British Railway Operations

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M636C

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

Tony, I'm in Mid Wales (pretty much in the old Radnorshire, close to the border).

Regarding the HST power car numbers, these were a little more complex - 41001 and 41002 were the prototype pair (painted grey with a blue band at window height, and a very different nose design to the production version - 41001 survives at the NRM but 41002 went to the breakers in the 90's after extensive usage by the R&D department of BR). The standard production examples were Class 43. While numbered as sets rather than individual locos and stock, the prototype carried 252001, production sets carried 253xxx and 254xxx numbers (the main difference being the type and number of coaches).

Trust me, despite looking different, 41001 and 41002 were renumbered as 43000 and 43001 by 1975, when I travelled between them from St Pancras to Derby as part of the Engineering Conference excursions celebrating 150 years of railways. They mistook me for someone important and I was in a VIP car with free drinks! At Derby, 43002, the first production car, was on display, still with its black window stripe which was replaced by Rail Blue before it entered service. So I have photos of the first three HST power cars with the same number series photographed on the same day! The first two both got departmental DB series numbers before 41001 went to the museum. So I'm not making this up, I was there!

M636C

I stand corrected - My main source was/is a book titled "HST Silver Jubilee" which didn't mention this! They did mention the black window stripe on the first production power car though. Nice going in getting into the VIP car by the way!

[Tulyar15]

Nowadays the Royal Navy use the same Paxman engine as powers the HST's

On the subject of class names, when BR revived the practice of naming locos in the mid 1970's (Dr. Beeching having ended the practivce 10 years before) the class 50's were given Warship names that had previously been carried by the "Warship" diesel hyrdraulic locos (Classes 42 and 43) which by then had been scrapped. But somehow the 50's never became known as Warships and were still known by their nickname of "Hoovers" (the sound they make when they're idling); railfans still associated the name "Warship" with the diesel hydraulic class (two of which have been preserved).

Other class names were the "Western Class" of diesel hydraulics were all the names started with the word "Western" eg "Western Enterprise" (popular with Terkkies no doubt!) , "Western Pathfinder" etc. (They were TOPS class 52 but never carried 5 digit numbers) Then there's also the Peak class diesel electrics. These 140 ton leviathans were the heaviest diesel locos to operate in Britain. The ten prototypes had 2,300hp Sulzer engines and were named after mountains in England and Wales. The production version had uprated (2,500hp) engines and were mostly un-named but a few were named after British Army regiments. Under the TOPS scheme the 10 prototypes became class 44, the production batch either 45 or 46 depending on what make of traction motors they had.

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Wow! 5 replys from 4 posters! I feel like I hit the jackpot!
Now that I see that the class #'s are broken down in relation to their reletive horsepower, it does make a lot more sense. I couldn't figure out how a country could be so proud of Spifires,Hurricanes,Lancasters and such could come up with a name as exciting as "Class 37".

Now then,is Napier the same engine company that produced Napier Saber engines for *I think* Hawker Tempests? The ones that overheated so much? Maybe it was the Typhoon(?) but I thought they had Merlins in them.

Funny you should mention the success of Deltic engines in marine applications. I recall that F-M had built it's reputation on marine applications. I read too. that some Alco diesel engines still live on in those type applications also.

One last thought-How often did the engines get switched out in a Deltic? Was it after so many hours, or only when there was a problem?

Again- Thanks

Yes the Napier Sabre was a 24 cylinder horizontally opposed engine, with two crankshafts geared together, one above the other giving a "H" shape engine of 2400HP. It was used in the Typhoon and Tempest and was proposed for the slightly smaller Fury, but the Bristol Centaurus radial engine was used in those and the later Sea Fury.

Napier also built the amazing Napier Nomad, a twelve cylinder horizonally opposed diesel (like half a Sabre) arranged as a turbo-compound. the turbine that drove the exhaust gas powered turbocharger was clutched to the crankshaft to provide extra power, and the Nomad produced over 3000 HP, as well as some exhaust thrust. It was effectively a gas turbine with the twelve cylinder diesel acting as the combustion chamber. It is said to be the most fuel efficient aero engine ever built. It was test flown, but was so complex compared to a jet or turboprop that it never entered production.

My recollection is that the Navy changed out the Deltic engine between 3000 and 4000 hours, and I expect that it may have been similar for the locomotives. The opinion in the workshop was that the engines could run far longer than that between overhaul, and BR may have extended the operating life if they had good results.

M636C

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

Tony, I'm in Mid Wales (pretty much in the old Radnorshire, close to the border).

Regarding the HST power car numbers, these were a little more complex - 41001 and 41002 were the prototype pair (painted grey with a blue band at window height, and a very different nose design to the production version - 41001 survives at the NRM but 41002 went to the breakers in the 90's after extensive usage by the R&D department of BR). The standard production examples were Class 43. While numbered as sets rather than individual locos and stock, the prototype carried 252001, production sets carried 253xxx and 254xxx numbers (the main difference being the type and number of coaches).

Trust me, despite looking different, 41001 and 41002 were renumbered as 43000 and 43001 by 1975, when I travelled between them from St Pancras to Derby as part of the Engineering Conference excursions celebrating 150 years of railways. They mistook me for someone important and I was in a VIP car with free drinks! At Derby, 43002, the first production car, was on display, still with its black window stripe which was replaced by Rail Blue before it entered service. So I have photos of the first three HST power cars with the same number series photographed on the same day! The first two both got departmental DB series numbers before 41001 went to the museum. So I'm not making this up, I was there!

M636C

[Simon Reed]

The Napier company were predominantly concerned in providing engines for maritime use but it would'nt surprise me if they also dabbled in aviation.

"Deltic" is a semi-official nickname which stuck. Pretty much every bit of traction on BR and it's successors has been given a nickname, with varying degrees of officialdom,currency and obscenity. The humble Class 37 could, according to where and who you are, be a Tractor, Growler, Death, Syphon, Slug, Fatty etc..

The list really is endless.....

[Murphy Siding]

Wow! 5 replys from 4 posters! I feel like I hit the jackpot!
Now that I see that the class #'s are broken down in relation to their reletive horsepower, it does make a lot more sense. I couldn't figure out how a country could be so proud of Spifires,Hurricanes,Lancasters and such could come up with a name as exciting as "Class 37".

Now then,is Napier the same engine company that produced Napier Saber engines for *I think* Hawker Tempests? The ones that overheated so much? Maybe it was the Typhoon(?) but I thought they had Merlins in them.

Funny you should mention the success of Deltic engines in marine applications. I recall that F-M had built it's reputation on marine applications. I read too. that some Alco diesel engines still live on in those type applications also.

One last thought-How often did the engines get switched out in a Deltic? Was it after so many hours, or only when there was a problem?

Again- Thanks

[Simon Reed]

Murphy Siding - you're quite correct. The actual power unit was referred to as a "Deltic" type by Napier, as an allusion to the Greek letter Delta, which is roughly triangular.

As has been suggested by M636 the power unit was primarily intended for marine applications and was, in that respect, phenomenally successful.

Our friend Tulyar15 may tell you more as he apparently IS a Deltic, failing which you could do worse than check out www.thedps.co.uk .

Shame you're in South Dakota (which I believe is one of the four states not served by Amtrak) because on such a fantastic day for English sport I'm sure a few of us USA-o-Phile Brits could sit you down, give you some proper beer and answer any question you cared to think of!

[Anonymous]

Tony, I'm in Mid Wales (pretty much in the old Radnorshire, close to the border).

Regarding the HST power car numbers, these were a little more complex - 41001 and 41002 were the prototype pair (painted grey with a blue band at window height, and a very different nose design to the production version - 41001 survives at the NRM but 41002 went to the breakers in the 90's after extensive usage by the R&D department of BR). The standard production examples were Class 43. While numbered as sets rather than individual locos and stock, the prototype carried 252001, production sets carried 253xxx and 254xxx numbers (the main difference being the type and number of coaches).

[owlsroost]

The 'Deltics' did have high maintenance costs, but when they were being run hard on intensive, high speed schedules (i.e. what they were bought for) apparently they were cheaper to maintain than the (lower power) class 47 diesels running the other trains on the same routes - and no other BR diesel loco could touch them for high power at high speed (and they only weighed just over 100 tons too).

It was only after they had been displaced by HST's from front-rank service onto lesser trains that the economics worked against them, and BR decided that it wasn't worth keeping a small number of unique locomotives in service any longer.

Interestingly, the track forces generated by a 'Deltic' running at 100mph became the UK benchmark for acceptable track forces at high speed.

Tony

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Thanks for the clarification. I see the Deltic mentioned from time to time. On our side of the Atlantic, that's probably the most recognized British diesel. What I've read of them, the deltic name is in reference to the triangle shape formed by the 3 banks of cylenders. It would seem to me that an arrangement as such would have all the same problems that Fairbanks-Morse had with it's opposed piston diesel engines. So why did the Deltics do so good, and the F-M's do so poorly?

Thanks

The Deltic engine was built by Napier, who mainly built aircraft engines. Napier had built single bank opposed piston diesel aero engines under licence from the German "Junkers" company. The Deltic was intended for use in fast light Naval patrol boats, and the engines were made largely from cast aluminium, except for the gears, crankshafts and connecting rods. This also allowed their use in minehunting ships, where the aluminium construction reduced the magnetic signature, and combined with a wooden or fibreglass hull, gave a ship that could often avoid magnetic mines. The light weight allowed easy removal and in both the locomotive and in Naval ships, the engine was able to be removed and taken to a central workshop for overhaul after a specified number of running hours. This allowed the engines to be always worked on by experts, and by using exchange engines, the locomotive was back in service quickly. This allowed the Deltic to succeed while the F-M suffered from maintainers unfamiliar with their special features. They weren't cheap to buy or run, but the locomotives were very reliable in service, particularly since each Class 55 had two 1650HP engines, and could run on a single engine at reduced power meaning that very few complete failures were experienced. This was important, because British passenger trains rarely had more than one locomotive (before the HST was introduced).

M636C

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

So, I'm understanding that class *number* like 55 or 37 has no signifigance in itself? Class 37 doesn't signify that the engine has 3700 horsepower or anything like that?

Thanks

As mentioned earlier, the class numbers derived from the earlier "Type" numbers.

Shunting (swtching) locomotives had no type numbers, and these were given TOPS class numbers from 01 to 09

Type 1 locomotives were those with up to 1000 HP, and these were given class numbers in the range 11 to 20. The class 20 locomotives were 1000HP and were equivalent to lower power type 2 units.

Type 2 locomotives had power ratings from 1000HP to 1500HP. These were given class numbers from 21 to 30. One class, the Bru***ype 2 was in the process of being rebuilt with more powerful engines of 1470 HP, and these became class 31 (rebuilt from class 30)

There were only two Type 3 locomotive types, and these became class 33 (1550HP) and class 37 (1750HP)

The Type 4 locomotives were those over 2000 HP but less than 3000 HP and these were numbered from Class 40 to Class 52.

The only Type 5 at the time of reclassification was the Type 55 "Delic" of 3300HP.

Later locomotives of above 3000 HP were class 56, 58, 59, 60, 66 and 67

Classes 61 to 65 were avoided because these numbers were used on diesel railcars. Note that the classes were not used by railcars, but the individual railcar vehicle numbers would have conflicted with locomotives in those series.

Class 57 are class 47 locomotives rebuilt with EMD 12-645E3 engines, and these are only 2500 HP, but recieved the class "57" to indicate their origin as class 47.

The HST power cars were originally Class 41, but later 41 001 and 41 002 were renumbered as 43000 and 43001 in the passenger car series and later power cars were in this series.The trains were regarded as diesel multiple unit cars in classes 253 and 254. Even later, the "train" classes were abandoned and HST power cars (2250 HP) are now known as "Class 43" using the existing numbers in the passenger car series.

So, in general, a higher class number means a higher power, based on the 1958 "Type" number groupings.

Of surviving old classes.

Class 37 are 1750 HP
Class 47 are 2500 HP

Classes 56 to 60 and 66 and 67 are around 3000HP, except for Class 57 (2500HP).

M636C

[Murphy Siding]

Thanks for the clarification. I see the Deltic mentioned from time to time. On our side of the Atlantic, that's probably the most recognized British diesel. What I've read of them, the deltic name is in reference to the triangle shape formed by the 3 banks of cylenders. It would seem to me that an arrangement as such would have all the same problems that Fairbanks-Morse had with it's opposed piston diesel engines. So why did the Deltics do so good, and the F-M's do so poorly?

Thanks

[owlsroost]

Just to 'fill out' the UK class numbering table:

Diesel locos are in the 1x to 6x series

DC electric locos are in the 7x series
AC electric locos are in the 8x and 9x series

Diesel MU's with mechanical transmissions are in the 1xx series
Diesel MU's with electric transmissions are in the 2xx series

AC and AC/DC electric MU's are in the 3xx series
DC electric MU's are in the 4xx and 5xx series

There's also a 9xx series for special vehicles.

Tony

[Anonymous]

Railroading Brit - whereabouts in Wales. Ironically Cogloads parents are based in Radnorshire

[Anonymous]

There's no significance to the class number - they seem to pretty much pick whatever's free these days. Some locos didn't survive long enough to gain TOPS numbers even though they were allocated (for example, the D8500 "Clayton" diesels were to become class 17, but were all withdrawn due to their terrible reliabilty record before they could be renumbered).

[Murphy Siding]

So, I'm understanding that class *number* like 55 or 37 has no signifigance in itself? Class 37 doesn't signify that the engine has 3700 horsepower or anything like that?

Thanks

[M636C]

QUOTE: Originally posted by owlsroost

QUOTE: Southern Pacific I think

That's my understanding too.

Pre - TOPS, diesel locos were classified into 'Types' from 1 to 5 based on their haulage capabilities. When TOPS arrived, the type number generally became the first digit of the class number e.g. Deltics became class 55. A three digit unit number was appended to this to form the new loco number - so the Deltics went from being D9000 - D9021 to 55 001 - 55 022.

Tony

Tony

To make the example quoted a little clearer, D9001 to D9021 became 55 001 to 55 021 and D9000 became 55 022, so that the individual numbers stayed the same as much as possible.

Similarly D8001 became 20 001 and D8000 was slotted into a number left blank by an early withdrawal.

Fortunately, this logical system is still used despite privatisation.

M636C

[owlsroost]

QUOTE: Southern Pacific I think

That's my understanding too.

Pre - TOPS, diesel locos were classified into 'Types' from 1 to 5 based on their haulage capabilities. When TOPS arrived, the type number generally became the first digit of the class number e.g. Deltics became class 55. A three digit unit number was appended to this to form the new loco number - so the Deltics went from being D9000 - D9021 to 55 001 - 55 022.

Tony

Tony

[Anonymous]

TOPS - Total Operation Processing system. First introduced 1973. Bought from one of the American RR/s of the time (Southern Pacific I think...could be wrong so please advise). Green Screen Computer system. About 7 people left on the planet who know how to programme it.

Reason why it is still here - COZ IT WORKS. How many of us had so called "upgrades" which crash constantly..........

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

The class numbers were assigned under the "TOPS" computer system (it's an acronym but I'm not sure what it stands for) - before this locos were assigned numbers deriving from their HP output (I think - not sure about this as some powerful locos got low numbers). Diesels had a D prefix, electrics an E prefix. Hence you have D8000 (the first loco of what became Class 20). The nicknames derive from a variety of sources - "Deltic" comes from the design of their powerplants, "Castle" class steamers were mostly named after castles, "Warship" class diesel-hydraulics were named after Royal Navy ships. Class numbers seem to be assigned with some care (for example, electric locos tend to be from the 70s up to the low 90s, "97" was used for locos handed over to the R&D department, DMU sets tend to be in the 100s, etc).

Sounds like the numbering system was put in place to make it easier on the accounting staff?[;)]

Thanks

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by scjoines

hi the company that owns the track provide the the contral tower staff and the track maintance staff and the p[eople who owns the trains provide the rest it sometimes works and sometimes doesnt.it is get better as i work for the company that owns the track and it does sometimes fall apart when we have something go wrong.Like were i work we had someone hit by a train and other delayes by singal and other promblems but this soon get sort as we run small trains than u do in america

Scjoines: Welcome! You work for a company that owns tracks? What do you do there?
Thanks

[Anonymous]

hi the company that owns the track provide the the contral tower staff and the track maintance staff and the p[eople who owns the trains provide the rest it sometimes works and sometimes doesnt.it is get better as i work for the company that owns the track and it does sometimes fall apart when we have something go wrong.Like were i work we had someone hit by a train and other delayes by singal and other promblems but this soon get sort as we run small trains than u do in america

[Anonymous]

The class numbers were assigned under the "TOPS" computer system (it's an acronym but I'm not sure what it stands for) - before this locos were assigned numbers deriving from their HP output (I think - not sure about this as some powerful locos got low numbers). Diesels had a D prefix, electrics an E prefix. Hence you have D8000 (the first loco of what became Class 20). The nicknames derive from a variety of sources - "Deltic" comes from the design of their powerplants, "Castle" class steamers were mostly named after castles, "Warship" class diesel-hydraulics were named after Royal Navy ships. Class numbers seem to be assigned with some care (for example, electric locos tend to be from the 70s up to the low 90s, "97" was used for locos handed over to the R&D department, DMU sets tend to be in the 100s, etc).

[Murphy Siding]

Thanks for the info and links! Most pictures show locomotives as, for example: a Class 37, or a Class 101. Do the class numbers mean anything significant ? And who picked out the names/numbers? It seems a little more *classy* to be talking about Deltics,Castles or Coronations to me.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

I think the term "Sprinter" came from Holland - they were apparently the first to use it. Over here it refers to a second generation diesel railcar (these were built from the '80s onwards to replace the old first generation or Heritage DMUs, many of which have found new homes with preservation groups. The 1st generation units are the type shown on the www.railcar.co.uk website). In my experience of sprinters the ride quality and seating is far worse than the units they replaced...(rode a Class 153 recently - they don't seem designed for tall people as I felt rather like a deckchair by the end!)

[Anonymous]

OK. Here is my precis - tho other posters will of course have their own interpretation which is equally valid.

The Modernization Plan - this in essence extends back to the grouping of 1923 into the Big Four; the Government then basically capped the rates which the railways could charge. After the war and nationalisation the system was basically run on string so the govt of the time reorganised the transport system (again). One spin off was the British Railways Board and lo - they were charged with producing an investment plan which would modernise the railways and create a vibrant public service. Which the treasury would pay for. SO, this plan appeared. And to say the least it was entertaining in that "blue sky" thinking was prevalent and not a lot else. Basically the railways asked for a lot of locomotives, new track, lots of electrification and all sorts of other gubbins and in return the railways faithfully promised that there would no more deficits. This of course proved to be slightly erroneous. Anyway, a few years later and tired of the groaning deficits which the railways were clocking up the Govt brought in Dr Richard Beeching from ICI on a whopping salary who produced "The Re-shaping of British Railways". This was a report which called for inter alia, a lot of cuts and closures. SO therefore known as the Beeching Axe; Beeching Cuts. A Lot of the railway
was cut. And some of it is now being put back at great expense.Hehehehehe.

A sprinter is basically a light weight DMU train of two(or three carriages) which can be coupled to others. They were bought in to reduce operating costs on the provincial services by replacing the locomotive/ carriage fleet. The are relatively easy to maintain; easier to move when failed; produce less track wear and are more flexible. Think of a bus on wheels. And actually; they are pretty hardy.

As for frieght flows. Ah. You can run flows economically for 10 miles if you are hauling heavy tonnages and dont forget that in the tight and crowded island which we reside land is at a premium so the road netweork cannot grow exponentially to remove bottlenecks. Therefore congestion is one of rails great friends. The haul which some refer to is 6S55 the Burngullow to Irvine Slurry Tank Train. Taking china clay up to Scotland for processing into various bits and pieces.

[Murphy Siding]

Guys: I re-read some of the posts above and ran accross something else that doesn't register. What is a "sprinter"?

thanks

[Murphy Siding]

So the freight equivelant of an old Budd RDC would be able to operate singly and in multiple units? If I perceive this correctly, Each unit has 2 motors, so 6 units M.U.ed together would have 12 motors, but only 1 engineer?

Thanks

[Anonymous]

Probably the best way to picture these would be a container flatcar, with an angular cab on one end and a couple of engines fitted under the floor. I think the German version used Volvo truck engines though I may be wrong. Basically it's a freight equivelent of the old Budd RDC.

Regarding the modernisation plan, I always believed it was a case of BR spending money badly - they bought all manner of diesel locos, some of which had appalling reliability records. At the same time, they retired steam locos that were barely run in and had years of useful life left. Again, I may be wrong - this is just how it appears to me from what I've read!

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M636C

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by Railroading_Brit

The reason for the heavy truck use has more to do with the fact that many places don't have freight services - large chunks of rural Britain haven't seen freight trains for many years. Many smaller lines were also closed during the Beeching cuts of the '60s - the government of the time was of the opinion that road transport was the better option for both freight and passenger. They rather failed to spot the problem here in that we're now being told to use our cars less but often have little real alternative, especially in the areas that were hit hardest by Beeching. Interestingly we are seeing a few new efforts to haul by rail - in my part of the world there was a recent trial of Network Rail's swapbody diesel railcars hauling timber. Hopefully it'll catch on as those timber trucks are a real pain on twisting roads!

Thanks for the responce! I don't quite understand *Beeching* though. What's a swapbody diesel railcar? I like the sound of it- I sell lumber(timber) for a living.[8D]

The "swapbody diesel railcar" is a German vehicle, called a "Cargo Sprinter" in Germany. It is basically a 63' flat container wagon fitted with a driving cab and two diesel engines under the floor driving the truck axles through hydraulic transmissions. It is intended to provide economical distribution of containers within a large urban area.

Network Rail in the UK purchased two of these cars to carry various loads related to track maintenance and inspection. Because it is a standard vehicle, the deck is too high for it to carry standard containers in the UK where the clearances are too small compared to Germany. It can carry palletised loads, such as timber, as long as they fit the limited British profile. Hence the term "swapbody" used in Europe for intermodal equipment of less than container size.

We have one set in container service in Australia, where the power cars can carry two 20' boxes and they are normally used with other container wagons fitted with multiple unit cables. It hasn't found a real niche just yet, but the owners are still trying.

M636C

I'm a little bit confused:The swap body diesel car has it's own engines and cab? I didn't see them on the links provided, or maybe I didn't know what I was looking for?

Thanks