Were there any passenger services that ran with top and tail diesels in the 60s/70s?

[Nearholmer]

Stovepipe,

 

Yes, no, and maybe.

 

He did ask specifically about T&T, and Class 25.

 

As has been explained, T&T was very rare, for braking and crewing reasons, and PP, which looks the same at first glance, but isn't, was confined to classes fitted with MU gear, which, to the best of my knowledge Class 25 weren't.

 

The date and livery are relevant too, in that PP operation of diesel loco trains really began with the tests that led to the 33/1+TC combination for Bournemouth - Weymouth, i.e. "blue period" rather than green/maroon.

 

What the OP wants to do is his business (Rule 1), all this detail does is allow him to make informed decisions, rather than uninformed ones.

 

Kevin

Edited April 15, 2020 by Nearholmer

[stovepipe]

I think it quite likely the OP was using Top and Tail as a term to simply mean a loco at each end. After all I doubt the loco in rear would be being dragged, in the modern sense of T&T, on a model railway.

 

In fact the model operation would very likely be emulating P&P, multiple, or possibly double manned, of which several real life examples have been given.

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, Ken.W said:

With the Edinburgh - Glasgow 27s, coaches were through wired and piped so the locos were working in multiple with each other.

Top & Tail working in the modern sense, with the leading loco working the train and the trailing loco hauled dead would not have been possible with vacuum braked stock, as the trailing loco would be unbraked.

And of course in days (not too long) gone by it was also prohibited except at places where assistance in the rear was specifically permitted.  We then in the 1980s moved gradually to a situation with some air brake trains where a loco was permitted to be hauled on the back but it had to be officially published on the diagram (if nowhere else) and shown as 'ANR' (Attached Not Required).  

 

But genrally it remained pretty unusual and it really increased post-privatisation as a way of cutting out Shunter's jobs and avoiding run rounds.  And that of course is why it happens today.

[pete_mcfarlane]

12 hours ago, stovepipe said:

There were also a couple of rail tours to Meeth and Meldon in the late 70s were this happened with 33/1s at either end of TC+RMB+TC set.

With this combination, wouldn't the two 33/1s be working in multiple and controlled from the leading loco? The RMB presumably being one of the ones that were through wired to allow them to work with multiple units.

 

 

 

 

[Nearholmer]

Pete

 

As I noted above, that is exactly how it was.

 

Kevin

[Zomboid]

Would the often mentioned 33/1+4TC+4VEP train that split at Basingstoke count as a P&P? The VEP obviously isn't a loco, but it would have been able to contribute to the overall tractive effort (I assume the 33 was leading, was there a corresponding up working where the whole lot was driven from the EMU? I have been on a 4VEP controlling and being pushed by a 73 in preservation so I assume it's possible)

[Nearholmer]

What a deep, philosophical, question (, for the benefit of anyone who might take that too seriously) which is applicable to the 33/1 at each end combination, the 27 at each end combination, a Blue Pullman, any number of DEMU combos, and an HST for that matter.

 

One end is pushing, and the other is pulling, which is fine, until wires get crossed and they both start pulling, as happened with a Hastings unit once.

 

It highlights that calling trains involving power units under MU control "push pull" is sloppy use of terminology, although it is exactly what BR called some of them. "Push pull" really ought to be used only to describe trains with a single power unit under simple remote control, rather than proper MU control, as in a steam loco and "auto-trailer".

[EddieK]

On 14/04/2020 at 23:35, DavidCBroad said:

Later Class 47/7s were created for these services with 100 MPH speed and MU equipment to run with a MK2 brake converted to a DVT.

The term DVT stand for Driving Van Trailer. These were used on WCML (Mark 3)  and ECML (Mark 4) and comprised a driver's cab, a Guard's office and a load of space in between for luggage, mail bags etc. The Mark 2s were DBSOs, Driving Brake Second Open. Driver's cab, Guard's office, luggage compartment, seating for 32 second class passengers and a toilet. More than just a luggage van...

[roythebus]

On 15/04/2020 at 12:15, Zomboid said:

Would the often mentioned 33/1+4TC+4VEP train that split at Basingstoke count as a P&P? The VEP obviously isn't a loco, but it would have been able to contribute to the overall tractive effort (I assume the 33 was leading, was there a corresponding up working where the whole lot was driven from the EMU? I have been on a 4VEP controlling and being pushed by a 73 in preservation so I assume it's possible)

Multiple unit train. Sometimes the loco would be in the middle. Sometimes the VEP was 2x2HAL. It depends what was available. Once the train split at Basing, the bit with the loco would be push-pull.

 

Locos working in multiple are different to multiple unit working just to add to the confusion. Locos in multiple are coupled next to each other and coupled using the loco's 27 way multiple working jumpers, couplings, air/vac/steam heat pipes and controlled by one driver. the locos had to be at the front of the train. Of course that changed with the advent of the multiplex MU working as used these days. Multiple unit working is the Basing example, loco anywhere in the train, might even be an MLV as well, all controlled from the leading cab.

[DY444]

On 14/04/2020 at 23:35, DavidCBroad said:

They weren't top and tailed they were the famous "Disco" trains with 27s at both ends but with both locos powered up and running in multiple.  The MU signals ran through the coach lighting circuits which caused them to flicker rather like a 70s disco.  Later Class 47/7s were created for these services with 100 MPH speed and MU equipment to run with a MK2 brake converted to a DVT. Later more 47/7s were created 15 I believe. They were painted "Scotrail" livery  (Intercity red stripe except with a blue stripe with scotrail branding.)   Incidentally a further 47, Charles Rennie Mackintosh a 47/4 also had its red stripe over painted with blue, not very well, it looked like someone had bought a tin of Dulux and  brushed it on.

I really don't know of any topping and tailing of passenger trains with a dead loco at the rear prior to about 2000.  

 

The later operation with class 47s used the coach lighting circuits and the disco train name came from that period.  For the class 27 operation the coaches used were fitted with blue star jumper cables to allow the locomotives to work in multiple.

 

Edit.  Just noticed this has been pointed out a couple of times already

Edited April 17, 2020 by DY444

[DY444]

On 15/04/2020 at 12:15, Zomboid said:

Would the often mentioned 33/1+4TC+4VEP train that split at Basingstoke count as a P&P? The VEP obviously isn't a loco, but it would have been able to contribute to the overall tractive effort (I assume the 33 was leading, was there a corresponding up working where the whole lot was driven from the EMU? I have been on a 4VEP controlling and being pushed by a 73 in preservation so I assume it's possible)

 

There was an up working at some time and the 33/1 was on the back.  There was also an up working formed 33/1+8TC+33/1 for a while too.

 

Any of the EP emu stock could be pushed by a 33/1 or a 73 from a control perspective but there were some restrictions with 73s (and 74s when they were around) due to power consumption.

 

In a wider context, the SR regularly operated TNT empties long before it became more widespread.  The empties for the last morning up and first evening down Oxted were worked between New Cross Gate and London Bridge in this fashion as were a number of Bristol/Cardiff set empties between Fratton and Portsmouth Harbour.

Edited April 17, 2020 by DY444

[Covkid]

On 15/04/2020 at 10:50, Nearholmer said:

Stovepipe,

 

Yes, no, and maybe.

 

He did ask specifically about T&T, and Class 25.

 

As has been explained, T&T was very rare, for braking and crewing reasons, and PP, which looks the same at first glance, but isn't, was confined to classes fitted with MU gear, which, to the best of my knowledge Class 25 weren't.

 

The date and livery are relevant too, in that PP operation of diesel loco trains really began with the tests that led to the 33/1+TC combination for Bournemouth - Weymouth, i.e. "blue period" rather than green/maroon.

 

What the OP wants to do is his business (Rule 1), all this detail does is allow him to make informed decisions, rather than uninformed ones.

 

Kevin

 

He didn't.  This was his opening line

Hi

Does anyone know whether any scheduled passenger services ran in the 60s/70s in a top and tail formation with diesel locos?

 

Class 25s weren't mentioned.

 

 

[Nearholmer]

They were, in the second paragraph.

 

Can you explain to me what is is about my dryly factual contributions to this thread that so upsets people?

 

Because, TBH, I’m at a loss to understand.

 

Kevin

Edited April 17, 2020 by Nearholmer

[45125]

On 15/04/2020 at 09:22, Hairy Bear Digital said:

 

No, your getting confused. The earlier description is correct. 

The 27's were in multiple using a 27 pin cable and regulating air pipe either end of 6 mk2 coaches.

These were completely replaced by the 47/7 , mk3 coaches and mk2 dbso using the Brush 2 wire tdm system via the coach lighting rch cables. They were the ones that made the interior lights flicker .

The control was FDM not TDM on the 47s .

 

One of the 27s did lose a tyre at one time, it was thought it was caused by the heavy braking the Push Pull service was subject to and a poor fit of the tyre on the wheel disc. Remember reading the report a few months ago.

 

Edited April 17, 2020 by 45125

[Bomag]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

They were, in the second paragraph.

 

Can you explain to me what is is about my dryly factual contributions to this thread that so upsets people?

 

Because, TBH, I’m at a loss to understand.

 

Kevin

 

No, he mentioned that he had used Cl25, not asking specifically for Cl25 examples.

 

Your first post showed that you were not aware of how the 1970's E+G trains worked and then said that Cl25 were not fitted for MU - which if you had read 'chard's post was wrong as they were used (at least once) to sub a Cl27 on E+G, being blue star fitted.

 

Being helpful is good, being accurate  is better.

 

For the avoidance of doubt some of the more recent uses of top and tail have also used blue star fitted coaches, so both locos are under power. Two Cl37/4 on 4 coaches sound quite good, even in air-cons.

[Nearholmer]

Yes, I was ignorant of the fact that 25 were MU fitted. I shalln’t forget now!
 

The real difficulty around this thread is with terminology.

 

I honestly believe that to most railwaymen “top and tail” operation means one loco under power, and another at the other end of the train being hauled dead.

 

With some best forgotten exceptions in the very early days of electric trains, anything involving more than one power unit in a train under control from a single cab is achieved by MU operation, and even in the case of, for example, a single 33/1 being driven from a TC it is being driven via MU equipment.*

 

So the 37/4 case that you cite, and term “top and tail”, I would call MU operation, because it is.

 

As for what the OP thinks about the whole discussion, I’ll wait to find out if/when he/she tells us all.
 

*I don’t know whether the systems used on E-G with Class 47, WCML, and ECML are MU or not. I suspect that they are not, rather that they are remote control systems for single power units, but would be interested to hear from someone who really knows.

[The Stationmaster]

To me 'top and tail' has one simple meaning - a loco on each end, whatever it happens to be doing or not doing depending on which direction the train is moving.  As Roy has already said locos working in multiple means they are coupled next to each other (and controlled by one Driver - as defined in the General Appendix).

[Nearholmer]

Hmmmm ........ clearly different language in different places then.

 

Maybe it’s only engineers who get particular about whether or not things are under MU control.

 

 

[melmerby]

On 15/04/2020 at 12:15, Zomboid said:

Would the often mentioned 33/1+4TC+4VEP train that split at Basingstoke count as a P&P? The VEP obviously isn't a loco, but it would have been able to contribute to the overall tractive effort (I assume the 33 was leading, was there a corresponding up working where the whole lot was driven from the EMU? I have been on a 4VEP controlling and being pushed by a 73 in preservation so I assume it's possible)

The original Gatwick Express had a Class 73 + rake + class 489 GLV.

That would be push pull I assume, as it was powered by both the 73 & the GLV in either direction.

[pinzaboy]

Hi All

As the original poster it has been really interesting reading all the knowledgeable responses.

 

To clarify my question, I had meant top and tail in the sense that the leading loco would be the only one under power. The rear loco would just be trailing.

 

I've learned an awful lot from the replies on top and tail/push pull and am grateful to all who have given their responses.

 

Tim

[RFS]

Some pictures of the services would be useful I think and here are 3. The first is one of c;lass 27 + 37, and the other two pairs of 27s. In all cases there were 6 coaches.

 

https://railphotoprints.uk/p582944081/e7a6fb267

 

https://railphotoprints.uk/p582944081/e8961f9c0

 

https://railphotoprints.uk/p582944081/e8961f9d8

 

 

 

Edited April 17, 2020 by RFS

[melmerby]

An interesting modern service top'n'tail was when DRS were supplying trainsets for Northern on the Cumbrian Coast line.

Some were conventional with a Class 37 hauling a rake with a DVT, however some services were using two 68s Top'nTail, as the 68s have AAR MU wiring which is not compatible with the coaching stock.

Sadly no longer, as Northern have enough DMUs now.

[caradoc]

18 hours ago, Bomag said:

 

No, he mentioned that he had used Cl25, not asking specifically for Cl25 examples.

 

Your first post showed that you were not aware of how the 1970's E+G trains worked and then said that Cl25 were not fitted for MU - which if you had read 'chard's post was wrong as they were used (at least once) to sub a Cl27 on E+G, being blue star fitted.

 

 

Classes 25 and 27 were of course both blue star so could work in multiple, ie coupled together, but if a 25 was used vice a 27 on the E&G push-pulls, would the rear loco, whether the 25 or the 27, have been able to be controlled from the leading loco and therefore power the train ? Given that the 27s were specially fitted for the service, I would have thought not.

 

[forest2807]

On 14/04/2020 at 23:35, DavidCBroad said:

Charles Rennie Mackintosh a 47/4 also had its red stripe over painted with blue, not very well, it looked like someone had bought a tin of Dulux and  brushed it on. 

A matter of opinion, possibly, but as a son of Inverness, being raised in the 80’s I saw this loco numerous times and my memories, photos, and the photos on www.Class47.co.uk don’t reflect this. The blue stripe was done as professionally as any other I’ve ever seen!

[DCB]

2 minutes ago, forest2807 said:

A matter of opinion, possibly, but as a son of Inverness, being raised in the 80’s I saw this loco numerous times and my memories, photos, and the photos on www.Class47.co.uk don’t reflect this. The blue stripe was done as professionally as any other I’ve ever seen!

There were gaps where the red showed through, the red of the red stripe intercity livery had been over painted probably at a depot  it wasn't a works job.   CRM was doing Inverness Edinburgh Aberdeen Inverness triangle rosters in the late 80s before the 156's came.  We had a week in Inverness every year from 1987 to about 1993 when we started having a week in Culloden, Tomatin and finally Aviemore.  I will have to dig my photos out but they are a) buried somewhere, and b)  not digital.