Jump to content
 

"MPD" or "Engine Shed"?


Harlequin
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

Hi Folks,

 

When did the term "Motive Power Depot", abbreviated to MPD, come into use in the UK?

 

The term feels wrong to me when talking about steam era railways and I'd like to use the right terminology for the different periods when I'm drawing plans.

 

(Google doesn't help much with this question. Naive searches return lots of pages about "Multiple Personality Disorder" and more railway specific searches return nothing about the history of the term.)

 

Edited by Harlequin
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

It was certainly used in steam days, and I believe originated with the Midland, to be used in turn by the LMS.  I remember using it myself as a spotty teenage spotter in the 60s.  I do not recall the term being used colloquially by railwaymen apart from in ex-LMS areas, though, either then or a decade later when I worked on the railway, either as ‘MPD’ or ‘Motive Power Depot’.  Engine shed or loco shed has less syllables than ‘motive power depot’ and conveys the meaning just as well.  
 

So, fine for steam era usage on LMS or BR layouts.  Engine shed was more widely used though; LMR apart only spotters used MPD. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It stems from the LMS Motive Power Reorganisation 0f  around1934, when many sheds were rebuilt to improve 'flow through', and they were arranged into two distinct types: Concentration Depots (A sheds) and Garage Depots (others, including sub-sheds). Major repairs and servicing above washouts were conducted at the Concentration Depots, or Motive Power Depots, while the Garages (sheds) were little more than storage facilities with provision for minor repairs only. It meant a certain change around in some places: Willesden (1a) was a concentration depot with Camden a garage (1B).

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Best I can do is this - in 1925 the LMS (Derby) posted a list of 'Engine Sheds' for the entire company although the title of the person in charge at any particular shed varied considerably depending on the size and importance of the shed.  In 1935 the LMS posted a map of 'Motive Power Depots'.  So I suspect the term 'District Motive Powrer Supt was in use on the LMS by then.  I can recall a BR era enamelled sign at one ex LMS depot proclaiming it to be a 'Motive Power Depot' in the early 1960s although the shed had by then become more or less exclusively diesel.  So to answer your question as far as positive evidence is concerned the LMS was using the term 'Motive Power Depots' in 1935 and possibly earlier

 

I suspect that in 1948 the LMS terminology was pushed into wider use - for example in the late 1950s the WR had  'District Motive Power Supts' but that title vanished in the 1960s reorganisations and with dieselisation when running and maintenance responsibilities were split.  WR depots were never 'Motive Power Depots' but in steam days were 'R&M Depots' which came under the R&M Dept (R&M = Running and Maintenance).  I don't know about other Regions.

 

Generally I think it was pretty well established by the 1930s, possibly earlier in some places, that larger sheds were managed by a Shedmaster and up to the end of steam i think it was pretty universal that such folk had served works based engineering apprenticeships although that definitely changed with dieselisation following the split of running and maintenance.  Smaller shed might have a Shed Foreman in charge while at larger sheds there would be shift Running Foremen and depending on the size and type of work being done Shift Chargehands in charge of maintenance work under a Maintenance Foreman.

 

Dieselistaion changed things massively with far fewer depots undertaking maintenance although there were also locations undertaking servicing.  Showing how it related to the new world and what did or didn't happen at various places the first place where I managed traincrew I was just an Assistant Area Manger and we had shift supervisors who were in charge of everything including traincrew.  Basically the same at the next place although there I was Assistant Area Manager Operations & Traincrew and because there was a small depot carrying out mainly servicing and minor repairs it had a totally separate Depot Foreman.  At the largest depot I was involved with I was the Area Traincrew Manager and at the loco depot I had a Shift Running Foreman and he had under him an Outside Foreman - all strictly the running and Driver management side.  But because it was a major maintenance depot, with a traction allocation, there was also an Area Maintenance Engineer plus hisvarious supervisors etc however unlike the steam age R&M days he also dealt with rolling stock maintenance.  

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Came from the LNWR possibly. They didn't call them engines.

 

There's a famous quote somewhere about an accident and the train having four engines and questions being asked about why they needed four to pull a train.

 

It was a four cylinder locomotive not four locomotives. The LNWR referred to cylinders and motion as engines.

 

 

Jason

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

There's a famous quote somewhere about an accident and the train having four engines and questions being asked about why they needed four to pull a train.

 

It was a four cylinder locomotive not four locomotives. The LNWR referred to cylinders and motion as engines.

I've heard the story but applied to a GWR engine, where the driver uncoupled a defective cylinder on a Star(?) and reported that he worked back with three 'engines', leading to questions being asked. Who knows?

 

It should be noted that the LNWR called their homes for resting engines 'steam sheds', not locomotive sheds.

 

There was still a lot of Midland influence in the LMS loco side at this time, far more than LNWR, but LMS top management had become very American in its composition, being run by a President rather than a Chairman, and its phraseology (freight trains rather than goods, for instance). Could it be a trans-Atlantic affectation?

Edited by LMS2968
Additional information
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
22 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

I've heard the story but applied to a GWR engine, where the driver uncoupled a defective cylinder on a Star(?) and reported that he worked back with three 'engines', leading to questions being asked. Who knows?

 

It should be noted that the LNWR called their homes for resting engines 'steam sheds', not locomotive sheds.

 

There was still a lot of Midland influence in the LMS loco side at this time, far more than LNWR, but LMS top management had become very American in its composition, being run by a President rather than a Chairman, and its phraseology (freight trains rather than goods, for instance). Could it be a trans-Atlantic affectation?

That's an interesting thought - it certainly feels like an American phrase, doesn't it?

You can imagine it being pronounced "Deepoh"...

 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

I've heard the story but applied to a GWR engine, where the driver uncoupled a defective cylinder on a Star(?) and reported that he worked back with three 'engines', leading to questions being asked. Who knows?

 

It should be noted that the LNWR called their homes for resting engines 'steam sheds', not locomotive sheds.

 

There was still a lot of Midland influence in the LMS loco side at this time, far more than LNWR, but LMS top management had become very American in its composition, being run by a President rather than a Chairman, and its phraseology (freight trains rather than goods, for instance). Could it be a trans-Atlantic affectation?

 

I read it was a Claughton. Can't remember where though.

 

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 'Motive  Power Depot' term's actually more suited to the steam than diesel era.

 

At Gateshead depot, in blue diesel days, the sign proclaimed 'Gateshead T.M.D.' (Traction Maintenance Depot). Not that I recall anyone actually using the term.

As Mike The Stationmaster has said, Running and Maintenance were split by then. The depot itself came under an  Area Maintenance Engineer, with his Supervisors and Maintenance Foremen. The traincrew depot on site came under he Area Traincrew Manager at Newcastle, with a Running Foreman at the depot.

 

Heaton, as an HST depot, became a T&RSMD (Traction and Rolling Stock)

These days it's a 'Traincare Depot', or some other such modern drivel

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can’t comment on official use of either of these terms, but all I can remember calling them, and hearing other spotters call them, was plain ‘shed’.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ken.W said:

Heaton, as an HST depot, became a T&RSMD (Traction and Rolling Stock)

These days it's a 'Traincare Depot', or some other such modern drivel

Depends where you look. SMIS still thinks it's either an HST depot or a TMD depending on which field I'm looking in because Network Rail's location lists don't agree with each other. The sign outside says "Train Maintenance Depot" and it operates under a Light Maintenance Depot licence from the ORR. 

 

Most staff refer to it as just Heaton Depot regardless of what it says on the gate and the unadorned 'depot' seems common useage for the other large-ish depots.  I expect it made a difference back in the day when BR had dozens of them but not now. 

Edited by Wheatley
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems to depend who you are - if you're the Ordnance Survey producing maps they are called engine sheds regularly (look at an old OS map to see the shed of your choice). DMU or EMU sheds may be called carriage sheds in some cases. 

 

If you are part of the rail industry it would depend on which railway, region or operating company or time period - however the BRB was formed in 1963 and removed much previous autonomy of individual Regions, some of which had resulted for instance, in very odd interpretations of national Policy in some Regions, or divergence in others based on business cases (eg WR Hydraulics; ECML Deltics). However after 1963, or even more probably the end of steam there may have been a period of countrywide standardisation of terminology for most things (including IIRC stabling points; signing on points, maintenance depots etc etc).  

Edited by MidlandRed
Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Free At Last said:

367033951_AintreeMPD.jpg.ad8b76d60ab0b701bd8d6792acecf100.jpg

 

I did say regularly called engine shed - however I don't think I've noticed them named as well as stating motive power depot before - what year is that OS Plan?

 

I wonder if they call them 'train presentation depot' these days (Bedford Thameslink for instance)...... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion.

 

The key phrase is 'Motive Power' - to that add 'Department', 'Superintendent', or 'Depot'. However it started, in the classic British Railways steam era, the 'Motive Power Department' was organised on the Regional-Divisional-District hierachy, similar to other BR functional departments. And 'Motive Power' was equally concerned with the management and provision of men (drivers, firemen, cleaners, fitters,etc) as they were the actual locomotives.

 

It all came together at the Motive Power Depot, with an allocation of locomotives and the men based there, according to the traffic that the depot served. As has already been mentioned, each district had it's principal 'concentration' depot (ie the 'A' code shed) which is where the District MPS would be based (or at least primarily concerned with).

 

I can understand some non-LMR locations kicking against the apparent imposition of a former LMS system but my understanding is this is how it was officially organised. Dick Hardy's 'Steam in the Blood' is a great read for first-hand experiences of how it all worked (mainly Southern and Eastern Region experience).

 

I agree that TMD is a modern term and probably came about as a result of the transition to diesel / electric traction ending the time-honoured tie between engines and men. Hence 'traction maintenance' refers to the trains and fitters - but no longer the drivers. Today's railway has many different permutations and combinations of how it is all managed, with TOCs having departments / functions such as 'fleet', 'engineering' , 'operations', 'production', commercial' - I've seen and experienced them all.

Edited by LNER4479
  • Like 1
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...