Jump to content
 

Class 48 in 00 Considered by “Model Rail”


No Decorum
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

If there is enough interest in a class 48, maybe attentions will turn to 47901 too.


I think 47901 would be a absolute winner and even though it was a one off, it was seen on heavy stone trains out of Westbury, in the capital, Bristol and I don’t know if there’s much difference between 47601 and 47901 apart from a early high intensity light on 901.  If there’s very little between the two, you could add Tinsley and the Yorkshire coalfields when it was fitted with a Ruston-Paxman 16RK3CT as a test locomotive for the upcoming Class 56’s.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 hours ago, jools1959 said:


I think 47901 would be a absolute winner and even though it was a one off, it was seen on heavy stone trains out of Westbury, in the capital, Bristol and I don’t know if there’s much difference between 47601 and 47901 apart from a early high intensity light on 901.  If there’s very little between the two, you could add Tinsley and the Yorkshire coalfields when it was fitted with a Ruston-Paxman 16RK3CT as a test locomotive for the upcoming Class 56’s.

I would buy one, but there is a lot of work to make both 47901:

  • New cab front
  • New bogies
  • New roof.

I have a feeling the fuel tanks were different also.


Roy

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
15 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

I would buy one, but there is a lot of work to make both 47901:

  • New cab front
  • New bogies
  • New roof.

I have a feeling the fuel tanks were different also.


Roy


I had a quick look on Flickr and I can’t see any detail differences regarding the cabs but I did notice that the early high intensity light was present on both 601 and 901.  47901 also seemed to have a more pronounced roof details over 601, but that could be just the way it photographed.

 

Again I couldn’t see any difference on the bogies, so I wonder if differences were internal and different gear ratios?  Also I checked the fuel tanks but again, I couldn’t see any difference between them to my untrained eyes.

 

 I read somewhere that 47901’s engine was removed when it was sold for scrap and it rode up on it’s springs by several inches because of the lack of weight.  The results were that it hit several bridges on the motorway.  I don’t know if that’s true or not 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, jools1959 said:


I had a quick look on Flickr and I can’t see any detail differences regarding the cabs but I did notice that the early high intensity light was present on both 601 and 901.  47901 also seemed to have a more pronounced roof details over 601, but that could be just the way it photographed.

 

Again I couldn’t see any difference on the bogies, so I wonder if differences were internal and different gear ratios?  Also I checked the fuel tanks but again, I couldn’t see any difference between them to my untrained eyes.

 

 I read somewhere that 47901’s engine was removed when it was sold for scrap and it rode up on it’s springs by several inches because of the lack of weight.  The results were that it hit several bridges on the motorway.  I don’t know if that’s true or not 

The cab front needs to be different for that headlight, no other 47 had it there. Unlike a 37, where you can just have a nose, the 47 is a whole new cab front. 
 

The bogies were modified to have sand boxes. 

Also, I forgot that it had one less bodyside  window on one side.

 

Roy

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

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

The cab front needs to be different for that headlight, no other 47 had it there. Unlike a 37, where you can just have a nose, the 47 is a whole new cab front. 
 

The bogies were modified to have sand boxes. 

Also, I forgot that it had one less bodyside  window on one side.

 

Roy


A man who knows his stuff, unlike me :D.  When I was at Westbury, I knew drivers who had driven 47901 and they never said a bad word about it.  But then again, they never said a good word about it either :sarcastic:

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 16/09/2020 at 03:38, Roy Langridge said:

The cab front needs to be different for that headlight, no other 47 had it there. Unlike a 37, where you can just have a nose, the 47 is a whole new cab front. 
 

The bogies were modified to have sand boxes. 

Also, I forgot that it had one less bodyside  window on one side.

 

Roy

The sandboxes are the same type as the class 47/57 type freightliner had done at brush, The front end headlight was carried by at least one other 47. Would quite fancy a model of 47523 with this light. 

Screenshot_20200920-134530_Flickr.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
15 minutes ago, PM47079 said:

The sandboxes are the same type as the class 47/57 type freightliner had done at brush, The front end headlight was carried by at least one other 47. Would quite fancy a model of 47523 with this light. 

 

 

Wasn't aware of 47523's light. It is in teh same place for sure, although a slightly different fitting.


The sand boxes on Freightliner 47s and 57s are a different shape to those on 47901. The Freightliner sandboxes had a narrow round neck and cap, 47901 a flat square cap (amongst other differences).

Roy

Edited by Roy Langridge
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/09/2020 at 22:25, Neil Phillips said:

The five members of Class 48 used to amuse us spotters in the late 1960s as their allocation regularly alternated between Tinsley 41A and Stratford 30A - they were that "popular"! 

 

 

They were certainly popular on the GN&GE during the late 1960s. A few hours spotting would guarantee at least a couple on coal trains/empties between Whitemoor and either Mansfield Concentration Sidings, or Warsop Junction. 

 

Obviously, they were not a success compared with the ordinary 47s but I don't know why they moved to Stratford. Maybe to try them on passenger services to/from Liverpool Street? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

Wasn't aware of 47523's light. It is in teh same place for sure, although a slightly different fitting.


The sand boxes on Freightliner 47s and 57s are a different shape to those on 47901. The Freightliner sandboxes had a narrow round neck and cap, 47901 a flat square cap (amongst other differences).

Roy

Shame about the sandboxes being different, I had been told when we got the 47/57 sand mod that they were the same design but as you say they are different. They have been modified somewhat. The sanders were operated using the button on the power controller which was the antislip button. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
10 hours ago, PM47079 said:

The sandboxes are the same type as the class 47/57 type freightliner had done at brush, The front end headlight was carried by at least one other 47. Would quite fancy a model of 47523 with this light. 

Screenshot_20200920-134530_Flickr.jpg

Looks like the light on a class 87 as built (just more recessed).

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So on top of all of the other changes 47901 would also require internal circuitry changes to power that extra headlamp. More £££. Can't see it happening.

Kernow' s D845 is the ideal kind of special commission from a retailer's viewpoint - run 504 extra D841s with additional paintwork and different name/number/headcodes. No tooling changes required. Where the correct tooling exists it helps if the right suite is used - not the case with Kernow's weathered two-tone green Class 24 D5072 with the (incorrect) later 'open' underframe and Modelzone's Class 25 D5218 in Bsyp with BR emblem sporting (incorrect) welded-up communication doors - and both with (incorrect) blanked boiler compartment grilles. Basically early versions using later tooling. A pity as the latter really appealed. Ah well, things have moved on now.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, Neil Phillips said:

So on top of all of the other changes 47901 would also require internal circuitry changes to power that extra headlamp. More £££. Can't see it happening.

Kernow' s D845 is the ideal kind of special commission from a retailer's viewpoint - run 504 extra D841s with additional paintwork and different name/number/headcodes. No tooling changes required. Where the correct tooling exists it helps if the right suite is used - not the case with Kernow's weathered two-tone green Class 24 D5072 with the (incorrect) later 'open' underframe and Modelzone's Class 25 D5218 in Bsyp with BR emblem sporting (incorrect) welded-up communication doors - and both with (incorrect) blanked boiler compartment grilles. Basically early versions using later tooling. A pity as the latter really appealed. Ah well, things have moved on now.....

 

Not sure why you think the circuitry would need to change, I am sure Heljan will be planning for 47s with a headlight. Sure, the light-guides will need to change, but that would be all. 

 

Roy

Edited by Roy Langridge
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

Not sure why you think the circuitry would need to change, I am sure Heljan will be planning for 47s with a headlight. Sure, the light-guides will need to change, but that would be all. 

 

Roy

 

Good point Roy, I wasn't thinking outside the box around the photo of 47523! :mocking_mini: 

This was the original D1106, which was a mega-cop for this Cornwall-based spotter when seen at Reading on 5/4/69. It was in such gleaming green full yellow condition that I saw it approaching in the far distance as it swung onto the straight to the west of the station, and knew it was something special! Sorry, that's a little OT......

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:


Quite true, and probably shows 47901 would be a better bet than a 48!

 

Roy


If 47901 had been announced instead, Model Rail’s server would have crashed under the weight of emails :jester:

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 16/09/2020 at 08:56, jools1959 said:


A man who knows his stuff, unlike me :D.  When I was at Westbury, I knew drivers who had driven 47901 and they never said a bad word about it.  But then again, they never said a good word about it either :sarcastic:


everytime I saw it, it was at Westbury, on shed, if it wasn't there it was at Bath Road... I think once I saw it light engine, between Westbury and Bath rd. I saw it at Doncaster Works once.  :rolleyes:
 

to be fair, it did seem a shed queen, but I did see it a few times on ARC/Yeomans, though mostly in its Blue days, I didnt see as much of it in action in Construction, but it did make a few opendays.

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
22 minutes ago, adb968008 said:


everytime I saw it, it was at Westbury, on shed, if it wasn't there it was at Bath Road... I think once I saw it light engine, between Westbury and Bath rd. I saw it at Doncaster Works once.  :rolleyes:
 

to be fair, it did seem a shed queen, but I did see it a few times on ARC/Yeomans, though mostly in its Blue days, I didnt see as much of it in action in Construction, but it did make a few opendays.


To be honest, I think it was allocated to a particular link at Westbury, so only a limited number of drivers knew it.  It was worked quite hard and by a couple of drivers, thought it was better than a Class 56.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 minutes ago, jools1959 said:

  It was worked quite hard and by a couple of drivers, thought it was better than a Class 56.

Thats not exactly setting the bar very high though.

56’s were a bit unreliable.

Wasnt that why FY bought the 59’s ?

 

 

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Thats not exactly setting the bar very high though.

56’s were a bit unreliable.

Wasnt that why FY bought the 59’s ?

 

 


Agreed and when FY approached EMD, they wanted six but EMD convinced them that four was all they needed.  And they were proved right, much to BR’s dismay.

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

In summer/autumn 1984 I was commuting from Swindon to Bristol and took a camera with me every day. One evening on the way home I spotted 47901 in the Wootton Bassett stone terminal sidings so rushed back there on the way home (it wasn't actually on the way home.....;))  to grab a couple of photos. It was in clean BR blue livery with red bufferbeams including the cowls and lower side framing. Unfortunately scanning all those 1984 photos is still on my retirement to-do list.....

  • Like 3
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...