Locomotive Changes

[Joseph_Pestell]

Following the Peterborough North thread, I have become aware of how many ECML trains involved changes of loco at various points along the route.

 

To what extent was this also the practice on other railways and what would be the preferred distance?

 

The LSWR changed locos at Salisbury/Wilton and Exeter but it had the handicap of not having water troughs.

 

The Midland changed locos for Scottish services at Leeds - but the trains were reversing anyway.

 

Similarly the GW changed locos at various points around Plymouth but that was necessary because of the Royal Albert Bridge.

 

What was the situation on other lines?

[The Border Reiver]

The majority of trains changed engines at Carlisle in the 1950s and 1960s while I was spotting there

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Following the Peterborough North thread, I have become aware of how many ECML trains involved changes of loco at various points along the route.

 

To what extent was this also the practice on other railways and what would be the preferred distance?

 

The LSWR changed locos at Salisbury/Wilton and Exeter but it had the handicap of not having water troughs.

 

The Midland changed locos for Scottish services at Leeds - but the trains were reversing anyway.

 

Similarly the GW changed locos at various points around Plymouth but that was necessary because of the Royal Albert Bridge.

 

What was the situation on other lines?

 

Look at where the major engine sheds existed and you have at least the start of your answer.

 

Because it wasn't just water, steam required lots of maintenance (which is one of the reason diesel won - far less maintenance).

 

So on the GWR - Newton Abbot.  Engine changes for the Kingswear/Paignton line, plus the bankers Dainton.

Edited August 9, 2021 by mdvle

[sulzer27jd]

East coast passenger trains changed engines at Dundee. Originally related to the practice of keeping top link engines and men together, the need to change was therefore determined by the working hours of the crews, rostered to out and back services. There are also claims that this happened because of low water pressure at Tay Bridge Station. If water supply had really been such an issue I rather suspect the railways of the day would have done something to resolve the problem. However it may be that the working methods of the day meant that the cost of resolving the water supply issue was considered not viable. Perhaps we will never know. The result was that the through lines at Dundee TB were often used to exchange express passenger locos.

 

John

[LMS2968]

The limiting factors with a steam engine were the amount of char in the smokebox; the blockage of the airways past the firebars, which would become choked with clinker; and the volume of ash in the ashpan, all these restricting air flow through the fire and the ability to make steam. Pacifics were used on both East and West Coast routes as their wide fireboxes and increased ashpan capacity allowed longer continuous working, about 400 miles from London to Edinburgh or Glasgow.

 

On the West Coast in LNWR days, engines were generally changed at Stafford. On the LMS pre-war, Carlisle was the normal exchange point for the Royal Scot 4-6-0s. In BR days, the Pacifics, with a few exceptional workings, were changed at Carlisle if working from Euston. Birmingham trains used a 4-6-0 between there and Crewe, where a Pacific would then work through to Glasgow.

 

When a train was nominally non-stop, it would generally have a booked stop at Carlisle, but at Upperby or Kingmoor, just to change crews, with the engine continuing for the rest of the 400 miles. Post-war, coal was of a much reduced quality which forced shorter workings and more frequent loco exchanges.

[Wickham Green too]

Nobody's mentioned coal yet ! .................. water could be replenished - but coal troughs never caught on !

[TheSignalEngineer]

3 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Nobody's mentioned coal yet

The idea would be to match the coal capacity to the day's work where possible, or in the days of engines being allocated to a single crew it could be enough to get from one loco change to another to match in with their breaks. Carrying surplus coal cost unnecessary money.

 

Large passenger locos could do about 40-50 miles pre ton IIRC. 

On the GWR a King which carried 6 tons could just about do a round trip Paddington to Wolverhampton which was about 250 miles, Paddington to Plymouth was about 225 miles.

A Duchess tender could carry 10 tons which could easily do the 401 miles Euston to Glasgow. I think the Princesses originally had 9 ton tenders but these were thought to be a bit close for comfort.

Gresley used 8 ton tenders on his Pacifics but there were stories of these running into Kings Cross with empty tenders on long distance turns. The Thompson and Peppercorn Pacifics had 9 ton tenders.

[The Stationmaster]

10 minutes ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

The idea would be to match the coal capacity to the day's work where possible, or in the days of engines being allocated to a single crew it could be enough to get from one loco change to another to match in with their breaks. Carrying surplus coal cost unnecessary money.

 

Large passenger locos could do about 40-50 miles pre ton IIRC. 

On the GWR a King which carried 6 tons could just about do a round trip Paddington to Wolverhampton which was about 250 miles, Paddington to Plymouth was about 225 miles.

A Duchess tender could carry 10 tons which could easily do the 401 miles Euston to Glasgow. I think the Princesses originally had 9 ton tenders but these were thought to be a bit close for comfort.

Gresley used 8 ton tenders on his Pacifics but there were stories of these running into Kings Cross with empty tenders on long distance turns. The Thompson and Peppercorn Pacifics had 9 ton tenders.

But on a 'rough trip' Down from Paddington it wasn't unknown for a 'King' to come off at Newton for coal (it always seemed to be 'Kings' from what I was told by various ex Old Oak Firemen).  Castles' never seemed to have the problem from what i was told and they of course worked one of the toughest double home (lodging) turns on the Western which was Newton Abbot to Shrewsbury (and back the next day). 

 

A pal of mine - now deceased - used to pick up a regular Newcastle lodging turn when he was firing at Top Shed.  The return working was a parcels train with relief to pull coal forward at Doncaster and it was not at all unusual on that job with a Peppercorn pacific to arrive in the Cross with nothing but the sweepings of coal dust in the tender but i that was also a consequence of time as well as distance.

 

Some engine working was also very much tied up with portion working of coaching stock - hence engine changes at Plymouth which apart from distance run also saw portions detached from Down trains or added to Up trains.  The same happened on the ECML with portions being attached to some southbound trains at York and if the attachment was made front the attaching engine worked the train forwards.  I suspect that on the ECML some of the relatively short distance working by pacifcs might also have been a consequence of a policy of sharing work between the principal depots ?

[pH]

4 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Nobody's mentioned coal yet ! .................. water could be replenished - but coal troughs never caught on !

Not in the UK, and not troughs, but in the US there were coaling towers over main lines and tenders were refilled on locos without them having to cut off their trains:

 

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/770199/

[kevinlms]

7 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Nobody's mentioned coal yet ! .................. water could be replenished - but coal troughs never caught on !

The New York Central Niagara class 4-8-4 did replenish it's coal at the halfway point - all 46 Tons of it, of which they burnt just about the lot! Relative small water capacity, because the NYC had water troughs - a rarity in the US.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Central_Niagara

[Steamport Southport]

A lot of the changes occurred where trains were split.

 

For example a train coming from say Bristol to Liverpool and Manchester would split at Crewe. A quick change of engine whilst they are uncoupling the coaches. Usually to one needing to go back to it's home depot.

 

It was as much for crews. Would a driver from Bristol know the route to Liverpool? Possibly not. But there's several Edge Hill locos and crews at Crewe wanting to go back North.

 

This was all planned rather than haphazard.

 

 

 

Jason

[Nearholmer]

Have axle-weight restrictions been mentioned? Or, the need for locos with smaller driving wheels on steep and curvy sections?

 

For many years, the SR loco changes at Exeter were dictated by axle-weight limits, aside from the fact that west thereof the gradients got even steeper, although I think most trains shed their catering cars.

 

I'm less sure about changes at Salisbury, which were common in earlier times, but less so later: they may have been dictated by a combination of distance/time from home shed, the need for high tractive effort but a bit less speed, and very early on by axle-weight too. I'd be interested to hear more definitive answers.

 

Relatively small locos ruled on the Cambrian Coast because of weight limits too, although reversal at Shrewsbury dicatated a new loco there anyway.

[WillCav]

Cheltenham GW to London trains used to change locos at Gloucester as it was quicker than running round - this may have happened on other services that reversed re-route.

Will

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, WillCav said:

..... this may have happened on other services that reversed re-route. ....

Probably the norm for anything that reversed in steam days  -  otherwise the loco would be running tender-first unless time was allowed ( keeping the passengers waiting ) while the loco was turned.

[The Stationmaster]

On 10/08/2021 at 23:02, Wickham Green too said:

Probably the norm for anything that reversed in steam days  -  otherwise the loco would be running tender-first unless time was allowed ( keeping the passengers waiting ) while the loco was turned.

Exactly so - thus it happened at, for example, both Swansea High St and Carmarthen while passenger trains which didn't call at those stations (and therefore didn't reverse) had a through engine working over greater distances and changed engines at the limit of working for an engine or. crew.  So for example while trains to the Cambrian which reversed at Salop changed engines there the one which at certain times of year didn't call at Salop had an engine change at Wolverhampton where an engine suitable for the Cambrian route replace a larger engine, and vice versa.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Thanks to everyone who has contributed. Certainly given me cause for thought in layout design.

[Norton961]

Just to clarify the issue of trains from Wolverhampton to the Cambrian  not stopping at Shrewsbury ( the loco being changed at Wolverhampton). The trains would bypass Shrewsbury station using the curved link that passed behind the signal box from the Wolverhampton line and gave access to the Hereford line and the Cambrian Junct. The trains bypassing the station tended to be the summer Saturday extras. At Wellington, where the normal expresses would stop, you could see 73xx 2-6-0s thrashing through without stopping on there way to the Cambrian and using the Shrewsbury curve. Trains such as the Cambrian Coast express would still reverse at Shrewsbury as coaches would be added and loco changed to one suitable for the Cambrian line.

David

[Norton961]

There were lots of loco changes at Shrewsbury where trains from Manchester,Liverpool and Crewe to Bristol and the South coast, which would arrive with LM locos ( Duchesses, Re built Scots, Jubilees) would hand over to Western Region locos ( Castles, Halls etc). However not all trains would change locos at Shrewsbury, many would go on and change engines at Pontypool Rd particularly the summer services.

Paddington to Birkenhead trains would sometimes change at Shrewsbury where the newly introduced Class 47s arriving from Paddington would hand over to steam ( usually a Black 5) for the run to Chester where the train would reverse and a 2-6-4 tank would take over for the short run to Birkenhead.

 

David

[Michael Hodgson]

On 10/08/2021 at 23:02, Wickham Green too said:

Probably the norm for anything that reversed in steam days  -  otherwise the loco would be running tender-first unless time was allowed ( keeping the passengers waiting ) while the loco was turned.

A number of long distance trains on the continent reversed at various places en route rather than running through.  I doubt if this was a historical accident, as the distance between many major European cities was such that a few engine changes would be needed.   Assuming you're going to have to change locos, there's a lot to be said for reversing as it can be done quicker than changing engines at the same end.

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

A number of long distance trains on the continent reversed at various places en route rather than running through.  I doubt if this was a historical accident .....

Yes an' no ........ those long distance trains would have started out - in the dim and distant past - as point A to to point B trains which agglomerated to serve C, D etc. over the years. Consequently, few major city stations were built with through lines - though there are notable exceptions.

[TheSignalEngineer]

4 hours ago, Norton961 said:

Trains such as the Cambrian Coast express would still reverse at Shrewsbury as coaches would be added and loco changed to one suitable for the Cambrian line.

In the late 1950s the Down Cambrian changed locos at Wolverhampton on Summer Saturdays, running non-stop from Wolverhampton to Welshpool via the Abbey Foregate loop.

Due to line capacity on the Welshpool route there were several Summer Saturday  Birmingham trains to and from Pwllheli which ran via Llangollen with reversal at Ruabon.

[Compound2632]

On 09/08/2021 at 13:13, Joseph_Pestell said:

The Midland changed locos for Scottish services at Leeds - but the trains were reversing anyway.

 

In Midland days, Scotch expresses changed engines at Leicester and Leeds - I think one engine running through between St Pancras and Leeds came in with the larger engines of the 1930s? When the Settle & Carlisle first opened, the pattern was for engines to be changed at Leicester, Normanton (where there was a half-hour luncheon stop), and Skipton (where train was split into Glasgow and Edinburgh portions  with carriages from Leeds and Manchester added).

 

I don't think the issue was water - troughs were invented by the LNWR*, which still changed engines after 120 - 150 miles - or even coal but, rather, the capacity of the locomotive's grate. It would seem that with a grate area of no more than 20 sq ft, typical for 19th century engines, the limit was around 100 miles.

 

*The LNWR took advantage of the water troughs to build tenders of much lower capacity than other companies were using - in the 1890s Webb was building 2,000 gal tenders where Johnson on the Midland was up to 3,250 gal - enough to get from London to Nottingham. Lower capacity tenders of course weighed less.

[LMS2968]

There was also the issue of crews being permanently allocated to an individual engine, so mileage was also constrained by their working hours.

[Compound2632]

10 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

There was also the issue of crews being permanently allocated to an individual engine, so mileage was also constrained by their working hours.

 

Less of an issue in the era of the 12-hour day... 

 

When Jeanie Deans was on the Corridor; 1890-99, she worked down to Crewe and back with the up train - a round trip of 316 miles - with two regular sets of driver and fireman for much of the period, each pair working the train every other day; I don't know what work they did on the alternate day, probably some nice relaxing stopper.

[The Stationmaster]

21 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

In Midland days, Scotch expresses changed engines at Leicester and Leeds - I think one engine running through between St Pancras and Leeds came in with the larger engines of the 1930s? When the Settle & Carlisle first opened, the pattern was for engines to be changed at Leicester, Normanton (where there was a half-hour luncheon stop), and Skipton (where train was split into Glasgow and Edinburgh portions  with carriages from Leeds and Manchester added).

 

I don't think the issue was water - troughs were invented by the LNWR*, which still changed engines after 120 - 150 miles - or even coal but, rather, the capacity of the locomotive's grate. It would seem that with a grate area of no more than 20 sq ft, typical for 19th century engines, the limit was around 100 miles.

 

*The LNWR took advantage of the water troughs to build tenders of much lower capacity than other companies were using - in the 1890s Webb was building 2,000 gal tenders where Johnson on the Midland was up to 3,250 gal - enough to get from London to Nottingham. Lower capacity tenders of course weighed less.

The grate area per se was not the major problem, it was the consequences of it.  What really mattered was the capacity of the ashpan because as it filled it would limit the primary air supply through to the bottom of the fire.  Smaller ashpans needed clearing after a lower mileage than the larger ones.  The need for larger ashpans for longer distance running was partly what caused the likes of Ivatt, Gresley, and Stanier and others to go in for wider fireboxes although increasing the depth of the ashpan was another solution.