

It was 95% complete, but had never steamed, when the decision was made to abandon the Leader project. As a result it was towed almost straight from works to scrapyard, and was broken up in June 1951.

[germanium]

OVS s - Leader -IIRC, 6 were ordered, 2 built, 2 started but not finished, other 2 cancelled. The fireman's compartment was in the middle - he probably knew what Hell would be like if he ever went there. They used sleeve valves (I have a photograph showing an old Atlantic 4-4-2 running with these valves).
. Innovative idea, but too late in the steam era to be worth persevering with, and also when the railways were taken over by the government standardised designs were favoured, small classes were not .

[Anonymous]

what Bulleid was aiming for with his chain drive valve gear was a fit and forget valve gear that could be entirely enclosed in an oil bath along with the conecting rod, crank and crosshead assembly for the middle cylinder. How it worked was a three throw crank shaft was connected by two quadraplex chains to the crank axle. The crank shaft had two links coming off each throw, one running vertically up to ossilate the expansion link and the other running forward to the bottom of the combination lever. The expansion link and the top of the combination leaver being connected by a short radius rod. The arranrangement formed a square with crankshaft at the bottom righ corner, expansion link top right corner and the combination link connecting the top left and bottom left corners. The best way to really explain it though is with a diagram.

Malcolm, IMHO the Merchat Navy's were much better looking before rebuilding that after.

[Murphy Siding]

Could one of you mechanical types please explain to us non-mechanical types,what the difference is in a Bulleid type valve gear? Thanks

[John Bakeer]

What about OVS's Leaders then? Now they were something else, I believe only two were built. I seem to remember a "Loco Profile" or some such was published about twenty years ago.

[germanium]

The rebuilt "Merchant Navy" class were IMHO one of the most handsome machines to run on British rails (rather like the Midland "Duchess" class (also a Pacific). The overall conclusion on the Bulleid Pacifics would seem to me to be "great boilers, shame about the rest".
Townsend is right about some of them not being rebuilt, but I believe this was more to do with lack of interest in rebuilding steam locomotives with a short limited life, rather than any virtues or otherwise of the original valve gear.

[Simon Reed]

Rather prosaically, I seem to recall that another problem with the valve gear on the unrebuilt examples was sheer inaccesibility.

Despite that I think both versions were fine looking. I've not had time to find decent photo's to paste, sadly.

[mhurley87f]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Townsend

There is a picture of Bulleid Chain drive in "British Pacific Locomotives" by C.J. Allen, a very good book but very English. There must be a picture of it on the web somewhere as it is a very difficult gear to describe, but if you see a diagram of it all becomes clear. It cannot have been all bad as BR did not bother rebuilding all the Bulleid pacifics and the unrebuilt ones lasted to the end of steam and several unrebuilt ones still run with the gear.

IIRC, in his book on Bulleid's Pacifics, Winkworth (or was it Brinkworth) stated that a conscious decision had been taken to retain a number of unmodified West Country / Battle of Britain locomotives for the peak summer trains on the ex Southern Railway North Deven and North Cornwall branches, whose axle loading limits would have precluded the use of the Modified members of the class.

Martin

[malcolmyoung]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH

At the risk of opening up a can of worms, what exactly was OVS Bulleid's chain-driven valve gear, and how successful (or not) was it?

It was basically three miniature sets of Walschaert's valve gear driven by a chain from the driving axle and all enclosed in an oil bath. Problems were caused by the chain stretching which didn't do the valve events any good, and the supposedly oil tight casing leaking oil onto the track causing the drivers to slip. All the Merchant Navy class were eventually rebuilt but not all the Battle of Britain/West Country class were rebuilt and a few are preserved in their original form. The rebuilds consisted mainly of fitting three sets of conventional Walschaert's valve gear and removing the semi-streamlined shrouding, making them a lot better looking locos in my opinion.
Malc.

[Anonymous]

There is a picture of Bulleid Chain drive in "British Pacific Locomotives" by C.J. Allen, a very good book but very English. There must be a picture of it on the web somewhere as it is a very difficult gear to describe, but if you see a diagram of it all becomes clear. It cannot have been all bad as BR did not bother rebuilding all the Bulleid pacifics and the unrebuilt ones lasted to the end of steam and several unrebuilt ones still run with the gear.

[Anonymous]

I suspect the problem with the Bulleid valve gear was just that it was ahead of its time. Judging by the information I found here http://www.semg.org.uk/steam/mn_01.html there was nothing inherently wrong with the design, it just took rather more care and attention than could be provided.

Yellow ends were brought in (if I remember rightly) due to the new diesels being a lot quieter than steam. A steam loco at speed made a lot more noise giving MOW crews time to get off the line, but a diesel could appear with very little warning.

[Murphy Siding]

A photo and caption from an old magazine reminded me of some discussion we had on here a time back. From the August 1996 issue of Railfan & Railroad magazine: "Wisconsin Central painted the first loco for its English,Welsh & Scottish lines in U.K. The 37057 [i]Viking[/] (left) was just out of Totton shops on April 23,1996. The Class 37's are the "Alco PA's" of England".
A little blurb later in the magazine mentions that the units "have been painted .......with safety-mandated yellow ends", something I didn't know.
I do believe the railroading roots run a little deeper in Britain, than in the U.S.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

At the risk of opening up a can of worms, what exactly was OVS Bulleid's chain-driven valve gear, and how successful (or not) was it?

[John Bakeer]

There are more LERTS in Stockport thanks to emigration from Yorkshire.
Who are you Hugh? I've a feeling that I've met you.

[John Bakeer]

Cushion cars in UK were known as Shock Vans & Wagons. The body was shorter and mounted on spring dampers within the vehicle frames in order to absorb the shocks caused when the slack was taken up when starting a train of loose coupled stock.
To day all stock is close coupled using screw links as in passenger stock.therefore snatching is no longer a problem.

[Simon Reed]

916 is my count from the Industrial Railway Society's most recent list and will vary, I'm sure, between loco's used on a regular basis and rusted frames which will never move again.

Many of the 15" loco's are based, more or less, on prototypes from standard gauge, whereas others are strictly freelance. A 15" gauge working loco is a fair size and would'nt really constitute a model.