Jump to content

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

On the HST mileage debate, worth noting that they were introduced from the mid/late 70s.  So a unit released to traffic could have been up to c45 years in traffic.  In context, that’s the equivalent of 2509 being withdrawn in 1980.  Remarkable bits of kit. (the hst.  The A4 obviously is - not sure you can print on this thread if you state otherwise!)

 

I’m not sure total mileage is a useful metric.  I’d have though mean distance between failures, km in passenger service would be more useful.  Revenue/seat would be interesting as well.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Over how many years? (Purely out of interest!)

 

Let's say 60 years.  Number 120 was not withdrawn when she was painted in LSWR livery as a prelude to preservation, so she was the last 4-4-0 in service on British Railways.  Finally retired in August 1963.  Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. That's about what I would have guessed.

 

So 2million miles in 60 years ....

1 million miles in 30 years ...

33,000 miles a year ...

Compared to 55-60k per year for the 1930s big pacifics

 

So, although significantly less than modern traction, by the standards of the day, the usage of the A4s and others would have been impressive at the time.

Edited by LNER4479
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stewartingram said:

Wasn't it also involved in the Sandy derailment? (wheelset problem on a coach?)

 

Stewart

Not been able to fund a report of the Sandy derailment, but the newspaper reports of the Great Heck accident state this was the 2nd accident for 91132 and various websites quote only two major accidents involving the class.

Of the 10 set that will remain in service until 2023/2024, 91110 has been selected for the national collection as it holds the speed record of 161.7mph which achieved just south of........   Little Bytham.

 

Nigel L

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony talks about the Claytons being unreliable and catching fire, unfortunately only one of those was true. Yes they were unreliable but they did not catch fire ( that was the North British Type 2s). The problem with the Claytons was that they were proposed by Claytons with the Rolls Royce V8 engines ( Claytons were owned by Rolls Royce) but the BR board insisted on a different engine ( from Paxman) which had never been used ( except for a single 2 car unit that never entered revenue service) in rail service. The result was failure after failure. I have an official Clayton document which shows that there were crank shaft failures on locos before delivery! This was a classic case where the British Railways board were pressurised  by Paxman to give them a share of the  Pilot scheme diesels, the result finished any chance of Claytons building more main line locomotives and resulted in the premature withdrawal of the Claytons.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Clearwater said:

On the HST mileage debate, worth noting that they were introduced from the mid/late 70s.  So a unit released to traffic could have been up to c45 years in traffic.  In context, that’s the equivalent of 2509 being withdrawn in 1980.  Remarkable bits of kit. (the hst.  The A4 obviously is - not sure you can print on this thread if you state otherwise!)

 

I’m not sure total mileage is a useful metric.  I’d have though mean distance between failures, km in passenger service would be more useful.  Revenue/seat would be interesting as well.

 

David

When I watched the last HSTs leaving Paddington two years ago, it occurred to me that had the GWR Castles lasted as long I would have grown up watching them too.

 

It's been pointed out by many engineers that miles per casualty is not really meaningful for trains; they are really industrial equipment rather than vehicles so operation should be measured in hours (as diesel locomotive engines always used to be).  So faster diesels can cover more miles in a day than those they replaced while actually operating for fewer hours, yet still be considered more reliable.

 

The Golden Spanner awards tend to show SWR's 158/159 DMUs as the best and until last year, Pacers as the worst.  However this takes no account of the stop-start nature of much Pacer operation, while Waterloo to Salisbury/Exeter services don't normally stop before Woking and usually Basingstoke, so the engines are running at steady, moderate load for long periods.  If they were judged by hours per casualty, they would still come out as much more reliable than the Pacer fleet but the margin would be somewhat smaller.

 

Rob

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things that struck me reading Yeadon's Register was the amount of maintenance steam engines needed, and the number of sub-depots around the system that could perform repairs-such as Gateshead, Peterborough and Haymarket,  Even places like Lincoln had wheel drops.  Whereas modern diesels can be maintained by module replacement, steam engines spent far more time out of traffic for even mundane attention. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Some impressive mileage figures of late.................................

 

At the other end of the scale we have the likes of this.

 

1285648194_HeljanClayton02.jpg.b182fb7b3b278cf7f68e2f03611b2df8.jpg

 

They were unreliable, caught fire and the jobs they were built for were disappearing faster than the individual units were being delivered.

 

Still, it makes an impressive model; Heljan's latest O Gauge offering.

 

A full review will be appearing in BRM. 

 

 

Hello Tony

 

Just like their 00 offering you cannot get your hand around the hand rail along the engine rooms. In 7mm separate handrails, surely, are a must.

 

I managed it on my plastic card efforts many moons ago.

 

100_5128a.jpg.30a944ae536a6a46dd905973b5490f8c.jpg

The one at the back has a broken one.

  • Like 5
  • Craftsmanship/clever 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

More importantly, a working like that is an ideal fit for the then standard eight hour engineman's working day. Despite their high speed reputation, there were in fact only a handful of 60mph timings; more typically, Grantham-London timings were 2hrs 20mins to 2hrs 30mins. Double that, and that's best part of five hours concentration on the road ahead (driver) and five hours physical labour (fireman) within the eight hours - a reasonable day's work and one that attracted mileage payment, being in excess of 150.

 

Much as we love 'em, there are good reasons why steam locos didn't turn in particularly impressive lifetime figures compared to their modern counterparts!

And everybody thinks that increased speed is all about getting business people who think that they are very important from A to B faster. 

 

It isn't at all, it is about reducing the number of trains that you need to buy and the number of people to run them. No, do not get me started on 5 car Class 800s coupled together that need 2 lots of catering staff and equipment.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Norton961 said:

Tony talks about the Claytons being unreliable and catching fire, unfortunately only one of those was true. Yes they were unreliable but they did not catch fire ( that was the North British Type 2s). The problem with the Claytons was that they were proposed by Claytons with the Rolls Royce V8 engines ( Claytons were owned by Rolls Royce) but the BR board insisted on a different engine ( from Paxman) which had never been used ( except for a single 2 car unit that never entered revenue service) in rail service. The result was failure after failure. I have an official Clayton document which shows that there were crank shaft failures on locos before delivery! This was a classic case where the British Railways board were pressurised  by Paxman to give them a share of the  Pilot scheme diesels, the result finished any chance of Claytons building more main line locomotives and resulted in the premature withdrawal of the Claytons.

I can't recall in which magazine I saw it at the time, but there was a shot of a Clayton with one end completely gutted.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jrg1 said:

One of the things that struck me reading Yeadon's Register was the amount of maintenance steam engines needed, and the number of sub-depots around the system that could perform repairs-such as Gateshead, Peterborough and Haymarket,  Even places like Lincoln had wheel drops.  Whereas modern diesels can be maintained by module replacement, steam engines spent far more time out of traffic for even mundane attention. 

I think it's accepted that steam locos needed (need) more time out of service for maintenance, but what's not always remembered is that they would keep going in such a bad state of repair, whereas alternative (more modern) motive power would fail totally if left to get in such a condition.

 

Was it Adrian Vaughan (a WR signalman) who wrote that a 'Hymek' failed by his 'box one day because the driver had knocked a cup of sweet tea over on the console, and the subsequent sticky residue had insulated some of the contacts?

 

Expanding on the subject, I think the 'pinnacle' of post-War A4 running was non-stop  'Elizabethan' where the standard of reliability was incredibly high. Granted, the individual locos only worked for six and a half hours in 24, but it was continuous. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Lemmy282 said:

Not been able to fund a report of the Sandy derailment, but the newspaper reports of the Great Heck accident state this was the 2nd accident for 91132 and various websites quote only two major accidents involving the class.

Of the 10 set that will remain in service until 2023/2024, 91110 has been selected for the national collection as it holds the speed record of 161.7mph which achieved just south of........   Little Bytham.

 

Nigel L

Good morning Nigel,

 

Whenever one looks at the logs of record-breaking runs in this country (by any form of motive power), the name 'Little Bytham' appears far more than any other. Of course, it has the benefit of being two thirds of the way down Stoke Bank (with gravity assistance), but there are far more authenticated 'tons' recorded in the vicinity than anywhere else in the realm. That's why I was slightly puzzled when TORNADO broke the magic hundred between Darlington and York, rather than be given the assistance of gravity further south. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I think it's accepted that steam locos needed (need) more time out of service for maintenance, but what's not always remembered is that they would keep going in such a bad state of repair, whereas alternative (more modern) motive power would fail totally if left to get in such a condition.

 

That sounds a bit like cars. My MGB will limp home on three cylinders and belching black smoke if I’m really desperate. If something goes wrong with my Jag XF the LCD display tells me to seek assistance or similar. Meanwhile it has a sit down sulk and I’m stuck.

 

That might be better for the environment but it can be very annoying!

Edited by thegreenhowards
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 26/03/2021 at 10:08, St Enodoc said:

If you ask nicely and bring some cake. I should have the New Model Railways issue that Graham mentioned as well.

I think I’ll have some birthday cake left over, homemade red velvet. 

  • Like 1
  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

That's why I was slightly puzzled when TORNADO broke the magic hundred between Darlington and York, rather than be given the assistance of gravity further south. 

 

Highly meritorious, though!

 

It led me to wonder afterwards how many UK steam 100mph maxima were actually achieved on the flat? For info, on that night, there was a 50mph slack through Thirsk so it was a true acceleration from that speed up to 100mph with no assistance from gravity to speak of (I think 1-in-600-ish is about as steep as it gets in the Thirsk area). Nine coaches - and no diesel (just in case anyone asks!)

 

I'm pretty certain all ECML 100mph maxima were with the assistance of gravity. However, I'm not well acquainted enough with the WoEML to comment on whether 1967 Bulleid maxima had the assistance of gravity (nor Kings on the Western) so happy to be put right on that.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 minutes ago, rowanj said:

I'm sorry you (and everybody) thought I was self-important when I used to drag myself out of bed at Newcastle at 5-30 to go to London and get back home usually about 11.00 at night. I assure you that the folk I travelled with didnt think we were lucky, other than that faster speeds meant meetings lasted 1 day rather than meaning an overnight stay.

 

Sorry for the confusion and the apparent slight. I was not referring to those doing the travelling feeling self-important, I was referring to those who think that increased speed is merely to get people from A to B more quickly, and therefore assume that the traveller feels self-important. I used to work in an office at Euston, and travelling from and to Ross-on-Wye just made me feel tired.

 

Please accept my apology if I offended you, I can assure you that it was unintended.

  • Friendly/supportive 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LNER4479 said:

Highly meritorious, though!

 

It led me to wonder afterwards how many UK steam 100mph maxima were actually achieved on the flat? For info, on that night, there was a 50mph slack through Thirsk so it was a true acceleration from that speed up to 100mph with no assistance from gravity to speak of (I think 1-in-600-ish is about as steep as it gets in the Thirsk area). Nine coaches - and no diesel (just in case anyone asks!)

 

I'm pretty certain all ECML 100mph maxima were with the assistance of gravity. However, I'm not well acquainted enough with the WoEML to comment on whether 1967 Bulleid maxima had the assistance of gravity (nor Kings on the Western) so happy to be put right on that.


I don’t know about the Kings but I’m pretty sure that the 1967 Bullied runs were down the banks from Andover to Salisbury or Worting to around Shawford. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting one of the Bullied drivers in his later days - you would never believe he was a young ‘speed merchant’!

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LNER4479 said:

Highly meritorious, though!

 

It led me to wonder afterwards how many UK steam 100mph maxima were actually achieved on the flat? For info, on that night, there was a 50mph slack through Thirsk so it was a true acceleration from that speed up to 100mph with no assistance from gravity to speak of (I think 1-in-600-ish is about as steep as it gets in the Thirsk area). Nine coaches - and no diesel (just in case anyone asks!)

 

I'm pretty certain all ECML 100mph maxima were with the assistance of gravity. However, I'm not well acquainted enough with the WoEML to comment on whether 1967 Bulleid maxima had the assistance of gravity (nor Kings on the Western) so happy to be put right on that.

It was hugely meritorious, especially since 60163 did it 'on the level'.

 

As I mentioned, Stoke Bank has been the location for just about all (if not all) of the ECML records. The big difference between steam and diesel/electric traction is that the latter achieved 'normal' line speeds whether they were going up or down Stoke. I recall a magic ride behind BALLYMOSS one day when she topped Stoke at 100 mph, going north!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Lemmy282 said:

Not been able to fund a report of the Sandy derailment, but the newspaper reports of the Great Heck accident state this was the 2nd accident for 91132 and various websites quote only two major accidents involving the class.

Of the 10 set that will remain in service until 2023/2024, 91110 has been selected for the national collection as it holds the speed record of 161.7mph which achieved just south of........   Little Bytham.

 

Latest edition of Railway Herald confirms that it was this loco that was involved in both Great Heck and Sandy accidents. It goes on to say that 91 103, 104 & 108 will be next to go and are currently being stripped for spares to keep the rest of the fleet operational.

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

As I mentioned, Stoke Bank has been the location for just about all (if not all) of the ECML records.

The notable exception being No.2709 on 27th Sept 1935 with the Silver Jubilee demonstration run. The 112mph maxima on that day was achieved on the north bound run south of Peterborough, taking advantage of the falling gradients from Potters Bar onwards, having first ascended the 'northern heights'. What was it - 43 miles at an average of 100mph? One of the all-time 'greats' of the steam age.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Was it Adrian Vaughan (a WR signalman) who wrote that a 'Hymek' failed by his 'box one day because the driver had knocked a cup of sweet tea over on the console, and the subsequent sticky residue had insulated some of the contacts?

There is a Defence Standard test which had to be applied to a operator's console in a military helicopter I was involved in testing.  It requires the console to continue to work when tea, coffee or orange juice is spilled over it and I seem to remember the test specification defines the number of sugars in the tea.  We did joke with the pilots that the test really should consider the impact of spilling their Gin and Tonic.

 

Rob

  • Like 3
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Highly meritorious, though!

 

It led me to wonder afterwards how many UK steam 100mph maxima were actually achieved on the flat? For info, on that night, there was a 50mph slack through Thirsk so it was a true acceleration from that speed up to 100mph with no assistance from gravity to speak of (I think 1-in-600-ish is about as steep as it gets in the Thirsk area). Nine coaches - and no diesel (just in case anyone asks!)

 

I'm pretty certain all ECML 100mph maxima were with the assistance of gravity. However, I'm not well acquainted enough with the WoEML to comment on whether 1967 Bulleid maxima had the assistance of gravity (nor Kings on the Western) so happy to be put right on that.

 

From Wikipedia: "On 26 June 1967, [rebuilt MN] 35003 Royal Mail recorded the highest speed ever for the class. Hauling a train comprising three carriages and two parcels vans (164 tons tare, 180 tons gross) between Weymouth and Waterloo, the mile between milepost 38 and milepost 37 (located between Winchfield and Fleet) was covered in 34 seconds, a speed of 105.88 mph."

 

According to the gradient profiles this was done on a stretch of level track after descending a short stretch of 1 in 460, preceded by a level section and a stretch of 1 in 249.

Edited by SD85
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Back when Rebuilt Merchants still worked through to Exeter, the "racing road" for Bulleids was the long straight bit on the down line near Chard Junction where there was no risk of scalding diners. The gradient is variable, but I think most of it is falling at 1 in 120 .

 

The fastest speed officially recorded was 35028 Clan Line, at 104mph, on a normal express service, so 10+ coaches. However, when that became public, more than one driver expressed the opinion that 104 was "just warming up" for certain other members of the class that had achieved "at least 110" there. 

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 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...