British Railway Operations

[Simon Reed]

Very few 9F's made 10 years. It's sobering to think that in my neck of the woods by 1963/4 5 year old 9F's were being withdrawn at the same time as 50 year old Raven-designed Q6's.

One of the huge mistakes made in the BR dieselisation programme was a failure to anticipate changes in the broader economy and a severe underestimation of the impact of road haulage.

To this end literally thousands of low horsepower shunters (switchers, or yard goats) were built to switch small yards and industies at local stations. Much of this traffic was already being lost to roads in the 1950's and many of these locomotives were obsolete from construction.

http://www.preservedshunters.co.uk/ gives an overview of some of these classes.

Murphy - yes, I've been back at work for three whole days which has prompted me to book my next break. 4 days based in Antwerp at the end of March, which should be sufficient time for me to ride my last bits of passenger track in both Belgium and Holland.

I'm hoping that your delightful president and congress don't murder Amtrak before September/October as I'd like to cover a few more routes, and some old favourites, before what seems to be the inevitable end of Amtrak as I know and love it. Otherwise I'll just have to come across earlier.

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

<snipped> Britain, by moving much slower in transition, it appears, was rewarded with a bigger variety of diesels-to the delight of railfans, no doubt. <snipped>

Murphy, the Brits started much later, but they made the same mistakes made by American Railroads. They bought a large number of untested types and paid for their mistakes by having to replace some of them before their time, rebuild many more to obtain merely mediocre results, and just plain scrap a few models. The British fans may have been pleased, but the Briti***reasury sure wasn't. If fact this failure of dieselisation to improve financial results contributed to the Beeching route cutbacks of the 1960s. And they scrapped many nearly brand new steamers before their time. None of the Class 9Fs were very old.

[Murphy Siding]

Good golly Simon, you're right. I must be getting daft. I've been following the rolling controversey on the steam vs. diesel thread. It's apparent that US railroads furloughed a lot of fairly new steam just to get in on the diesel bandwagon. Britain, by moving much slower in transition, it appears, was rewarded with a bigger variety of diesels-to the delight of railfans, no doubt. I see from an earlier post, that you went back to work on the 6th, after some well deserved time off. Hope you got to relax.

[Simon Reed]

Murphy - I think the short answer is no.

There were British diesels of all sorts of different power ratings, abilities and intended purposes. There are plenty of publications dealing with this and when I think of some I'll let you know.

British builders tended to look to Europe for inspiration, on the rare occasions that they bothered to research anything, despite the fact that the Irish had so despaired of UK products that they turned to GM.

Have we not touched on this a few months ago?

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH

After the experience and expense of maintaining the OP engine, I would find it unlikely for any North American road to be interested in the Deltic.

I quite agree. It sounds like 50% more maintenance that a Fairbanks-Morse opposed piston locomotive! From my perspective, it almost seems that American diesels were built as workhorses, British diesels were built as racehorses. Differing products for differing needs. Did the experiences of earlier built American diesels affect the design of later-built British diesel designs?
Thanks

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

After the experience and expense of maintaining the OP engine, I would find it unlikely for any North American road to be interested in the Deltic.

[Anonymous]

I've never read of the prototype Deltic going to the USA or Canada and thats something that the books would keep quiet. On the other hand it is suprising that English Electric built this very expensive loco that could capable of running in America or Canada on the off chance. Does any one know if any Arican railroad were actually interested in an engine like the Deltic.

Cogland, i work in Network Rail train planning and i could not think of anything to add to your discription of the process, really brilliant.

[Anonymous]

Murphy - each company has a track access agreement with Network Rail and this system forms part of it. How they pay the fines may vary - i.e. the next time the Agreement is negotiated it maybe reflected in higher access charges. NR also pays the TOC on TOC delay to begin with and then claws it back from the operator later as the passenger franchises are basically asset free shells and if they were liquidated the revciever/ adminstrator would have nothing to sell. IF delays occur on a strectch of track and have no knock on effect anywhere else and were caused by the Train Operator then no penalty maybe paid. I wil have to check on this. When I worked for Canadian National...er...sorry EWS we had a stretch of line in the North West which was ours and nothing else used it; so unless it was an infrastructure fault and caused late arrival at the customers terminal or late presentation at a junction any delay had a nil effect. Incidentally PLANNED engineering work which results in speed restrictions etc is paid for under a entirely different schedule; schedule 4 .

IF I were a customer of EWS I wouldn't bloody well care. It is up to the Freight forwarder to manage the relationship; however some of the bigger customers (ex Royal Mail, Powergen and the likes) have a very vested interest in what goes on and they can afford to scrutinize the performance of both infrastructure provider and the haulier. I can remember more than a few times when the Mail got very very exasperated with the antics of Railtrack; one memorable occasion when the then infrasrtucture provider decided on a christmas possession on the Euston Lines blocking the Mail's major terminal at Willesden; without telling EWS or informing the Mail as a courtesy. As you may imagine words were said in various shell likes.

If I were a customer I will want a quote and know when my train will arrive. Nothing more then sign the contract. It will be up to the EWS team then to manage thier supplier.

I am a signalman in an Absolute Block Area so I just pass em on when the train is asked for. But in major PSB areas then yes; trying to work out the best regulation can cause stress but then that is (partly) what you are paid for.....it is not the MAIN aim of the job. It is to see evreybody and everything safely through your area and that any work done on the track is done safely etc etc etc. SAFETY and working by the Rule Book Brother.

[Murphy Siding]

cogload: Thanks for the explanation. You have a way with words that makes me smile! From a distance, the system you describe sounds like a big,confused mess. Are you sure the complexity of the system itself, doesn't push more freight to the roads? It would appear, that if my freight train had the mis-fortune of breaking down at the wrong time, it could block the wrong patch of track at the wrong time, and cost a million dollars(pounds) in a hurry. Does all the complexity of the system add undue stress to a signaller's job?
Thanks

[Anonymous]

Murphy - we dont have dispatchers here like you do in the States. Basically every train is timetabled.

Here is a basic rundown:

In a nutshell - the Train Operators (both frieght and Passenger) put bids in to Network Rial for paths. Notwork Fail er...sorry Network Rail then produces the timetable and IN THEORY this means that every train should run smoothly if they are on time with a sea of green signals before them. Of course things do not happen quite like that. Both passenger and frieght operators can put in for VSTP (Very short term plan) moves which is basically on the day and STP moves (Short Term Plan) which is basically 24hrs beforehand. These are then timetabled alledgedly using any white space available.

Incidentally as HMG runs the train operators and decides what timetable can and can't be run then some parts can be very rigid. When the railways where first "privatised" there was a procedure in place that train operators could bid for each others paths every 8 weeks - bloody hell.

Under Schedule 8 of the Railways Act 1994 there is enshrined a performance regime. This is a kafkaesque piece of stupidity. Every train is measured against point to point timings at certain sections along its journey; and any delay against those times above a certain threshold has to be attributed. So there are people whose (well paid) purpose in life is to attribute the delays. Penalties are then paid - they can be against the infrastructure provider; reactionary delay (i.e. against another operator) or what is known as TOC on self. The penalties paid range from say £20 a minute on a little used branch to an eye watering £300/min on some London Commuter Routes (Thameslink was at this level - not sure if it still is). For each delay a series of codes is allocated and in some respects this is quite a useful system; you can tell for example how many minutes delay a points failure accrued and how much "it cost" both literally and metaphorically - so it can help target investment better. This system called TRUST (has various other uses) is alos used for Performance Figures which are issued by the government and governs a complex system of fines and bonuses for the passenger train operators.

As a result there are various regulation procedures which are laid down for the signallers in various boxes to follow although the main rule is the least overall delay. So, if you have a longer distance train running late and a commuter service with a very tight turnaround at the termini on time the longer distance train may get regulated to follow this.

That is one reason why early running freight (except for the former Royal Mail Traffic which used to first on the timing graph) is frowned upon; if it delays a passenger train behind say (or any on time train) then the delay maybe attributed to the signaller. So if it is at all possible they are looped until thier correct path comes available; if they are late then they wait their turn unless a path is available at that time. Then looped to let other trains pass. That is, of course if the infrastructure is there for looping.

I hope that sheds some light. Others may add or possibly contradict.

[Anonymous]

The rewire wouldn't necessarily be a problem - the Llangollen Railway managed to rescue a "Peak" that was in worse shape (46010). Apparently the electrical cabinet on this loco was almost completely empty when purchased, and the rest of Deltic is probably in better shape too. Interesting to hear that the DPS have the right power units as spares - I do wonder if they're planning to suggest a full restoration job as they've already done a full survey of the loco.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

cogload: Thanks for the info. Does a dispatcher somewhere have to try and fit all these freight trains of differing speeds in among passenger trains? I had assumed that all trains would have to be moving at relatively the same speed.

Thanks

Sometimes a slower train will be sidelined in a loop or siding to enable a faster train to overtake it. On lines controlled by modern panels this is fairly easy to do as the signaller/despatcher can see where all the trains are but on lines such as the Settle and Carlisle with good old fashioned manual signalboxes this requires more co-ordination and teamwork on the part of signallers.

[Tulyar15]

I think in principle "Deltic" could be restored to working order but she'd need a complete re-wire as a lot of her cables were cut. Also her engines have no pistons! They were an earlier version of the Deltic engine (Mk 2 as opposed to Mk 3 used in the production Deltics) but I believe the Deltic Preservation Society have obtained a pair of Mk 2 engines. (at one of the open days at Barrow Hill, they also had a 1950's racing car with a Mk 2 Deltic engine in it - very cool!)

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

beaulieu: I finally got time to watch the DVD you sent me. Many thanks. My only regret was that there wasn't more narration. The countryside looked a lot like eastern S.D. It appears that German freight trains run at a pretty good clip.

British Railway question: If freight trains run in the same blocks as passenger trains, what type of speeds do they run, in order to stay *out of the way*?

Thanks

For a European Cab Ride video it is positively chatty. Most have zero narration just on screen station names. If you were paying attention you will note that the opposing trains appeared in a vary specific order, first an Express Passsenger train, then a Local Passenger train, then a number of Intermodal trains, followed by the manifest freights, and then the cycle repeats. What happens is that leaving Offenburg to the south the Express Passenger will pull away from the following convoy and catch up to the previous convoy at Freiburg where an across platform connection can be made with the Local Passenger of the previous convoy. The Express will lead its new convoy out of Freiburg, and they will stream out in the same order. Not every slot will be filled in every convoy, and as you saw sometimes the best laid plans go bad.

In Britain every train is carefully pathed, all overtakes are calculated along with planned running times. The fast Expresses have fairly tight paths as they are assumed to be able to better maintain planned running times, Locals have slightly broader paths since with more stops and slower speeds the occupy more track capacity. Freights take even more capacity especially as they get slower. By far most British lines are at least doubletrack except for branchlines.

[Murphy Siding]

cogload: Thanks for the info. Does a dispatcher somewhere have to try and fit all these freight trains of differing speeds in among passenger trains? I had assumed that all trains would have to be moving at relatively the same speed.

Thanks

[Simon Reed]

Matt - I think the DPS looked at the protype Deltic a few years ago more in hope than expectation.

I doubt if the will or the finances are there to return Deltic to traffic. It's pretty well known that she was originally withdrawn due to a catastrophic engine failure. As you've said, it's not a straight power unit swap from the production Deltics and that's just a start.

I've not been to Shildon yet despite it being relatively close to me, but everything I hear impresses me and against the odds it seems to be attracting the punters so maybe at the moment the Big Blue Deltic is in the right place.

Tulyar15 - I could'nt bring to mind whether or not she'd gone to Canada when new, but I knew that English Electric built her as a demonstrator for the export rather than the home market, hence the cyclopean headlight amongst other things.

[Anonymous]

Murphy - there are several classes of freight train. Every train which runs in the UK has a headcode for identification reasons as everywhere else. The Freights are classed as basically:

1. Up to and inc 100MPH (Parcels traffic)
4. Up to and including 75MPH (Intermodal stuff)
6. Up to and including 60 MPH (Majority of freight)
7. Up to and including 45MPH
8. Up to and including 35MPH
9. Have you got all day? (Unfitted - now doesn't run...but you NEVER know)

Speed depends on a varitey of factors inter alia axle load, weight and clearance. The TOPS machine will give a class depending on the consist so you can have coal trains which run at Classes 4,6 and 7.

Class 9 are now Eurostar trains (RATHER NIPPY) tho Virgin did run a 9 before Christmas as a trial which got a few of us to get the rule books out to look up the bell code.

I am sure others will add thier tuppence. I see one two freights a week; class 6 fuel tanks full and their discharged return.

[Anonymous]

What's the current status of Deltic by the way? Last I heard was that she'd been lent to the DPS and was undergoing a survey to see what was missing. I do know that they can't simply bolt in spare power units from a production Deltic as the baseplates are different and the NRM won't allow them to be modified. I know it's a piece of history but I for one would far rather see her back on the main line even if it involved some minor internal modifications.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed

Just read Beaulieus' comments. I forgot about LNER 4496, ("Dwight D Eisenhower") which he mentions.

If you're including preservation SR 926 "Repton" and SR (ex LSWR) M7 class 53 were also preserved in the US for a while. Both have been repatriated and "Repton" has been a regular - and very loud - performer on one of my local preserved railways, the North Yorkshire Moors.

In Canada are LNER 4489 "Dominion of Canada" and SR (ex LBSCR) "Terrier class 654 "Waddon."

These are all steam locomotives, and I've just thought of a diesel!

BRE-Leyland RE004, a prototype RDC, went to the US as a demonstrator in the 80's although I can't remember where.

Did the prototype Deltic ever go to Canada? Any offers before I have to look it up?

Alas No! English Electric tried to drum up interest in Canada, but did not get sufficient interest to justify shipping it out there. So it ended up in the Science Museum in London; it is now on display at "Locomotion" the National Railway Museum's outstation at Shildon, Co. Durham.

Cogload - thanks for the update re St. Blazey

Happy New Year to everyone, I'm back at work to-day having been on leave since 23rd December.

[Murphy Siding]

beaulieu: I finally got time to watch the DVD you sent me. Many thanks. My only regret was that there wasn't more narration. The countryside looked a lot like eastern S.D. It appears that German freight trains run at a pretty good clip.

British Railway question: If freight trains run in the same blocks as passenger trains, what type of speeds do they run, in order to stay *out of the way*?

Thanks

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed

No work for me until Friday 6th, but to make up for that I've just got myself out of bed after a delightful bout of food poisoning!

A question maybe best answered by Beaulieu. I've read somewhere recently (don't recall where) that SP had some U25B's re-engined by Sulzer in the 1970's. Actually it's three questions:-

1 - Were these the standard 12LDA28 units as applied to classes 44-47 in the UK?

2 - What was the outcome of the experiment? Obviously Sulzer never became a major player in the US Railroad market but are we talking failure or abject failure?

3 - Why? I know that the U-Boats never scored highly on the reliabilty stakes but re-engining a batch with an untried product (in the US) seems a little drastic.

The engine used in the US rebuilds was the Sulzer AS type, a much more recent design than the LDA which dated back to the mid 1930s. I think the SP rebuilds used a 12 cylinder, and a 16 cylinder was used in some AT&SF SD45 units. I understand that they worked well enough but the maintenance costs were too high, partly due to the high cost of spares. These engines were similar to the LVA type used in the Brush class 48 and the Kestrel (they were a vee-type rather than the twin crankshaft LDA), but were somewhat heavier.

The GE FDL engine tends to develop cracks in the crankcase after a long period of service and needs to be replaced either by a new engine of the same type (or a different type if so preferred). This is one reason so few U series locomotives are still around, while 40 year old SD40s are very common.

M636C

[Murphy Siding]

Hi Simon Reed! I just read something about those units,but had to do some looking to find where. Morrison-Knudsen rebuilt 4 U25Bs in 1978 for Southern Pacific. About the best thing that any book says about them, is that they were painted in a snazzy adaptation of SP's orange "Daylight" colors, and refered to as "posicles".
According to " The Diesel Spotters Guide", they were repowered with 8-cylender turbocharged 8asl 25/30 engines, rated at 2800 h.p. They did not hold up under U.S. operating conditions, and were soon retired. Another source GE Locomotives / 110 Years of GE motive Power, notes that they served out their days on a flat section of track in Oregon. Perhaps, there is a clue there about what didn't work?
From what I gather, it appears that M-K was trying to get into the business of rebuilding non-EMD locomotives with engines from a source other than EMD.

[Simon Reed]

No work for me until Friday 6th, but to make up for that I've just got myself out of bed after a delightful bout of food poisoning!

A question maybe best answered by Beaulieu. I've read somewhere recently (don't recall where) that SP had some U25B's re-engined by Sulzer in the 1970's. Actually it's three questions:-

1 - Were these the standard 12LDA28 units as applied to classes 44-47 in the UK?

2 - What was the outcome of the experiment? Obviously Sulzer never became a major player in the US Railroad market but are we talking failure or abject failure?

3 - Why? I know that the U-Boats never scored highly on the reliabilty stakes but re-engining a batch with an untried product (in the US) seems a little drastic.

[Anonymous]

Happy new year to you all on here as well. Finished 8:30Am on New Yrs day after a run of highly entertaining night turns.

Having a few beers and back to work tomoorow afternoon; so no rest for the wicked.

[owlsroost]

OK, thanks for the info.

Tony

(and lots of snow here in Canada - just come back from a long snowshoe walk - no trains up here in Algonquin Park though......Happy New Year ! )

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: [i]Originally posted by owlsroost[

Thanks for the info Beaulieu.

From the information I have, there is no difference between the Class 59/2s and the earlier subclass in tractive effort - just allowed top speed, so I presume the gearing is the same (but I don't have a definitive answer).

Do modern DC-drive EMD locomotives have individual power control to each axle (for wheelslip control) ? - I thought the class 60's were relatively unusual in having DC-drives with separate excitation for each motor.

Out of interest, do GE and EMD locomotives with AC-drives have per-axle or per-truck invertors ? - I read somewhere that one manufacturer uses one invertor per truck, the other one per axle.

(apologies for getting a bit techy - I design (non-railway) electronics for a living, and hence have an interest in the engineering side of railways).

Tony

(Off to Canada for 2 weeks in a few hours - hope to get in a bit of railfanning along the way - so Happy New Year to everyone!)

Separate motor excitation is no longer unusual all modern US locomotive have that what the Class 60 introduced is separate excitation of the field windings from the stator. Normally the field and stator are wired in series. With regard to the AC locomotives GE uses one invertor per axle, while EMD uses one invertor per truck.

[owlsroost]

QUOTE: Originally posted by beaulieu

Ok, what I am going to talk about is based upon the modern US diesels type EMD SD70s, GE Dash9s, and especially their AC traction counterparts. I don't know if the same applies to NA export locomotives as this is optional according to customer desires.

Since, except for Amtrak, North American Railroads are oriented towards bulk or heavy haul transportation, the manufacutrers are offering the current microprocessor equipped locomotives with the control systems set up to produce a fixed amount of tractive effort for each throttle position rather than a fixed amount of horsepower. With this system the Engineer (Driver) does not have direct control of diesel engine speed, rather he sets a target and the locomotive control computer system attempts to find the most effiecient combination engine power output, Traction Generator Field Strength, and Traction Motor effort, to produce the desired results. This results in what was formerly a wheelslip control system becoming instead a portion of the of the Traction Management System. Instead of just being a system to stop a spinning wheel by reducing power it will transfer the power from the slipping wheel to the other wheels in an attempt to maintain total locomotive tractive effort, also since the first wheel to spin is most commonly the lead axle the systems will typical apply slightly less power to that axle to prevent problems. Further with both EMD and GE now using creeping traction control both companies have the systems setup to run the lead axle run at a slightly higher creep rate to "dress" the rail surface. With 3-phase AC traction motors the system works even better with more precise control of motor speed.

With regard to Class 66 versus Class 59 wheelslip, the Class 66 should have less problems with weight transfer and similar mechanical problems due to lower motor torque until the Class 66 reaches its minimum continuous rated speed, which since the power available for traction is the same will be a higher speed than for the Class 59. BTW do you have the gear ratio for the various subclasses of Class 59s? Somewhere I read that there was no difference between the Class 59/2s and the earlier subclass inspite of the fact that they are rated at 75 mph versus 65 mph. for the earlier subclasses. Reportedly it is just where the overspeed is set.

Thanks for the info Beaulieu.

From the information I have, there is no difference between the Class 59/2s and the earlier subclass in tractive effort - just allowed top speed, so I presume the gearing is the same (but I don't have a definitive answer).

Do modern DC-drive EMD locomotives have individual power control to each axle (for wheelslip control) ? - I thought the class 60's were relatively unusual in having DC-drives with separate excitation for each motor.

Out of interest, do GE and EMD locomotives with AC-drives have per-axle or per-truck invertors ? - I read somewhere that one manufacturer uses one invertor per truck, the other one per axle.

(apologies for getting a bit techy - I design (non-railway) electronics for a living, and hence have an interest in the engineering side of railways).

Tony

(Off to Canada for 2 weeks in a few hours - hope to get in a bit of railfanning along the way - so Happy New Year to everyone!)

[Anonymous]

tul. 15 - the roundhouse at St Blazey itself is now Industrial units; however the turntable is still in use.

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

From a non-mechanical mind: Couldn't the Class 66's be upgraded with new anti wheelslip technology?

It has the same system as EMD's newest DC motored power. A bigger problem is the fact that the locomotive is quite light by US standards. However it is as heavy as the British network is designed to accomodate. I still feel that it is the software for the Wheelslip system that is to blame. Remember that these were built when EMD was owned by GM who were very weak in customer service. As I recall the BN SD70MACs went through 40 or so variations of their software before finding an acceptable level of performance. EMD is still tweaking the system under the need to compete with the performance of GE's locomotives which are unanimously considered stronger pullers.

[Murphy Siding]

From a non-mechanical mind: Couldn't the Class 66's be upgraded with new anti wheelslip technology?