Jump to content

rodent279

Class 45 roof boiler water filler and bodyside steps-when did they get plated over?

Recommended Posts

Hi. When did the roof mounted boiler water filler and bodyside steps on class 45's get plated over? Did any make it into blue with 5 digit numbers with them intact? I've looked on the excellent Derby Sulzers website, and can't find any information there.

Cheers N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Problem is that there was no robust programme - essential to find photos of individual loco and a given time to be sure. Watch out for boiler filler access footsteps on bogie too. Not only that but locos were delivered with a hatch over the roof top filler which gives the same appearance as plated over....

 

So you have... using D11 as an example, the nose end door locos were amongst the first to have body work alterations 

 

As delivered -  with bogie footsteps, body side footsteps and rooftop filler covered by hatch

 

https://www.derbysulzers.com/11exworksnew.jpg

 

1969 - Nose end door and split boxes replaced by centre headcode, still has bogie footsteps but body side footsteps plated over and filler hatch removed

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/11238171386/in/photolist-i85yPC-zfpLoo-2i5xEkN-iAU4m8-X1tBg2-ovoyhc-ZvzFFE-8ggqg8-U45wQL-eETLpW-Aj4zEk-mDHGvD-xQ7TFc-c9daXS-fzy6u9-2a21NVT-dRw79D-dL3pit-baPjFH-a3cfig-ymFuuX-9qVUbZ-VHknyU-SNytuk-r46RUP-24EmhW2-uTGciq-2eKfZ8p-qC1DPP-qKwxLB-A7dayy-VJgpLJ-zNCBD3-uYaSXV-Ss8zME-SQs33t-X1Z5Eu-9wx2rb-cEZdts-DHpw1u-awdBg1-aDHtMG-onnZrU-9LHSHB-ifcLmD-cZRoLS-eQAP2E-tmQLbH-dthJZ6-9FDSqK

 

1970 - has lost bogie footsteps

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/the-evanses/5532966549/in/photolist-9qVUbZ-VHknyU-SNytuk-r46RUP-24EmhW2-uTGciq-2eKfZ8p-qC1DPP-qKwxLB-A7dayy-VJgpLJ-zNCBD3-uYaSXV-Ss8zME-SQs33t-X1Z5Eu-9wx2rb-cEZdts-DHpw1u-awdBg1-aDHtMG-onnZrU-9LHSHB-ifcLmD-cZRoLS-eQAP2E-tmQLbH-dthJZ6-9FDSqK-oeUFt8-bM2juD-9wx4mJ-oh31JX-A5Ca7R-7zfFBJ-24Dbrvu-ckoJXJ-h5ZV18-nqUXjk-LZizwf-T3xPdk-2eC9q1X-2donZDL-fvH74J-onmeFE-zaM8MK-hRTHmZ-mhJ8bh-kBwRU1-AfKiuf

 

1973 - has boiler room grille plated over

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ron_h/4883095715/in/photolist-oh31JX-A5Ca7R-7zfFBJ-24Dbrvu-ckoJXJ-h5ZV18-nqUXjk-LZizwf-T3xPdk-2eC9q1X-2donZDL-fvH74J-onmeFE-zaM8MK-hRTHmZ-mhJ8bh-kBwRU1-AfKiuf-ovQgUA-28VvAcL-2fgUtcX-Ti7Eiu-oxRyP2-nK9iMp-kzTYDK-eeL9wj-8rv9er-dB56ai-dABhov-nqSMBu-dN6eNy-9YwgEK-24TGeVx-nqUSVm-9FGUnd-9FH2ry-ePe138-9FGVWu-9FE21Z-zCLDPz-GyMAZt-7jiY3y-Q62mqw-aasyEn-nNUhEg-hS6M5B-cQgRVS-FwTiHc-Ax95ni-dCJLMe

 

1982 - as 45122 but still carrying 11! Sealed beams, no bogie footsteps, boiler room grille, body side footsteps and filler hatch plated over.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/49278201036/in/photolist-2i5xEkN-iAU4m8-X1tBg2-ovoyhc-ZvzFFE-8ggqg8-U45wQL-eETLpW-Aj4zEk-mDHGvD-xQ7TFc-c9daXS-fzy6u9-2a21NVT-dRw79D-dL3pit-baPjFH-a3cfig-ymFuuX-9qVUbZ-VHknyU-SNytuk-r46RUP-24EmhW2-uTGciq-2eKfZ8p-qC1DPP-qKwxLB-A7dayy-VJgpLJ-zNCBD3-uYaSXV-Ss8zME-SQs33t-X1Z5Eu-9wx2rb-cEZdts-DHpw1u-awdBg1-aDHtMG-onnZrU-9LHSHB-ifcLmD-cZRoLS-eQAP2E-tmQLbH-dthJZ6-9FDSqK-oeUFt8-bM2juD

 

We have done the 1970 version....

 

It looks as if plating of footsteps was done when locos became blue - but not in every case. Cant find any evidence of a TOPs numbered loco without them plated over but never say never...

 

 

 

Class 45 11.JPG

Edited by Phil Bullock
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

Reason I ask is that I am detailing an old Mainline 45039. I've decided to retain the 45039 identity, because it has split centre headcode boxes, and I don't want to alter that. I also don't want to plate over the roof filler, or remove the air brake reservoirs. From a trawl of Flickr, it seems that D49 went blue in 1968, had lost it's body side steps and bogie steps by 1972, was dual braked and renumbered in April 1975, had char headcodes in on both ends until at least April 1977, had domino headcode at no. 1 end (the fan end) in June 1977, and still had the roof filler in Sept 1977. In July 78 it had lost its headcode boxes for nose lights, but the photo does not show the roof filler, and by Oct 78 it had lost both roof filler and headcode boxes. 

So, based on the available photographic evidence, given that I can't model before 04/1975 because of the air brakes, or later than July 78 because of the nose lights, I am going to plate the bodyside steps, leave the roof filler uncovered, have dominos at no.1 end and have chars at no.2 end, possibly set to 0000. This would place it roughly 1976-1977, possibly into the first half of 1978. I can't imagine that it would have lost its headcode boxes but retained an uncovered roof filler.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rodent279 said:

Thanks.

Reason I ask is that I am detailing an old Mainline 45039. I've decided to retain the 45039 identity, because it has split centre headcode boxes, and I don't want to alter that. I also don't want to plate over the roof filler, or remove the air brake reservoirs. From a trawl of Flickr, it seems that D49 went blue in 1968, had lost it's body side steps and bogie steps by 1972, was dual braked and renumbered in April 1975, had char headcodes in on both ends until at least April 1977, had domino headcode at no. 1 end (the fan end) in June 1977, and still had the roof filler in Sept 1977. In July 78 it had lost its headcode boxes for nose lights, but the photo does not show the roof filler, and by Oct 78 it had lost both roof filler and headcode boxes. 

So, based on the available photographic evidence, given that I can't model before 04/1975 because of the air brakes, or later than July 78 because of the nose lights, I am going to plate the bodyside steps, leave the roof filler uncovered, have dominos at no.1 end and have chars at no.2 end, possibly set to 0000. This would place it roughly 1976-1977, possibly into the first half of 1978. I can't imagine that it would have lost its headcode boxes but retained an uncovered roof filler.

 

Nice research and good plan! There are etched footstep covers on the Brassmasters class 25 etch that do a neat job if you need them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Another one to look out for is overhead line warning flashes. Peaks had them on the nose and on the bodyside, next to the steps to the roof. Some, but not all, Peaks seem to have lost them* when the steps were plated over, and some Peaks retained them. 45039 seems to have had them in about 1968, lost them when the steps were plated over, then for some reason regained them in mid-1978, after the headcode box was replaced with lights and the boiler filler was plated over!

 

*Based on photographic evidence available from a quick and dirty tour of Flickr.

Edited by rodent279

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually when passing through Works, or other remedial attention.  BR wanted all boiler fitted locos with ladders/steps etc blanked off when electrification really got going - mid 1960's typically.  If a loco - any boiler fitted loco - went through works and came out in BR Blue then all plating work and electrification flashes would have been added.  Quite a few men lost their lives in the 60's on the Peaks climbing above cab level.  I would probably check when the loco was in for a heavy general overhaul and guess that's when plating took place.  Hope this helps.

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, CliveM said:

Usually when passing through Works, or other remedial attention.  BR wanted all boiler fitted locos with ladders/steps etc blanked off when electrification really got going - mid 1960's typically.  If a loco - any boiler fitted loco - went through works and came out in BR Blue then all plating work and electrification flashes would have been added.  Quite a few men lost their lives in the 60's on the Peaks climbing above cab level.  I would probably check when the loco was in for a heavy general overhaul and guess that's when plating took place.  Hope this helps.

 

Evening Clive and welcome to this chat.

 

Would be nice if it were that simple .Peaks had OHLE flashes when built see https://www.derbysulzers.com/45122.html - but they probably did acquire a few more.  Any 45/46 was likely to work under the wires from 67 onwards when Birmingham New Street was electrified - but prior to that there was Woodhead of course....

 

Take a look at the attached database for details of the locos we have modelled - BFYE livery no certainty and even getting air brakes was no guarantee that the bodyside footsteps would be plated - see 78. Makes for interesting modelling!

 

Cheers

Loco details.xlsx

Edited by Phil Bullock
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hadn't realised they got air brakes as early as 1969. Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there was traffic for which that was needed....

 

An AB peak used to work the Tunstead - Margam Limestones from 68 using CBAs - AB only. Down our neck of the woods the paradox I have only just realised is that Freight - mainly tankers and liners in addition to the Tunstead - were AB before the Class 1s. Therefore you were more likely to see a beaten up VB loco on the Class 1s and a nice shiny ex works AB loco on freight....

 

ALthough a significant number of Brush 4s were built with dual brakes ....254 IIRC in traffic by 1967 .... so the Peaks were playing catch up.... and 37s were also getting AB and working in pairs on tanker trains from S Wales refineries from 68....

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't suppose you've found a list of shopping dates anywhere on t'internet have you?

I know http://www.brdatabase.info/ has some info on TOPS numbering and air braking, which would seem reasonably reliable, based on looking at Flickr for shiny ex-works photos. I guess the only other way is to trawl through back editions of Modern Railways & Railway Magazine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, rodent279 said:

Don't suppose you've found a list of shopping dates anywhere on t'internet have you?

I know http://www.brdatabase.info/ has some info on TOPS numbering and air braking, which would seem reasonably reliable, based on looking at Flickr for shiny ex-works photos. I guess the only other way is to trawl through back editions of Modern Railways & Railway Magazine.


Have you seen the Derby Sulzer web site? Not comprehensive but it does give clues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, nur it's got much more on 24/25's.

 

Another thing I've just noticed is sandboxes on the inner bogie ends. As built, they all seem to have had them, but lost them fairly early on, mid-late 60's. I haven't yet found a photo of a blue one with them.

My 45039 is a Mainline Peak, now over 40 years old, and it has them. Have to get the knife out!

Cheers N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi r279, are these of any use? 45039 at Truro 25/6/77, getting ready to storm up the 1 in 60 to Highertown Tunnel from a standing start, always fun to watch, although Warships and Westerns were better (noisier that's for sure!!)

How on earth did Mainline manage to get the livery wrong on the blue one, when they all had driver's cabside BR logos at the time? They even printed the data panel in the right place. Bit late to ask now I suppose! Moulded-on nameplates not a good idea either, a bit limiting - same with the Hornby Western, OK for 'Western Courier', not so good for 'Western............................King'!!

 

997655506_770625_45039Truro1.jpg.40b6f25d24bedb6d9f308b3b79e9a186.jpg562115600_770625_45039Truro2.jpg.7615c06d80a0b6876c81a2558526167d.jpg

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Neil Phillips said:

Hi r279, are these of any use? 45039 at Truro 25/6/77, getting ready to storm up the 1 in 60 to Highertown Tunnel from a standing start, always fun to watch, although Warships and Westerns were better (noisier that's for sure!!)

How on earth did Mainline manage to get the livery wrong on the blue one, when they all had driver's cabside BR logos at the time? They even printed the data panel in the right place. Bit late to ask now I suppose! Moulded-on nameplates not a good idea either, a bit limiting - same with the Hornby Western, OK for 'Western Courier', not so good for 'Western............................King'!!

 

997655506_770625_45039Truro1.jpg.40b6f25d24bedb6d9f308b3b79e9a186.jpg562115600_770625_45039Truro2.jpg.7615c06d80a0b6876c81a2558526167d.jpg

 

 

Awesome, thanks Neil, spot on what I was looking for! With the photo below, this proves that it lost it's headcode box chars in the April 77 works visit, and wore dominos at both ends, presumably until another works visit in late 77/early 78. By Mar 78 it had sealed beams.

Cheers, Neil.

45039 THE MANCHESTER REGIMENT Rotherham Masborough 9.6.77

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Phil Bullock said:

 

Evening Clive and welcome to this chat.

 

Would be nice if it were that simple .Peaks had OHLE flashes when built see https://www.derbysulzers.com/45122.html - but they probably did acquire a few more.  Any 45/46 was likely to work under the wires from 67 onwards when Birmingham New Street was electrified - but prior to that there was Woodhead of course....

 

Take a look at the attached database for details of the locos we have modelled - BFYE livery no certainty and even getting air brakes was no guarantee that the bodyside footsteps would be plated - see 78. Makes for interesting modelling!

 

Cheers

Loco details.xlsx 16.25 kB · 7 downloads

 

Yes I do agree with your comments and in fairness I mentioned the addition of flashes circa mid 60's as the peaks were just about everywhere on the Midland (LMR) by then.  Strictly speaking of course, I'm now refering to all 44/45/46's and not just the original batch.  However BR in their usual calamitous methods would have loco's plated when/if called to works.  So although there was consistency in their approach, i.e., all loco's to be altered by a certain date, the actual implementation of said policy was often left to operating managers/engineers.  So it was not unusual to see some loco's plated over several years  after their stable mates.  The class 47 boiler filler was similarly treated,some being done years after authorisation.  Given the sheer number of loco's and availability you can understand why the operating department were reluctant to take a good loco out of traffic for something as trivial as the boiler plating etc. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

To be fair, putting the boiler water filler in such a position as to require steps to the roof was perhaps not the cleverest piece of design. Overhead electrification was nothing new in 1959, and both BR and manufacturers will have been well aware of the planned expansion of the electrified railway. I can understand prototypes like the LMS twins & Southern trio having them, but really, after Woodhead opening, and in the light of the WCML electrification plans, and the (at the time) plans to extend to the ECML, and the 1955 decision to standardise on 25kV A.C., it does seem strange that as late as 1962/3 locos were still being built with them.

Edited by rodent279

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it cant have been easy to get the bag from steam age water columns in to them either. The WR option was better .... filler was behind a body side grille which hinged open on Warships

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Off the top of my head, at least classes 24/5, 30/31, 44-47 had roof mounted water fillers requiring bodyside steps. Not sure about the 26/7, 37 & 40's, baby hydraulics and baby Deltics-were they filled through the side doors? Clearly it wasn't an insurmountable problem, as Warships, and presumably Westerns, had bodyside mounted fillers. Class 76 & 77 also had boilers-their fillers certainly weren't roof mounted!

Edited by rodent279

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a slightly different note, I know mu jumpers were removed fairly early on, but I wonder why BR felt the Sulzer Type 4 didn't need to work in multiple, but EE type 4's did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably because the EE4s only delivered around 1600 HP at the rail whereas a transient effort from a Duchess - which they were to replace - could get somewhere nearer 2900 rhp when climbing the Northern fells with 13 coaches or more - a challenge the Peaks were less likely to encounter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But at around 2000 rail horsepower, a Peak is still well short of that. I wonder if it was because BR was already seeing Peaks as mainly passenger locos, and 40's as mainly freight locos, therefore more likely to need high power up front when restarting a heavy freight on a steep climb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, rodent279 said:

Awesome, thanks Neil, spot on what I was looking for! With the photo below, this proves that it lost it's headcode box chars in the April 77 works visit, and wore dominos at both ends, presumably until another works visit in late 77/early 78. By Mar 78 it had sealed beams.

Cheers, Neil.

45039 THE MANCHESTER REGIMENT Rotherham Masborough 9.6.77

 

It never had sealed beams, it had marker lights fitted. Sealed beams arhat was fitted to the 26s. LaMP U/S you throw it away marker lamps have a LBC lamp fitted, lamp u/s you renew lamp. Why do people insist on calling it sealed beam it is not sealed as it can be opened to renew lamp and clean the crap out of it.

 

Some locos actually lost the plated footsteps due the rivets rotting, other locos had them removed completely as that section of body work was prone to corrosion so new steelwork was but in.

Edited by 45125
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rodent279 said:

But at around 2000 rail horsepower, a Peak is still well short of that. I wonder if it was because BR was already seeing Peaks as mainly passenger locos, and 40's as mainly freight locos, therefore more likely to need high power up front when restarting a heavy freight on a steep climb?

 

The LMR also liked to use pairs of locos on Royal Trains for insurance.... 216 and 233 were the select pair late 60s/early 70s, but photos of double headed 40s not that common....

 

IIRC the MU connections on Peaks gave trouble too.... and they did plenty of freight work on both the MML and NE/SE route, once the hordes of Brush 4s appeared they were both second string power on both ECML and WCML

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, rodent279 said:

Off the top of my head, at least classes 24/5, 30/31, 44-47 had roof mounted water fillers requiring bodyside steps. Not sure about the 26/7, 37 & 40's, baby hydraulics and baby Deltics-were they filled through the side doors? Clearly it wasn't an insurmountable problem, as Warships, and presumably Westerns, had bodyside mounted fillers. Class 76 & 77 also had boilers-their fillers certainly weren't roof mounted!

The cl. 26/27s had a square bodyside window which hinged inwards to allow filling. You can tell which one it is as the other bodyside windows have a rubber grommet around them.

In later years, this filling window could usually be seen either half-open or missing/fully open, presumably due to broken catches.

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Phil Bullock said:

Probably because the EE4s only delivered around 1600 HP at the rail whereas a transient effort from a Duchess - which they were to replace - could get somewhere nearer 2900 rhp when climbing the Northern fells with 13 coaches or more - a challenge the Peaks were less likely to encounter.

All correct although we have to remember that whilst both types of loco were designated Type 4, they way they delivered that power (tractive effort) was very different indeed.  The old Class 40's were a dependable and well proven engine, but had a fixed radiator and limited amperage per hour rating.  The Class 44's broke that barrier, with an electric fan, and higher tractive rating, all from a 12 cylinder intercooled engine.  Class 40's were okay for load 9 on Class 1 trips, and they put in some very good performances on the Highland Mainline circa 1970's from the Scottish crews.  The big Sulzers reigned supreme in my opinion, the 45's being the best of the bunch.  (We seem to have strayed off the point a wee bit again!)

 

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.