RMweb Gold TravisM Posted September 11, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 11, 2017 I know several members of BR built class 42 Warships MU'ed together from time to time but I wonder if ever both BR built Class 42's and NBL Class 43's ever did? As both builds were white diamond multiple unit fitted, in theory they could work together but in practise, did they ever? Julian Sprott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEDDYBEAR D9521 Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 I know several members of BR built class 42 Warships MU'ed together from time to time but I wonder if ever both BR built Class 42's and NBL Class 43's ever did? As both builds were white diamond multiple unit fitted, in theory they could work together but in practise, did they ever? Julian Sprott Yes they did there's a shot of D861 and D868 working together on Padd - Penzance service on the Rail online photo site taken in 1970. Cheers Gareth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEDDYBEAR D9521 Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Little bit more info on Mu'ed working there was in the mid to late 60's only 18 class 42 Warships fitted and 3 class 43 Warships left with these fittings for MU'ed working. Cheers GARETH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark alden Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 In the Rail Online picture 861 has no MU so it would be in tandem with the 2nd loco. Also the date is wrong as 868 was working on the Southern that weekend, or the 2nd loco isn't 868. I suspect this was more of a positioning move rather than anything else... 2C20 was the 17.10 Plymouth - Penzance local... http://www.rail-online.co.uk/p634483962/h5c14a698#h5c14a698 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25901 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) Having a standard multi working system can be hit and miss even with blue star. I've seen two 40's coupled together and 2000hp went one way and 2000hp went the other followed by lots of four letter words Edited September 28, 2017 by 25901 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEDDYBEAR D9521 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 In the Rail Online picture 861 has no MU so it would be in tandem with the 2nd loco. Also the date is wrong as 868 was working on the Southern that weekend, or the 2nd loco isn't 868. I suspect this was more of a positioning move rather than anything else... 2C20 was the 17.10 Plymouth - Penzance local...http://www.rail-online.co.uk/p634483962/h5c14a698#h5c14a698 D861 is one of NBL Warships that still had its MU in 1970 there is a photo of it at Exeter I've seen with the MU still in place one of only 3 Class 43 at this time. Cheers Gareth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEDDYBEAR D9521 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) This a Rail prints photo D861 Exeter Dec 1970 Edited September 17, 2017 by TEDDYBEAR D9521 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D860 VICTORIOUS Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 IMG_0138.JPG This a Rail prints photo D861 Exeter Dec 1970 Looks more like a 42.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Definitely a 42. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 21, 2017 One must exercise caution here. There are many photos of two Warships leading a train and the WR authorities diagrammed 2 x 8xx on the better West of England expresses for a time. Some workings were definitely one of each: a 42 and a 43. But unless it is possible to see mu pipes connected or an empty second cab beware. The "inside" engine may well have been in tandem (with its own crew driving) rather than in multiple (two locos driven as one by a single crew). For modelling purposes it's ok to couple the two types together just as it is to couple most other types assuming each was individually driven. For the gathering of historical records and a precise representation of a given working - beware. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 21, 2017 IMG_0138.JPG This a Rail prints photo D861 Exeter Dec 1970 Yes, am sure theres a discussion elsewhere about the correct ID of this loco - will look up tonight if no-one else gets there first! Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Yes, am sure theres a discussion elsewhere about the correct ID of this loco - will look up tonight if no-one else gets there first! Phil If the Dec'70 date is correct I think it'll be D867 Phil. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Andy Kirkham Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 21, 2017 If the Dec'70 date is correct I think it'll be D867 Phil. I wonder if the date is correct. I thought D867 was the last MSYP Warship and became blue in September 1970. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 21, 2017 If the Dec'70 date is correct I think it'll be D867 Phil. I wonder if the date is correct. I thought D867 was the last MSYP Warship and became blue in September 1970. Can see why someone might think D861, it was in a similar mess at the end of its MSYP existence Funnily enough Nidge that's exactly what I dredged out of my grey cells over lunch! Andy - if the number is wrong what is chance date might be too I wonder? Cheers Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D860 VICTORIOUS Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Yes, am sure theres a discussion elsewhere about the correct ID of this loco - will look up tonight if no-one else gets there first! Phil I vaguely recall seeing in the "comments" section of this picture a correction by Martin Street,i.d.'ing the loco as Zenith.Couldn't see the comments section when I last looked... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david ellis Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Class 43 857 http://trainsferriesbuses.co.uk/857-cardiff.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/86020500@N06/7915674910 https://www.flickr.com/photos/124087962@N08/26529663795/in/photolist-oGnQQr-3JzEDs-cZP6J3-4iZajK-GqksLt-QHHEdJ 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertcwp Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 (edited) Why stop at two Warships together? D860_D823_D819_Exeter_1A39_7-9-68 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr Edited September 30, 2017 by robertcwp 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D826 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 (edited) Why stop at two Warships together? D860_D823_D819_Exeter_1A39_7-9-68 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr Superb image Robert - would have sounded spectacular. I have memories of combinations with three on the front coming through Dawlish. In all these posts my fave, D826 seems conspicuously un photographed. A few images of Jupiter in Strath wood hydraulic books and of course in the Book of the Warships. Best regards Matt Wood Edited October 1, 2017 by D826 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now