Jump to content
 

Class 50 prototype freelancing


LU_fan
 Share

Recommended Posts

50 026 Is also carrying a livery never worn by that loco in BR service, but looks great.  Sadly it wasn't able to join in the fun due to engine problems.

Withdrawn in early NSE With upsweeps I believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the original approval for ECML electrification was London to Leeds and Newcastle only, as the onward traffic to Edinburgh was not thought to be sufficient to justify the cost of electrification.

 

Under the original scheme the planned traction was a fleet of Class 89 locomotives plus a new build of Mk3b coaches, with power doors (maybe they would have been Mk3c if they were actually built) plus DVTs. As you stated the plan was for a locomotive change at Newcastle to pairs of refurbished class 50s for the journey North.

 

This was detailed in Modern Railways in 1983/84 including drawings of the class 89 looking a little different to how it was eventually built.

 

Problems identified with this plan were that the change from IC125 to class 89/Mk3b 125 mph trains might not be seen as a significant improvement from a passenger point of view, and that journey times from London to Edinburgh would be longer overall.

 

It didn’t take long for BR to submit a new proposal, which was approved, for a variant of the APT (maybe APT-U?) instead of Class 89/Mk3b and for electrification all the way to Edinburgh which was justified on the basis of expected improved passenger loading associated with shorter journey times. The APT-U became known as IC225 and the rest, as we know, is history!

 

Hope that helps

 

Cheers

 

Tom.

 

The Class 50 in Inter City swallow livery isn’t as far fetched as it might seem as there was a plan in the 80’s to stop the ECML electrification at Newcastle and re refurbish the best of the Class 50’s for services north. They would have been repainted in IC Swallow livery to match the then new Mk IV stock.

Edited by tiger
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the original approval for ECML electrification was London to Leeds and Newcastle only, as the onward traffic to Edinburgh was not thought to be sufficient to justify the cost of electrification.

 

Under the original scheme the planned traction was a fleet of Class 89 locomotives plus a new build of Mk3b coaches, with power doors (maybe they would have been Mk3c if they were actually built) plus DVTs. As you stated the plan was for a locomotive change at Newcastle to pairs of refurbished class 50s for the journey North.

 

This was detailed in Modern Railways in 1983/84 including drawings of the class 89 looking a little different to how it was eventually built.

 

Problems identified with this plan were that the change from IC125 to class 89/Mk3b 125 mph trains might not be seen as a significant improvement from a passenger point of view, and that journey times from London to Edinburgh would be longer overall.

 

It didn’t take long for BR to submit a new proposal, which was approved, for a variant of the APT (maybe APT-U?) instead of Class 89/Mk3b and for electrification all the way to Edinburgh which was justified on the basis of expected improved passenger loading associated with shorter journey times. The APT-U became known as IC225 and the rest, as we know, is history!

 

Hope that helps

 

Cheers

 

Tom.

 

 

But then of course at one point Railtrack considered de-electrification north of Newcastle, I understand on the basis that a large number of trains going north of there also went beyond Edinburgh so would have to be diesel-worked anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

If the 50s had been given alternators as was being mooted then i suspect they would have lasted a lot longer then they did....ironically however the one thing that was a downer on the 50149 experiment was the lack of electronic anti slip equipment something which was removed during refurbishment......continuous High speed running was the enemy to the 50.....the main generator simply wasn't robust enough.....and that's before we get on the subject of the troublesome ETH generator..... so freight working with a few mods would have been beneficial to them....

 

bear in mind however BR didnt own the 50s from the start they were leased a lot of the early problems were English Electric innovation (KV10 ;) ) and penny pinching (like the lack of an electric oil priming pump)......early problems you might say but do nothing but darken to overall opinion of them in BR at the time....

 

 

the 50s in operation is a fantastic book which covers the whats the whys and the wherefores of the 50....

Edited by pheaton
Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the crimson livery carried by 50017 because it was intended for the loco to be support of a streamlined Duchess?

 

Don't know for sure, but I read something about that being done for the VSOE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Was the crimson livery carried by 50017 because it was intended for the loco to be support of a streamlined Duchess?

 

50017 was repainted in Crimson Lake as it was going to work under contract, either the VSOE or The Northern Belle but with Sea Containers getting into financial difficulties, the project was abandoned and 50017 was left half finished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

If the 50s had been given alternators as was being mooted then i suspect they would have lasted a lot longer then they did....ironically however the one thing that was a downer on the 50149 experiment was the lack of electronic anti slip equipment something which was removed during refurbishment......continuous High speed running was the enemy to the 50.....the main generator simply wasn't robust enough.....and that's before we get on the subject of the troublesome ETH generator..... so freight working with a few mods would have been beneficial to them..

I spoke to someone who was involved with the Class 50 refurbishment when I worked on the railways and I asked why they weren’t fitted with alternators instead of keeping the generators. The reason was that there was no room for the extra electronics to fit a alternator, so I asked about the Class 37’s and the main reason they got fitted as they used the redundant space left by the steam generator. With Class 50’s being pure ETH, that option wasn’t available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...