Scottish Class 17 “Clayton”

[Phil Bullock]

Severn Valley Diesel Gala in May should be good for some mileage behind D8568

 

 

[adb968008]

4 hours ago, Phil Bullock said:

Severn Valley Diesel Gala in May should be good for some mileage behind D8568

 

 

If it makes it...

 

I have had plans to see it a couple of times at galas in the last few years, but it turned out to be a little too accurately preserved...

[ardbealach]

From my own photo collection - Kingmoor Carlisle 24 June 1967 with Clayton and Metrovick D5716 and a second Metrovick in the shed.  Second image of another Clayton at Kingmoor on the same day. (AM) 

[Phil Bullock]

18 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

If it makes it...

 

I have had plans to see it a couple of times at galas in the last few years, but it turned out to be a little too accurately preserved...

 

Yes in the past I have only ever had haulage on one engine....

[ardbealach]

Three more black and white images from my collection - all taken at Carmyle on the Rutherglen to Coatbridge line (I think around 1962 / 63) - the one on the breakdown train has been published previously on RMweb. (AM)

[Gwiwer]

Ah that enigmatic headcode, usually associated with the ScR of 1...   Alternatively ..1. was seen quite often and sometimes 9 blank blank blank.  

[keefer]

Indeed Gwiwer!

Each train was of course allocated a 4-digit headcode but for some reason the ScR couldn't usually be bothered to display it - as you say, the train class number sufficed in any position. (i'm sure I've seen pics of all train classes)

I could understand it for little goods/local passenger trains pootling about, but even the main-line internal services were included in this. The only trains guaranteed to be showing the full headcode were inter-regionals

Edited February 17, 2020 by keefer

[forest2807]

19 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Fact is that the Class 20s were proven to be an excellent and reliable design,  so not surprising that BR decided to build more. 

The only possible improvement would have been a double cab version,  but I guess that wasn't practical. 

That arrived in the mid 1980’s in the shape of a Class 58!

['CHARD]

On 16/02/2020 at 14:42, The Border Reiver said:

Here is a photo I took at Carlisle station on 31 July 1965 of a couple of Claytons D8582 and D8581 double heading a passenger heading south. The Claytons came off at Carlisle and were replaced by Jubilee 45626 so I presume it went down the Settle & Carlisle line.

 

 

As mentioned above, this is the SO Edinburgh - Leeds via Hawick. 

 

Claytons were also booked traction for the Summer SO Dundee - Blackpool and return between Dundee and Carlisle, again via the WR.

[Phil Bullock]

56 minutes ago, 'CHARD said:

Claytons were also booked traction for the Summer SO Dundee - Blackpool and return between Dundee and Carlisle, again via the WR.

 

Via the WR? Thats one heck of a diversion.......

[luckymucklebackit]

13 hours ago, keefer said:

Indeed Gwiwer!

Each train was of course allocated a 4-digit headcode but for some reason the ScR couldn't usually be bothered to display it - as you say, the train class number sufficed in any position. (i'm sure I've seen pics of all train classes)

I could understand it for little goods/local passenger trains pootling about, but even the main-line internal services were included in this. The only trains guaranteed to be showing the full headcode were inter-regionals

 

I remember the trip freights didn't bother with the four digit display but carried a small number on a lamp bracket, it was in the form "N92" (as an example)

 

Jim

 

[jim.snowdon]

15 hours ago, keefer said:

Indeed Gwiwer!

Each train was of course allocated a 4-digit headcode but for some reason the ScR couldn't usually be bothered to display it - as you say, the train class number sufficed in any position. (i'm sure I've seen pics of all train classes)

I could understand it for little goods/local passenger trains pootling about, but even the main-line internal services were included in this. The only trains guaranteed to be showing the full headcode were inter-regionals

Would the full 4-digit code have actually meant much to signallers in most of Scotland (and many other parts of England and Wales) where signalling, at the time, was still very traditional? After all, the railway had operated for over a hundred years with nothing more than different lamp arrangements on the front of steam locomotives.

 

Jim

[jessy1692]

On 14/02/2020 at 21:44, Norton961 said:

Don’t forget a small number worked in the East Midlands coalfields allocated to Barrow Hill. 

Regarding reliability, Clayton original proposal was for the locos to be fitted with Rolls Royce engines (Clayton being a subsidury company of Rolls Royce) but the BR board insisted they use a PaxMan engine which had only been used in an experimental rail car. The engines suffered a number of problems including the aluminium crank cases cracking, seizures ( I have a sheet showing that some of the engines seized before the locos left Claytons when under test!) and miss alignment between engine and generator which would lead to crank failure. The 2 Rolls Royce engined locos were fine but it was to late.

A couple of the Gateshead allocation were tested for a few days as banking engines on the Consett iron ore workings, but were soon sent back to Gateshead.

Iv read a few things about BR imposing the Paxman engines on Clayton's but what was the experimental DMU? I think iv read elsewhere the engines were to be used in a cancelled DMU order so the Claytons ended up with the engines. Any info appreciated to fill a nagging void in my knowledge!

Cheers

James

[The Border Reiver]

Here are a few more of my Clayton photos.

I spent an afternoon by the lineside at Rockliffe (about 5 miles north of Carlisle) in late July 1963.While I was there I took shots of 5 southbound freights. The first was one double headed Claytons D8527 and anon. Then there was a black 5, followed by a type 25. Then in quick succession 2 more double headed Claytons appeared; D8509 and anon; D8505 and anon.

The next shot is 6 Claytons on Kingmoor shed on 17th November 1963

I took the next shot of two more Claytons, D8522 and anon on I think Polmadie shed in 1965

Although not Scotland, the last photo of two unknown Claytons is taken at Thornaby shed in the roundhouse on Easter Sunday 18th April 1965. My friend on the right was a James Bond fan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Phil Bullock]

12 minutes ago, The Border Reiver said:

Here are a few more of my Clayton photos.

I spent an afternoon by the lineside at Rockliffe (about 5 miles north of Carlisle) in late July 1963.While I was there I took shots of 5 southbound freights. The first was one double headed Claytons D8527 and anon. Then there was a black 5, followed by a type 25. Then in quick succession 2 more double headed Claytons appeared; D8509 and anon; D8505 and anon.

The next shot is 6 Claytons on Kingmoor shed on 17th November 1963

I took the next shot of two more Claytons, D8522 and anon on I think Polmadie shed in 1965

Although not Scotland, the last photo of two unknown Claytons is taken at Thornaby shed in the roundhouse on Easter Sunday 18th April 1965. My friend on the right was a James Bond fan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plainly staple power for freight between Glasgow and Carlisle at the time - and still being used in October 1971,

 

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/DoE_Beattock1971.pdf

 

Only a few lasted beyond that date and all were gone by the end of 71.

 

Interesting looking tankers in first train - anyone know what they are please?

 

 

Edited February 18, 2020 by Phil Bullock

[keefer]

1 hour ago, jessy1692 said:

Iv read a few things about BR imposing the Paxman engines on Clayton's but what was the experimental DMU? I think iv read elsewhere the engines were to be used in a cancelled DMU order so the Claytons ended up with the engines. Any info appreciated to fill a nagging void in my knowledge!

Cheers

James

From the Paxman History pages https://www.paxmanhistory.org.uk/paxrailt.htm#yl-traction :

"Introduced in 1954, the ZH was a horizontal or 'flat' 6 in-line cylinder engine. Evolved from the YH, in essence half (i.e. one bank) of a Vee 12 YH, the ZH was designed for British Railways as an under-floor mounted power unit for railcars. In a collaborative venture involving British Railways, British Thomson-Houston and Paxman, an experimental high speed diesel-electric railcar train was built in 1956. Two 1926 passenger coaches due for scrapping were each modified to take an under-floor mounted pressure-charged 450 bhp ZH driving a flange mounted BTH generator. The two coach train had a maximum permitted speed of 85 mph and weighed 103 tons. Over 17 months of testing the train performed well with negligible defects and no significant engine wear."

And from the David Heys Collection http://www.davidheyscollection.com/page20.htm :

http://www.davidheyscollection.com/userimages/erm-dmu-chinley-1.jpg

http://www.davidheyscollection.com/userimages/00001-eaw-dh-exp-dmu-9821.jpg

"On September 15th 1956, ER Morten photographed an experimental unit awaiting departure from Chinley's bay platform for its return run to the Derby Carriage & Wagon Works over the Peak Forest route. The two coaches - numbered M9821 and M9828 in the fleet - were converted from former LMS steam-hauled Open Brake Thirds, and the motor bogies were removed from withdrawn Euston-Watford electric units. The 2-car unit was powered by a Ruston-Paxman type 6ZHHL of 450bhp in each coach."

[keefer]

Pages from Paxman History detail problems encountered with the Claytons' engines:

https://www.paxmanhistory.org.uk/paxeng34.htm#zh

https://www.paxmanhistory.org.uk/paxrailt.htm#clayton

Edited February 18, 2020 by keefer

[Fat Controller]

31 minutes ago, Phil Bullock said:

 

Plainly staple power for freight between Glasgow and Carlisle at the time - and still being used in October 1971,

 

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/DoE_Beattock1971.pdf

 

Only a few lasted beyond that date and all were gone by the end of 71.

 

Interesting looking tankers in first train - anyone know what they are please?

 

 

Phil, I think they could be either demountable tanks, or Conflats carrying powder tanks (there was a flow of corn-starch from somewhere near Glasgow to Birmingham for Bird's Custard. Just looked at some of David Larkin's photos, and there some of the former with very similar 'inverted U' side framing.

[jessy1692]

3 hours ago, keefer said:

Pages from Paxman History detail problems encountered with the Claytons' engines:

https://www.paxmanhistory.org.uk/paxeng34.htm#zh

https://www.paxmanhistory.org.uk/paxrailt.htm#clayton

Thank you for all that info Keefer, i have seen that DMU before but never associated it with the Paxman venture. Filed away for futute ref.

Thanks again

James

[RLBH]

On 18/02/2020 at 19:58, jessy1692 said:

Thank you for all that info Keefer, i have seen that DMU before but never associated it with the Paxman venture. Filed away for futute ref.

Thanks again

James

Straying quite a long way from Class 17s, but that DMU (really a DEMU) was a prototype for what ultimately became the Swindon Inter-City DMUs. In hindsight, the combination of BTH electrics and the Paxman ZH probably wouldn't 

[TravisM]

I had a interesting conversation with a friends brother-in-law who restores vintage buses and he was saying that diesel engines up until the 80’s were pretty basic (those of a certain age only have to remember how basic car engines were in the 60’s and 70’s) and the only way to get more power from them was to “go big” in engine size or turbo charge them which in itself reduces reliability due to their fragile nature.

 

On paper the Class 17 was a sound idea.  Two small power units, great visibility, could basically go anywhere but here comes the “but”.  Paxman we’re trying to pour a quart into a pint pot and though the build quality is definitely suspect, the power units couldn’t do what was asked of them.  You have to remember that in the 50’s and 60’s, the US who were probably the world leaders in diesel locomotives, struggled with getting more power out of their engines without having to up the cylinders, turbo charging and therefore ending up with a huge fuel guzzling 20 cylinder locomotives (EMD SD45).  ALCo’s engines were notorious for unreliability in the world of railroads but well respected in the marine industry.  GE’s Cooper-Bessemer engines of which the Class 70 power unit is evolved from, were equally unreliable up until the late 80’s with the Dash 8 series.

 

I wonder if Beyer Peacock had built them, possibly RR engines fitted and having BR’s blue star MU fitted, could they have been a success.  The Class 17’s were introduced into a different world from today.  They were maintained at first mainly in old filthy steam sheds which played havoc with the electrical equipment and depot staff were used to working on steam and then these “new fangled things” came along which they were unfamiliar with.

 

A lot of the comments made by my friends brother in law and not me as he seemed very well knowledgable about early diesels, so don’t shoot me down 

[John Tomlinson]

On 17/02/2020 at 15:38, adb968008 said:

If it makes it...

 

I have had plans to see it a couple of times at galas in the last few years, but it turned out to be a little too accurately preserved...

It worked OK at the Nene Valley in October, despite seriously dreadful weather for most of the time. Seen here with 45041.

 

John.

[Gwiwer]

2 hours ago, jools1959 said:

ALCo’s engines were notorious for unreliability

And still are so far as many Australian railway staff are concerned.  There is a reason they use lash-ups of four, five or six smaller ALCo units.  In addition to providing power and brake force in small units with light axle loading there is margin for error when something sits down.  

[jjb1970]

The Class 70 engine is a Jennbacher design, and is unrelated to the GE engines used in the -7, -8, GEVO etc.

[keefer]

It always amazed me how little power the Paxmans produced for their size - e.g. only 800hp from 16 cylinders in the cl.15/16 - and particularly in comparison to other pilot-scheme competitors

EE got 1000hp from 8 cylinders in the cl.20 and Sulzer got 1160hp from 6 cylinders in the cl.24 & 26.

Turbocharging was not necessarily going to cause unreliability - it was a viable way if getting more power, as long as it wasn't overdone and there was adequate intercooling etc.

 

As an aside, the pilot scheme has produced some 'infamous' locos (i.e. more known for catching fire/chucking oil out/just not working very well), but in most cases, this was due to poor engines - the electrical/traction side of things was generally pretty good, unless poorly matched to the engine