Steam - Electric traction changeover on the Metropolitan query

[RateTheFreight]

All,

 

Does anyone have any particualr details about how the changeover between electric (i'm thinking Met Bo-Bo engines) and steam traction took place on the former Metropolitan lines.

I believe it used to happen at Rickmansworth (?) however i'd be interested to see if anyone could answer the following queries;

 

 - was the time required for the changeover built into the timetable for Baker Street - 'Metro land' services and return? If so, how long was normally given to do the change?

 

- does anyone have a picture of the layout of Rickmansworth?

 

- were there stabling facilities/sheds for waiting steam/electric engines?

 

- did the timetable coincide so that a Down electric would be timed to meet an Up steam service?

 

Apologies if this should sit in the discussion rather than question thread.

 

Thanks as always.

G

[Oldddudders]

Is this any help?

 

[Gwiwer]

Having witnessed this event numerous times as a fairly young lad I remember exactly as the clip shows.

 

The electric loco ran in from Baker Street or the City, was uncoupled at Rickmansworth and ran forward.  It crossed over to the "up" side and ran back through the platform to a siding at the south end where it awaited its next City-bound duty.

 

The steam loco backed down from a siding north of the station on the down side and coupled to the train taking it forwards to Aylesbury (or beyond while the line was still open).

 

A City-bound train would arrive behind steam which uncoupled, ran forward and crossed to the "down" line before running back to the north-end siding where it would in turn await its next duty while the electric would back on from the south-end siding before proceeding.

 

Can't say I remember the parallel movements as seen in the clip but knowing how slick the Met were and - sometimes - the pressure on track occupation such moves don't surprise me in the last.

[RateTheFreight]

Thank's for the vid and info gents, very informative indeed.

 

G

[RateTheFreight]

Thinking about it, with regards to freight, were these steam hauled throughout to/from the city or were freight services subject to traction changes too?

 

I'd imagine Rickmansworth would have made an interesting place to spend an afternoon given all the activity!

G

[Gwiwer]

"Freight" on the Met would have been mostly civil engineer's trains rather than commercial payloads.  Many of those trains were indeed steam worked throughout and the Croxley Tip trains (which didn't quite reach Rickmansworth) were famously the last duties of the ex-GWR pannier tanks until 1971.

 

Electric locos of the Met type are not known to me to have worked revenue-earning freights (though may have done at some time in their long lives) and until No.12 became a departmental loco - officially she's still a brake-block test loco - they didn't appear very often on engineer's trains either.  Those were more often worked over electrified lines by the various tube-sized battery-electric locos.

 

However going back rather further into Met history there were the fascinating mixed (passenger and goods) trains on the Brill Tramway worked variously by small MR locos or before then by one of a pair of Aveling & Porter rail-mounted traction engines!

[mow]

Having looked at the video, I am wondering does the film show 2 types of tank engine in use?

[ChrisH]

Yes,  one looks like a Fowler 2-6-4T, the one shot from above is a LNER  L1 2-6-4T

 

Chris

[Suzie]

You might like to get hold of Model Rail No183 (June2013) which has a lot of info and a nice article including a layout design of Rickmansworth with changing traction from steam to electric.

[stewartingram]

Pedant mode - I think Sarah Siddons has now passed into the care of the museum rather than being a brake test loco? Nevertheless, glad she is still around and working.

 

Stewart

[johnb]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....

 

Can't say I remember the parallel movements as seen in the clip but knowing how slick the Met were and - sometimes - the pressure on track occupation such moves don't surprise me in the last.

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

I too was a regular watcher from the footbridge just south of Ricky station. Yes occasionally there were parallel movements, Very impressive that was to see. Southbound the uncoupled steam would pull forward, the points would flick over, the steam loco would run northwards over the crossover and pull up behind the northbound train and simultaneously the electric would pull out of the stabling sidings onto the front of the train, another flick of the points and all would pull away. The steam engine would ease along behind the departing northbound train and as the southbound electrically hauled train vanished, the electric that had brought in the northbound train would drift up to the end of the south platform and most times would be able to run into the stabling sidings without actually stopping. Due to the curve I could never see the northern movements, but they would have been the same sequence

 

The changeover time was always reckoned to be three minutes in either direction from stopping,changing locos to starting away .

 

Steam locos when I was around were initially L1s when the Eastern Region worked the line, changing to the Staniers when the LM took over.

 

Added note.

There were stabling sidings at each end, electric to the south for steam with water facilities at the north and I think, limited coal.

[Ian Smeeton]

I am sure that I have seen Rickmansworth done in N.

 

A good few years ago now.

 

Regards

 

Ian

[L49]

I believe I read somewhere that the trailing crossovers at each end and the facing point into the relevant stabling siding were all controlled by the same lever, giving the signalman an edge to complete the shunt inside the booked 3 minutes. Therefore as soon as the electric loco was clear and protected by the trailing shunt signal, all three points would move together allowing the electric back through the up platform, and the steam loco straight back onto the waiting train. The same arrangement worked for southbound trains at the opposite end of the station.

 

Regarding freight on the line, I'm sure that LNER and BR(E) freight services were run over the Met/GC joint at least as far as Neasden, so you can certainly include them, but as they were purely main line workings and nothing to do with the Met, they would be steam hauled throughout. There was one regular 'freight' duty which fell to the electric locos, but that was purely at the city end of the line, working the rubbish train to and from Chiltern Court. The loco bringing the train into Baker Street would be released by the engine off the last arrival, which would then complete the shunt move, while the engine which had brought the bin train in would run back into the siding to become the take off engine for the next passenger train. Pretty slick stuff, and great to model!

[wagonman]

Freight traffic ran over the line as far as Finchley Road – at least there was a goods yard there alongside the Met station. I don't know if there was a connection to the Midland yard there. I think it closed in the late '70s, unless anyone knows better?

[L49]

Freight traffic ran over the line as far as Finchley Road – at least there was a goods yard there alongside the Met station. I don't know if there was a connection to the Midland yard there. I think it closed in the late '70s, unless anyone knows better?

 

There was a connection between the two. Peckett got the job of supplying a pair of slightly modified X class 060ST to shunt the exchange sidings there. They ended up as L53 and L54 in the LT fleet. I don't know how much traffic ran into the Met side in later years through.

 

I forgot to mention one other regular freight working, although it would not have been electric hauled from Rickmansworth. Until 1936 there was a regular freight service to the Metropolitan railway goods depot at Vine St, Farringdon. These were definitely electric loco hauled, I believe from Finchley Road and/ or Paddington. There is quite a well known photo of a steeplecab shunting there not long after opening, and I assume the 1921 locos took over the duties once the older classes had been withdrawn. Due to the cramped conditions at the depot, they were limited to 14 vehicles maximum, and there was a stringent weight restriction as well, although I can't think what it was off the top of my head. I do know that up (eastbound) trains were allowed to be heavier than down trains. I assume that was because of the gradients between Baker Street and Finchley Road.

[sparks]

I believe I read somewhere that the trailing crossovers at each end and the facing point into the relevant stabling siding were all controlled by the same lever, giving the signalman an edge to complete the shunt inside the booked 3 minutes. Therefore as soon as the electric loco was clear and protected by the trailing shunt signal, all three points would move together allowing the electric back through the up platform, and the steam loco straight back onto the waiting train. The same arrangement worked for southbound trains at the opposite end of the station.

 

Regarding freight on the line, I'm sure that LNER and BR(E) freight services were run over the Met/GC joint at least as far as Neasden, so you can certainly include them, but as they were purely main line workings and nothing to do with the Met, they would be steam hauled throughout. There was one regular 'freight' duty which fell to the electric locos, but that was purely at the city end of the line, working the rubbish train to and from Chiltern Court. The loco bringing the train into Baker Street would be released by the engine off the last arrival, which would then complete the shunt move, while the engine which had brought the bin train in would run back into the siding to become the take off engine for the next passenger train. Pretty slick stuff, and great to model!

 

 

There was a connection between the two. Peckett got the job of supplying a pair of slightly modified X class 060ST to shunt the exchange sidings there. They ended up as L53 and L54 in the LT fleet. I don't know how much traffic ran into the Met side in later years through.

 

I forgot to mention one other regular freight working, although it would not have been electric hauled from Rickmansworth. Until 1936 there was a regular freight service to the Metropolitan railway goods depot at Vine St, Farringdon. These were definitely electric loco hauled, I believe from Finchley Road and/ or Paddington. There is quite a well known photo of a steeplecab shunting there not long after opening, and I assume the 1921 locos took over the duties once the older classes had been withdrawn. Due to the cramped conditions at the depot, they were limited to 14 vehicles maximum, and there was a stringent weight restriction as well, although I can't think what it was off the top of my head. I do know that up (eastbound) trains were allowed to be heavier than down trains. I assume that was because of the gradients between Baker Street and Finchley Road.

 

I've always thought that both the coal siding at Baker St and Vine St would make excellent micro layouts - see thread here:- http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/63309-micro-layout-ideas-rapid-transit/

 

There was also a steam/electric changeover for the GWR suburban workings over the Inner Circle from Paddington to the City. IIRC these finished in 1939 at the outbreak of WWII (hence the spare Met electric locos in later years) but you can still see the loco bay at the inner end of the H&C platforms at Paddington.

[RateTheFreight]

I'm pretty sure I saw a b&w picture in one of Bill Simpson's 'History of the Met' books which depicted a Met-Vic Bo-Bo with a private owner coal wagon delivering coal to what looked like an inner London station.

 

I'm pretty sure the caption mentioned something about it being a non-regular freight move and proved a means of transporting coal to the properties above the station. I could be mistaken though!

 

G

[Pacific231G]

At the changeover stations, how did they handle the coupling and uncoupling of screw couplings with the centre and the side conductor rails to avoid?

[Gwiwer]

Side con-rails were on the outside as is standard through platforms.  Accidental contact with the centre rail alone is harmless.  I suspect the couplers were dealt with the same way as other main-line operations namely with a person "going between" though with suitable training about the electrified lines.

[Suzie]

The -200V DC on the central conductor rail is not harmless! Please don't take note of the above post. It is very inadvisable to assume that any conductor rail is harmless since the voltage even on a zero potential rail could be raised significantly by traction current.

[L49]

The same problem existed on the District with coupling and uncoupling of off peak trains particularly at the western end of the line. I know that certain locations had specifically sited gaps in the conductor rail to enable a shunter to go in between and release the ward couplers to split the train. More recently I believe rubber matting has been used to cover the electrified rails, and more recently still I think I have seen a specially shaped plastic insulated sleeve being placed over both con rails before allowing a shunter to go in.

 

However, I'm afraid that back in the days being dicussed here, no such niceties were observed. The job was simply done by a shunter who was careful not to touch the 3rd or 4th rail! The three minute timing for the complete changeover would not allow much observance of health and safety policy.

 

Did anyone observe how the coupling/uncoupling was handled for Steam on the Met? As most of the engineering fleet is now equipped with retratable buffers and buckeyes, I wonder how much experience the test crews have had with screw link and side buffers.

[PhilJ W]

In some photographs of the changeover the third/fourth rail are protected by boards and the area was boarded up to rail level.

[Pacific231G]

The same problem existed on the District with coupling and uncoupling of off peak trains particularly at the western end of the line. I know that certain locations had specifically sited gaps in the conductor rail to enable a shunter to go in between and release the ward couplers to split the train. More recently I believe rubber matting has been used to cover the electrified rails, and more recently still I think I have seen a specially shaped plastic insulated sleeve being placed over both con rails before allowing a shunter to go in.

 

However, I'm afraid that back in the days being dicussed here, no such niceties were observed. The job was simply done by a shunter who was careful not to touch the 3rd or 4th rail! The three minute timing for the complete changeover would not allow much observance of health and safety policy.

 

And no doubt the company just considered it to be the shunter's fault if they got electrocuted. Not the directors' responsibility at all.

[roythebus]

"The same problem existed on the District with coupling and uncoupling of off peak trains particularly at the western end of the line. I know that certain locations had specifically sited gaps in the conductor rail to enable a shunter to go in between and release the ward couplers to split the train. More recently I believe rubber matting has been used to cover the electrified rails, and more recently still I think I have seen a specially shaped plastic insulated sleeve being placed over both con rails before allowing a shunter to go in".

 

Ward couplers did not require the shunter to go between; they were release by a long pole with a hook on the end. The shunter would have separated the air pipes at waist level but would have to be at track level to undo the train line jumper (650v) and the control cable (also 650v).

 

In later years, it was not common to uncouple Q stock on the District on the running lines, though it was practiced at Parsons Green. there were no special boards there or gaps in the juice rail!

[lmsforever]

The speed of this uncoupling ,coupling was amazing a shunter would just drop down inbetween the loco and coaches no hassle I bet today there would no way this would be allowed.No protective clothing just a pair of gloves and a flat cap I have never heard of any problems arising with the job .