RMweb Gold daveyb Posted December 20, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 20, 2011 The nose gangway doors were specified on all pilot scheme diesels and were continued on production locos in many cases. Clearly they saw little use as they were discontinued in design, blanked off and sealed and later engineered out. I have a number of questions (some of which may have been covered before for which I apologise)... What was the original need? I assume tandem working before all the clear up and standardising of coupling codes, but steam locos had to work tandem (as opposed to mu) and the was no need for the connection - the only steam corridors were the LNER ones and were carriage size - so was it a Union requirement, steam heat requirement, early distrust of new machines, assumption? When did they get taken out of service? i.e. how quickly were they considered unnecessary? The intro dates of non-gangway loco designs indicates by when the design requirements were changed, but how quickly and why was the decision made they were unnecessary? Leading on from that, why did some designs carry on so long with the gangway design? I'm guessing some of the later production early design locos may even have been supplied with doors welded up e.g. 25s, 27s, 31s. The later batches of some designs were real lash ups (22, 29, 45), were the 4 digit headcode boxes a key factor or had the decision been made earlier? (argued against the 25/27 shape that is an odd situation to get to) Lastly, for the moment, what happened to the connection equipment? My first trip in a cab of that sort was in a refurbished 45 in '84 and obviously no trace existed by then. Did the equipment stay or was the valuable space quickly used up? Many of you manage to post excellent photos to back up the info and it would be interesting to see some. I have only seen these modelled once on a pair of 24s (probably dating back to Hornby 25 conversions as it was in the 80s!) Some of the current batch of early diesel would suit it well. The Metro-Vicks almost always seemed to have them on the Condor runs, for example. Thanks in advance. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 TWhat was the original need? I assume tandem working before all the clear up and standardising of coupling codes, but steam locos had to work tandem (as opposed to mu) and the was no need for the connection - the only steam corridors were the LNER ones and were carriage size - so was it a Union requirement, steam heat requirement, early distrust of new machines, assumption? I don't know if this is the real answer, but my understanding was that it allowed a single crew to attend to both locos (pop back and make sure the beasty is behaving itself etc), but the majority of the time would be spent in the leading one. The need to actually go back and look at the other loco was exceedingly rare though. With steam locos you had no choice but to have a driver and fireman on each loco, so they wouldn't really need to move from one to the other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Deltic Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Gangways might have been useful if the boiler on the leading loco shut down with a fault and the second man needed to get access to the second loco to fire up the boiler with the train still moving. He would more than likely then stay onboard to monitor the boiler. It might also have been useful if the loco's were suffering severe wheelslip and the second man needed to take control of the second loco to help get the situation under control. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonspecial Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 As good a reason as any for sealing up the gangway doors if they were not going to be used was probably to combat draughts. Most of the early diesels had ineffective heaters and the draughts through these doors or any other gaps was the reason for the vast ammount of masking tape seen along all the joints in the cabs of most types. This had to be split each time a panel needed moving and the tatty tape used to get covered with a new layer. Not a particularly neat or pretty sight! Certain drivers would have a great heavy overcoat, or sacks or newspaper over their legs in an effort to keep warm in winter. I believe the last place gangway doors were used on loco's (D63XX Class 22) working in multiple was in Devon and Cornwall around 1968-70ish. I remember seeing a report in a magazine of society journal around about those dates. I think it was unusual and may have been done specially for an open day, possibly St Blazey. So even this may have been by then a one off. One other point was that these gangways were low and narrow and not easy for anyone of any size to get through! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 I suppose a pertinent question would be, when the doors were welded shut, was the general practice to leave the gangway bellows behind in situ or remove them? Presumably removal might give more space for "stuff" down there (for certain values of stuff), but at the end of the day this was just dead space presumably? Never actually explored the cab of a formally fitted loco or indeed seen a photo of that area so I could be havering again... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold daveyb Posted December 20, 2011 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 20, 2011 Having seen pictures of locos gangway type design in works taken much later, I think you are correct that the bellows were removed (in the end or immediately) and in some cases during refurb, etc e.g 45s the area had additional or new equipment put in place. There are pictures in BREL Locomotive Works by John Vaughan, OPC 1981 which show many different views of doors in various states, 25s, 31, 37s and 40s with their doors open yet 26s, 27s and other 25s with them not just welded, but plated and removed. No bellows visible. All these views are TOPS era. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think the Class 31's had the space used for air brake equipment when fitted, saw one with doors removed and there was an awful lot of white pipework behind them! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMJ Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 In one of the locospotters annuals from the 1960's had an article about the Condor freight when it was operated by pairs of 28's. There are some comments about moving between locos but I can't remember why.I would need to dig it out from the big bookcase and not sure which year to look in so it might take some time....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 If they left the bellows in place, wouldn't it either have got in the way while they were trying to weld the doors, or possibly caught fire during the welding? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted December 20, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 20, 2011 . Hi Folks The only Class 45s to actually have the doors fitted when built were D11 to D16 - whatever they became in TOPS, sorry I only do proper numbers! The remainder of the split box locos lacked doors as built. Class 44s of course all had them - but none on 46s Kind regards Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium keefer Posted December 20, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 20, 2011 just watched 'D&E on 35mm' this afternoon and there's the clip of the LMS 'twins' 10000/10001 being coupled up to the train.not only do the locos have their gangways connected, but the rear loco's one is showin being connected to the train gangway!(presumably some sort of adaptor was used)i believe they were usually used in multi on the 'royal scot', but were there any ECML non-stop services like 'the flying scotsman' that would require a crew change en route? or was it just an easier way for the secondman to get the crew's dinner? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium QWILPEN Posted December 20, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 20, 2011 intresting thread, question I have is are there any photos showing engines with the nose doors open? please ecuse spelling mistakes as one of my cats is sleeping on the keyboard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonspecial Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Hi Just a thought, how compatible were the connections between two different types otherwise able to work in multiple. Looking through a few books, not that many photos able to confirm but could imagine compatibility between Class 24/5/6/7 also D6XX and D6300-5 (unclassified and Classs 22). Another question were S.R. design 10201 & 10202 the only diesels retro fitted. Did I see somewhere D5705 is last remaining loco in existence still so fitted? Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium keefer Posted December 20, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 20, 2011 a couple of ones i can remember off-hand, gangways in use http://www.flickr.co...157622602429982 http://www.flickr.co...157622477890057 EDIT: just saw paul's post. i presume they were an 'standard' design for all locos, but there might be problems between 2 different locos, regarding the end 'throw' around curves? (i.e. different lengths/bogie centres etc) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 If you could couple the gangway on something ike a Stove R to a conventional coach then different types of loco shouldn't be a problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25901 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Did I see somewhere D5705 is last remaining loco in existence still so fitted? Paul Hi Hope this helps D5500 did have connection equipment and doors D335 Doors D5061 Doors (equipment ?) D5054 Internal doors only (outer doors plated over) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium BR60103 Posted December 21, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 21, 2011 Just looking through the Eagle Book of Trains (pub, 1953). 10000/1 are shown with "door for making connection to gangway of train corridor". 18000 (gas turbine) has apparently no nose doors. 10100 (4-8-4 diesel mechanical) has a big radiator covering the whole front end. American diesels and electrics of the time all seem to have nose doors. Blank ends were fitted with full gangways (usually). The initial locomotive sets were sold as single locomotives. Access would be needed for a crew member to attend to all the early problems that diesels had, especially as they were operated with only a single crew, not a crew per unit as steam locos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 10100 (4-8-4 diesel mechanical) has a big radiator covering the whole front end. I woke up in a sweat at the time that was posted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan76 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 I remember the Locospotters' piece about the Condor. The connecting doors were used because the author was riding with an inspector in the lead cab of the rear loco. No obvious reason why they couldn't have got into the rear cab of the lead loco. I suspect it was a journalistic device to make the piece a better read - it is a goof description of having the squeeze and contort yourself to get throught doors! Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Hello all, IIRC it was so that the fireman could go and attend to the steam heat boiler on the train loco and also use the water scoop on Diesel locos that were fitted with them. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonny777 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 There is a video clip of a pair of BRC&W Type 2s (cant remember if they are 26s or 27s) on a freight over the S&C with the doors connected, but that is the only one that comes to mind. I think it is on a Marsden Rail video, possibly the one which covers Leeds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonspecial Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 intresting thread, question I have is are there any photos showing engines with the nose doors open? please ecuse spelling mistakes as one of my cats is sleeping on the keyboard Book W R Diesel Hydraulics Bradford Barton 1974 has photo of 6330 for scrapping a Swindon Works in 1971, with doors open and bellows connection extended. Doubtless there are other photo's out there, this was just one I remembered! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold daveyb Posted December 21, 2011 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 21, 2011 There are pictures in BREL Locomotive Works by John Vaughan, OPC 1981 which show many different views of doors in various states, 25s, 31, 37s and 40s with their doors open yet 26s, 27s and other 25s with them not just welded, but plated and removed. No bellows visible. When was the no more use necessary decision? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 When the production batch of Deltics were being planned, consideration was given to fitting them with gangway doors so that, amongst other things, the non-stop London-Edinburgh run could be continued. I reckon the decision to abolish gangway doors in diesel locos was made during early 1960. By the way, I've never seen a picture of a Peak with their gangway doors connected to anything. Regards, Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigeonspecial Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 As good a reason as any for sealing up the gangway doors if they were not going to be used was probably to combat draughts. Most of the early diesels had ineffective heaters and the draughts through these doors or any other gaps was the reason for the vast ammount of masking tape seen along all the joints in the cabs of most types. This had to be split each time a panel needed moving and the tatty tape used to get covered with a new layer. Not a particularly neat or pretty sight! Certain drivers would have a great heavy overcoat, or sacks or newspaper over their legs in an effort to keep warm in winter. I believe the last place gangway doors were used on loco's (D63XX Class 22) working in multiple was in Devon and Cornwall around 1968-70ish. I remember seeing a report in a magazine of society journal around about those dates. I think it was unusual and may have been done specially for an open day, possibly St Blazey. So even this may have been by then a one off. One other point was that these gangways were low and narrow and not easy for anyone of any size to get through! Paul Photo of D6307+D6339 in Cornwall "all joined up", May 68 in Issue 5, Sep 2008 Western Power, Dartwest Publishing. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.