Class 50 why fifty.

[ba14eagle]

Personally, you could never have too many EE locos of any class - especially 50's - when there were far too many 47's   

I will get my coat.

[brushman47544]

I had 47500 with an HST rake and generator van from Bristol TM to Paddington on 10 October 1987. Departure from TM was about 6pm. Had been to see Bristol City v Southend.

 

You were unlucky. As often as not when I saw the set it was being hauled by a 47/0. Was very peeved one day when it rolled into Paddington with 47360 on the front, which then disappeared off to OC. Never did get 47360 for haulage.

[The Johnster]

Personally, you could never have too many EE locos of any class - especially 50's - when there were far too many 47's   

I will get my coat.

 

I'll help you on with it.  My view is that the order for 50 otherwise unnecessary DP2s with less reliable control systems was short termist on the part of LMR, who to be fair were in a bit of a hole having promised a reduced journey time from Glasgow to Euston and then had the electrification delayed for 5 years; there were no type 4 diesels, DP2 included, that could work in multiple to provide the interim service, and few enough with electric heating.  They dumped the wastes of space on to the WR as soon as the electrification was complete and Class 87s were hauling the trains, because the WR's otherwise perfectly good Westerns could not be fitted with ETH or airco.  The 50s were in no way superior to the equally problematic but ubiquitous and easily manned and repaired away from home 47s, and not in the same league as a Western.

 

Having helped you on with your coat I will now don my tin hat and get my head below the parapet...

Edited June 2, 2018 by The Johnster

[Flood]

I'll help you on with it.  My view is that the order for 50 otherwise unnecessary DP2s with less reliable control systems was short termist on the part of LMR, who to be fair were in a bit of a hole having promised a reduced journey time from Glasgow to Euston and then had the electrification delayed for 5 years; there were no type 4 diesels, DP2 included, that could work in multiple to provide the interim service, and few enough with electric heating.  They dumped the wastes of space on to the WR as soon as the electrification was complete and Class 87s were hauling the trains, because the WR's otherwise perfectly good Westerns could not be fitted with ETH or airco.  The 50s were in no way superior to the equally problematic but ubiquitous and easily manned and repaired away from home 47s, and not in the same league as a Western.

 

Having helped you on with your coat I will now don my tin hat and get my head below the parapet...

Yawn. Fake news is still fake news.

[45125]

The 50s were basically ok, and would have been much better if the busy bodies at Derby had not insisted that various bits of totally unnecessary bits of electronics be fitted. Other things like the missing oil scrapper rings and lack of electric oil trimming pumps was a big mistake.  Other than D400 and D401 no 50 was delivered with multi working gear, it was wired but not fitted. When refurbished the biggest *uck up was not replacing the main generator with am alternator, if so most of them would have seen off the 47s in use on Cross Country and other linked Inter City services.

Edited June 3, 2018 by 45125

[Talltim]

Back to the original question, why 50? Why not 49 or 51? Was it a coincidence that after working out how many turns needed covering and the likely availability the maths just happened to turn out a round number?

[rodent279]

and at the time there were 4 types of train in my head beyond the really famous things like Thomas, Mallard and Big Boys

There are more?!

 

Being serious, a 50 sounds most probable if it was late 80's at Woking, though 33/47/73 are all possibilities. It could have been a South Coast-North West inter-regional, in which case a 47 is perfectly plausible, but I can't remember if they would have stopped at Woking, or even been routed that way.

[rob D2]

Used to like seeing them, but weren’t exactly successful ? Ten years after building they all had to be refurbed, another ten and they’d all gone...

 

Does the “ 50 “ relate to miles between failures ??

[Davexoc]

Back to the original question, why 50? Why not 49 or 51? Was it a coincidence that after working out how many turns needed covering and the likely availability the maths just happened to turn out a round number?

Someone must have worked out that that was what was needed for the intended rosters, allowing for exams, works and casualties. Originally they were going to be leased anyway, and they weren't class 50s, just another type 4.

 

Used to like seeing them, but weren’t exactly successful ? Ten years after building they all had to be refurbed, another ten and they’d all gone...

 

Does the “ 50 “ relate to miles between failures ??

Close, but as late as 84, 50041 was rebuilt after it turned over at Paddington. Most would have thought it would have been the first to be scrapped, but Doncaster straightened it out.

 

Once refurbished they weren't that bad, but the Southern insisted on shutting them down between moves due to the smoke generated from idling.

 

Dave

[4630]

Originally they were going to be leased anyway, and they weren't class 50s...

 

 

 

Dave

They were originally leased. They carried a bodyside plate to that effect recording ownership and that they were leased to British Rail.

 

https://goo.gl/images/jnBFAs

Edited June 3, 2018 by 4630

[jjb1970]

I quite liked 50's and thought that large logo blue 50's were amongst the best looking BR diesels, but I never understood the obsessive devotion they seemed to instil in some enthusiasts.

[PenrithBeacon]

Used to like seeing them, but weren’t exactly successful ? Ten years after building they all had to be refurbed, another ten and they’d all gone...

 

Does the “ 50 “ relate to miles between failures ??

BR reckoned on replacing its diesel locomotives after 25yrs. On that basis a heavy overhaul after 10 seems about right.

On another sub-topic there has been mention of the electronics. I think it should be borne in mind that designing electronic equipment for railway use was an extremely difficult business in the 1960s and it doesn’t come as a surprise to me that much of the stuff that was designed for the D400 class was a failure. The surprise is that BR gave up on it and didn’t persevere as GM did.

[FelixM]

Here are three photos taken in 1968 to illustrate that early in their career the Class 50s did meet steamers:
https://plumbloco.smugmug.com/Trains/Former-LMS-Lines/i-mWRqhcT/A
https://www.flickr.com/photos/12a_kingmoor_klickr/22011936856/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/12a_kingmoor_klickr/21488551403/

['CHARD]

Here are three photos taken in 1968 to illustrate that early in their career the Class 50s did meet steamers:

https://plumbloco.smugmug.com/Trains/Former-LMS-Lines/i-mWRqhcT/A

https://www.flickr.com/photos/12a_kingmoor_klickr/22011936856/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/12a_kingmoor_klickr/21488551403/

 

I have a retrospective sweet-spot for the class, after their walk-on part in the death throes of the Waverley route...

 

https://www.railscot.co.uk/img/46/919/

[JohnR]

Dont forget, the 50s double headed north of Crewe - whereas the 87s that replaced them were single locos. 

[45156]

Dont forget, the 50s double headed north of Crewe - whereas the 87s that replaced them were single locos. 

Indeed, though I also had many trips with just a single 50. and on most occsasions it didn't lost that much time, though I doubt that the point to point times were observed, and that some spirited downhill running ensued.  Many of the Polmadie drivers working North of Crewe were of the opinion that they put two 50s on in case one failed.

[The Johnster]

I had a chance to ride behind DP2 from Doncaster to York on a stopper in 1966 while staying with my big sister, 12 inches shorter than me even then (I was 14) in Selby.  The loco roared away in fine style with great acceleration and I was impressed; 10 on with the last being a Thompson CK (guess where I was riding!).  I repeated a very similar run 2 years later on the other side of England with D402 between Preston and Carnforth (guess why I was going to Carnforth in the summer of 1968); 8 on but not a noticeably better performance to my mind.  Just a noisy, though!

[MJI]

I have ridden behind quite a few 50s and they were definately quicker than 47s.

 

Better looking and sounding too.

 

I liked them.

[Gary H]

I have ridden behind quite a few 50s and they were definately quicker than 47s.

 

Better looking and sounding too.

 

I liked them.

Indeed. Time to put the record straight.

I've seen speeds from 50's that were impossible to achieve from any 47 or Western unless you dropped them off a cliff which was probably the best thing for them.

Only had one fail on me too, 50033 at Goring & Streatley in about 1983.

Even when getting on a train from Padd to Worcester behind a filthy and oily unrefurbed example (50014 in particular at the time), they would go like stink and easily reach 3 figure speeds on the level to Reading and then before Didcot before taking the avoider to Oxford.

Those who are quick to rubbish them would do well to buy the book "BR Motivepower Performance" by Martin Becket and David Clough. http://ianallanrailwaybooks.com/book/1988-br-motive-power-performance-block-bound-authors-david-n-clough-martin-beckett-published-1988/ 

It's an eye-opener and the Western men and 47 cranks would get very upset! 

['CHARD]

Indeed. Time to put the record straight.

 

I've seen speeds from 50's that were impossible to achieve from any 47 or Western unless you dropped them off a cliff which was probably the best thing for them.

 

Only had one fail on me too, 50033 at Goring & Streatley in about 1983.

 

It's an eye-opener and the Western men and 47 cranks would get very upset! 

 

Wow!!!!  Talk about light the blue touch-paper, matey!!! 

 

Not about to rise to any of these points, but 'setting the record straight,' based on one's personal experience and a single reference work, laced with the invective typical of partisan bashers is hardly designed to further objective dialogue.

 

Don't get me wrong, I didn't mind a fifty turning up on a train when I was courting in East Devon during the mid eighties, but we didn't need 53 of them to be preserved.  

[Gary H]

 

 

Not about to rise to any of these points, but 'setting the record straight,' based on one's personal experience and a single reference work, laced with the invective typical of partisan bashers is hardly designed to further objective dialogue.

 

 

Hardly, since it contains entries and timings from the late and highly respected fella on locomotive performance from O.S Nock. How more 'real' do you want it?  

[Davexoc]

A good one could be quick, but when it came to breakdowns, I saw more main generator flashovers, instances of low power, flat batteries and major engine failures than the 47s. I certainly rode a few to Slough light loco test run on night shift that had been in for attention.

 

Dave

[TravisM]

I remember back in the early 80's, there was a evening peak Padd-BTM service which was rostered with a pair of Class 50's to cover a HST diagram as the deliveries of these were taking longer than expected.  It departed from platform 8 which had the straight routing onto the down fast and I believe the first stop was Swindon.  I remember travelling on it once and from what I recall, it departed Paddington like a scalded cat, with a very spirited run and I don't think it's arrival into Bristol was that much later than the booked HST working.

[jjb1970]

To answer the question, they multiplied the square root of reliability by the total mileage the type was meant to cover minus cost of spare parts to the power of the chairman of EE’s annual salary and arrived at 50.

[The Stationmaster]

Indeed. Time to put the record straight.

I've seen speeds from 50's that were impossible to achieve from any 47 or Western unless you dropped them off a cliff which was probably the best thing for them.

Only had one fail on me too, 50033 at Goring & Streatley in about 1983.

Even when getting on a train from Padd to Worcester behind a filthy and oily unrefurbed example (50014 in particular at the time), they would go like stink and easily reach 3 figure speeds on the level to Reading and then before Didcot before taking the avoider to Oxford.

Those who are quick to rubbish them would do well to buy the book "BR Motivepower Performance" by Martin Becket and David Clough. http://ianallanrailwaybooks.com/book/1988-br-motive-power-performance-block-bound-authors-david-n-clough-martin-beckett-published-1988/ 

It's an eye-opener and the Western men and 47 cranks would get very upset! 

 

I well remember the first full Summer Saturday of Class 50 working on the West of England.  At Westbury over the course of the day we had 14 (yes, fourteen) Class 50 failures where the failure had to come off and be replaced by something else.  Fortunately we had a quite a lot of Type 4s available on the stabling point because there were no stone trains on Saturdays but we eventually ran out of 1000s and class 47s and screamed for help from anywhere we could get it - which led to us getting a couple of locos sent over from Bath Road.

 

By late afternoon all we could do was hope that some of the failures had calmed or cooled down sufficiently to be put back out to replace the latest ones coming off.  Never anywhere in my entire railway experience did I come across so many loco failures in traffic, let alone of a single Class, on one day and it was well atypical of a Summer Saturday where there were often a few failed locos to replace.  Pre rebuilding and simplification the 50s had become a menace by the time they got to the WR but they were fortunately considerably improved once they'd gone through the rebuild/modernisation programme, still not marvellous but definitely improved.