Train Speeds

[DCB]

I was at Calne show earlier, stopwatch in hand, timing trains.   A surprising number of 30mph expresses  even class 50 hauled on a big layout, several 12 mph freights.    I did see one HST at over 80 which was impressive.

 

However just before 4pm a young chap took over running on one large layout and suddenly it came alive with semi fasts running at 55 mphn and goods around 25.   Ok one freight was over the limit with an unfitted bolster with loose load running in a part fitted goods at almost 40 mph, but it suddenly began to look like a real railway, a sense of urgency.

 

I time coaches past a fixed point. Mk 1 coaches are almost exactly 22 yards of 1:80 of a mile when coupled.   Works for T scale to 303mm : ft.

Edited January 23, 2018 by DavidCBroad

[Guest 40-something]

Why???

[stovepipe]

Why???

Probably because there was a thread a little while ago bemoaning that trains were being run too fast at exhibitions. This drew a lot of comment from people saying actually they thought they were running to slow. And now some evidence.

[johnd]

Anorak , next thing will be reports ( In Triplicate ) to the District Traction inspector !

Edited January 23, 2017 by johnd

[The Johnster]

Good to see some empirical evidence, DavidC, but I do think you need to get out more...

 

Much running at shows seems 'whizzy', an impression heightened by oversharp curves on the visible parts of layouts (nothing looks worse than a 70 foot coach going round a 15 mph corner at scale 40*), or takes place at a crawl.  Many layouts feature large stations at which high speed running would not take place anyway (there are exceptions, Swindon and Doncaster come to mind), termini were usually approached with some caution, loose coupled freights would take more than the length all but the very biggest layout to get up to 20mph, their usual speed as 25 was the maximum, and large areas of urban main line railways are speed restricted.

 

There is also the argument that fast running prevents onlookers from examining the trains.  A scale 50 or 60 for expresses is probably a reasonable compromise on any layout less than about 40 feet long, and about right for a lot steam era operation.  A HST needs a lot of room to stretch it's legs, especially since it must be up to speed before it hits the visible part of the layout and maintain it til the last vehicle disappears, and that applies proportionally to TGVs, bullet trains, and so on.

 

I can forgive a lot in exhibition running, as long as it takes place smoothly, and the trains do not accelerate or brake suddenly.  And if the speed limit through the junction is observed until the last vehicle clears...

 

 

*All right, plenty of things look worse than that.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Smooth operation is vital, as conveying the high mass of a train. But I like 'true speed' too. If a layout is a genuinely main line full speed location, such as 'Stoke Bank' was, then run them fast at the correct scale representation of typical speeds in such locations. The contrast with the loose coupled freight, brakes pinned down creeping down grade is very satisfying. (There will be plenty of 'Little Doing' branchlines at a typical show where nothing is capable of exceeding 10mph, for those who like it sluggish.)

[jonny777]

In my youth, watching Highdyke-Frodingham ore trains (amongst others) in deepest Lincolnshire, very few unfitted mineral trains managed 25mph on a regular basis. Most seemed to be around 15-20 mph.

 

I have a video somewhere in my collection which includes a sequence of heavy coal trains passing Wellingborough behind 8Fs, and they all seem to be going at only half the speed coal trains do on exhibition layouts. Maybe they were all following adverse signals or an adverse gradient?

[Rivercider]

Smooth operation is vital, as conveying the high mass of a train. But I like 'true speed' too. If a layout is a genuinely main line full speed location, such as 'Stoke Bank' was, then run them fast at the correct scale representation of typical speeds in such locations. The contrast with the loose coupled freight, brakes pinned down creeping down grade is very satisfying. (There will be plenty of 'Little Doing' branchlines at a typical show where nothing is capable of exceeding 10mph, for those who like it sluggish.)

That is good point about plain line main line layouts where trains at high speed look right, there are not normally many layouts like that in the exhibitions I get to see.

 

It reminded me that when the first class 66 locos were introduced I regularly saw them at Westbury from the office window, or on the platform while waiting for the train home,

they were always stopping or starting from the yard, or from traincrew relief. Over the next few years I saw them regularly at Bristol Temple Meads and Newport,

again they were often stopping for crew relief, or obeying the permanent speed restrictions in place in the station areas.

It was about five years after I first saw a 66 that one day at Taunton one passed through at about 60mph with the silver bullets and I thought to myself

that it was the first time I had seen one actually running at speed!

 

cheers

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...I have a video somewhere in my collection which includes a sequence of heavy coal trains passing Wellingborough behind 8Fs, and they all seem to be going at only half the speed coal trains do on exhibition layouts. Maybe they were all following adverse signals or an adverse gradient?

 First check would be how carefully the conversion was performed from cine original to video; that said the careless conversions tend to speed up the action.

 

But the slow pace for loose coupled mineral is entirely right for most locations, the crew would always want to be able to stop within sighting of a signal, and not a lot of brake force with 1,000+ tons behind meant slow progress. There's four times the kinetic energy in the train at 25mph, as compared to 12.5mph.

 

The 'fast' mineral train up run from New England (Peterborough) to Ferme Park (London) was pathed for circa 3.5 hours - so averaging 20 mph in round numbers with relatively few and brief stops en route only - and that was with a bogie brick wagon or two to augment the loco's brake force. Without the bogie brick wagons, the run was pathed for 6 to 7 hours; averaging 12 mph when running once allowance is made for the typically longer planned stops.

[davefrk]

What about steep grades? Heavy trains struggling up and carefully going down.

I help out on a large 70ft layout which has a speed trap fitted and it is surprising what speed models are driven at till you get the 'feel' of the speed needed for a particular type of train. An unfitted goods at the 25 MPH is slow looking and the express at the 60 MPH line speed is again slow looking. The trains are travelling through a large station and junction. Occasionally a silly train is run for fun with a Deltic on the front and that can hit 165MPH on the speed trap and unfortunately, one sees trains running like this at some exhibitions.... If one looks at some of the timings in the historical mags 60 - 80MPH was the usual speed of an express maybe touching 90 in places and rarely 100MPH.

I recently read Terry Essery's book where he talks about his time as a fireman on the stoker fitted 9Fs on the Birmingham to Carlisle fitted trains, cruising at 40 - 60 MPH (where possible) and he once got told off for seemingly hitting 80 with one when he took a turn driving trying to see what 9F would do.

 

We all need to take a look at the speed models travel at and realise that standing on a platform with a 125 whizzing past gives a totally different impression to watching a model from 5ft away doing the same scale speed.

 

Dave Franks

Whose railway also has a 60MPH line speed.

[Titan]

Should 16 tonners really be travelling this fast?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehscGltcDR0

 

Phil

 

 

Another film of 16 tonners (6 different train loads) in the 1960s

 

 

Richard

 

And this is why it spoils it for me when freight trains are run unrealistically slowly at exhibitions. If you look at the second video at 5.51 there is a steam hauled example at similar speed to the first, why? cos that's the speed they were actually run at, not the 20mph crawl most layout operators seem to think is 'correct'!

 

And for further reference, look at 6:57 on - that is the speed that fully fitted freights should be run at!

 

Okay, blatantly copied from another thread, but the evidence is there!

[Dave John]

Many years ago, late 70s - early 80s I had a N gauge layout for continuous running. I have always played with electronics, at the time I had a commodore 64 computer. So I rigged up a speedometer consisting of two photocells a known distance apart on one side of the track and two lights the other side. A bit of electronics fed the moment the train broke the beam at sensor 1 and the time at 2 to the c64 which then did some maths and displayed the speed on the screen in MPH. I gather you can now buy ready made ones. 

 

I seem to remember that I was surprised to find how fast things were going, and learned to drive trains a lot slower. 

[jonny777]

And this is why it spoils it for me when freight trains are run unrealistically slowly at exhibitions. If you look at the second video at 5.51 there is a steam hauled example at similar speed to the first, why? cos that's the speed they were actually run at, not the 20mph crawl most layout operators seem to think is 'correct'!

 

And for further reference, look at 6:57 on - that is the speed that fully fitted freights should be run at!

 

Okay, blatantly copied from another thread, but the evidence is there!

 

The only steam hauled goods train that I ever witnessed passing the back of our house at a similar speed to that at 5.51, was the evening Boston to Dringhouses fully fitted perishables (4N00 I think in later years); but everything else was way slower than that.

 

Yes, there were tightly timed mineral trains on certain routes (GCR 'runners' for instance) but that does not mean there is a right or wrong speed to run unfitted trains at. For one thing, the guard would not be amused if he was thrown around his van by the mad speed-merchant attitude of a driver. The loco could be slow due to a lack of steam. Some of those WCML goods trains might be trying to make up time by missing a water stop and hoping to have dip in the troughs (no use if speed was much below 40mph).

 

The reasons for the speeds of steam hauled goods trains were many and varied - there is no correct figure.

[The Johnster]

No correct figure, perhaps, but there were limits.  10 foot wheelbase wagons were once allowed to run at 60 mph, later reduced to 45mph at around the end of steam; coincidence and not the change of traction other than it was held that a number of straight line accidents caused by broken axles such as the one at Thirsk on the ECML which destroyed DP2 was down to the increased mileage that such wagons were required to run at higher speeds with the combination of more paths available and less traffic post Beeching.

 

As a general rule, fully fitted freight trains in steam days were scheduled. and permitted to run at 60 mph, with 45, 35, and 25 mp being permitted for part fitted and in the case of 25 mph unfitted trains.  These are the maximum speeds permitted, and for any train carrying 9 foot wheelbase wagons 45 mph is the maximum even if the train is fully fitted.  Class K  (later 9) unfitted mineral trains ran with the instanter couplings in the long position to facilitate shunting, another reason for their 25 mph maximum.  On a part or unfitted train, the driver rarely actually runs at the maximum, as he likes to have some speed in reserve that he can use on a falling gradient so as to run through the dip at the bottom keeping all the couplings tight; his guard will have something to say to him otherwise. 

 

Thus, unless we are talking about a long section of flat straight main line, typical speeds for part or unfitted trains will be about 10mph lower than the maximum permitted, and even fully fitted trains will run a little lower than their permitted speeds.  That's if the loco can pull them that quickly in the first place.

 

It is not difficult for an untrained observer, even an experienced one, to overestimate the speed of a moving train at close quarters, and underestimate it viewed from a distance.  This impression of speed from a close up view is enhanced in the case of a steam loco with smaller driving wheels which revolve faster at a given speed; an acquaintance of mine whose childhood home backed on to the South Wales main line at Pencoed, where the line speed is 60mph, used to claim that the fastest steam train of the day was a fully fitted freight hauled by a 28xx, the low look of the loco and the rapidly spinning wheels creating the impression of something running much faster than the Castles or Brits that passed with expresses, when the speed was probably the same or a little lower.

 

Added to this is that many people are now too young to remember steam operations, or even diesel or electric trains with short wheelbase wagons, and are not used to the speeds that look or sound right for them.  Everybody my age who ever spent time near a main line railway in the 50s, 60s, or 70s knows how a goods train sounded on a main line at running speed, so we can, if we are operating a layout based in those times or earlier, judge from the sound of wheel beats over joints if we are running too fast or too slow, but I wouldn't expect anyone under the age of 35 to be able to do this.  Those of us that know that 2 or 4 cylinder steam engines made 4 chuffs per revolution of a driving wheel, and that 3 cylinder ones made 6 (please don't mention Lord Nelsons, this is complex enough already) can judge the speed of a loco from looking at the wheels, but I wouldn't expect anybody younger than 60 to be able to this, even, in fact particularly, those with experience on preserved lines where speeds should not exceed 25mph and 20 is more typical.  

 

From what I can gather, the Great Central 'Windcutters' were likely to be running at unpermitted and in fact highly dangerous speeds; they could get away with it because a driver leaving, say, Annesley, knew he had a clear road to Woodford Halse 50 miles away.  Even then I doubt the speeds were much above 50 most of the time despite some of the more lurid claims, and the instanters were in the short position.  If Terry Essery really did 80 on a 9F with a train of fully fitted vans, he should be bloody well ashamed of himself and if I were him I certainly would be drawing attention to the fact.  I'd have sacked him on the spot, and his driver for letting him do it!

Edited January 23, 2017 by The Johnster

[73080]

In 1968, one of the last regular steam hauled passenger trains was the 12.44 Preston - Blackpool South 'express'.  It was a short train conveying the Blackpool portion of an express from Euston, and at that time was hauled by a Black 5.

 

I timed it half a dozen times, and it would generally only slightly exceed 60mph for a short distance. After acceleration from start most of the normal running speed was in the mid to high 50s mph.  Arrival at Blackpool South was normally on time, so the timetable didn't require any faster running.

 

Other than on the principal main lines, fast steam hauled passenger trains would rarely run much faster than 60mph, unless there was a late running train needing to make up lost time.

[The Stationmaster]

In 1968, one of the last regular steam hauled passenger trains was the 12.44 Preston - Blackpool South 'express'.  It was a short train conveying the Blackpool portion of an express from Euston, and at that time was hauled by a Black 5.

 

I timed it half a dozen times, and it would generally only slightly exceed 60mph for a short distance. After acceleration from start most of the normal running speed was in the mid to high 50s mph.  Arrival at Blackpool South was normally on time, so the timetable didn't require any faster running.

 

Other than on the principal main lines, fast steam hauled passenger trains would rarely run much faster than 60mph, unless there was a late running train needing to make up lost time.

 

Oddly every latter day steam hauled (strangely all involving Black 5s) achieved some very high speeds.  On the last day of the through Paddington - Birkenheads several people, including me, timed a train worked by a Black 5 at 90mph in several places between Salop and Chester while I also timed one at 90mph on the Up 'Lakes Express' in its last steam worked season.  Similarly spirited running behind a Black 5 between Crewe and Stockport a few weeks before the electric service came in although I don't think we did over 75mph.

[tomparryharry]

The Aberdare-Severn Tunnel Junction jobs (on bonus?) certainly weren't doing 25MPH when I saw them!

 

Mind you, they were vac fitted....

 

Ian

[davefrk]

The Aberdare-Severn Tunnel Junction jobs (on bonus?) certainly weren't doing 25MPH when I saw them!

 

Mind you, they were vac fitted....

 

Ian

 

Yes vac fitted or part fitted is very different to unfitted as mentioned above.

 

Dave Franks

[DCB]

Aftervwatching video of a Super D on the NYMR in 2011 I am now working on a chart for loco wheel revolutions per minute related to wheel speed. You can check wheel speed with the the second hand on an anologue watch, counting from Nought, or a metronome or similar app.     Wheel dia in feet X 3.142 divided by 3 gives distance travelled in yards 

A typical UK 0-8-0 or 2-8-0 (Not a 47XX) does around 5 yards per revolution, a Manor around 6 yards per revolution and a Castle 7 yards per revolution so if you can get a clear view of the motion or hear the exhaust beat clearly.

 

Chart to follow, hoping for + or - 3% accuracy.

Edited February 2, 2018 by DavidCBroad

[JZ]

All my loco's are timed, with a suitable train, over a scale 1/10th mile. I adjust the speed, this is DCC, accordingly, then only have to adjust on the handset whether this is an up or down train, passenger or freight. Generally, something like a 3F/4F/7F & 8F will be set to a maximum of 25mph, Passenger loco's to a maximum of 60mph. This is over the Mendip Hills by the way.

[Il Grifone]

The trains in rhe above video do not appear to be travelling all that fast. M estimate is a couple of seconds for a presumably 60' rail length. They will appear faster due to the foreshortening effect of the camera lens and it is quite possible that 8mm cine film has been transposed to video at 25 fps rather than the original 18fps (the quality suggests Super 8 rather than Standard - 16fps). (TV broadcast professionals do it all the time....). The porter in an early shot looks quite energetic.

 

In any case on a model, since the distances travelled are far shorter than on the real thing, it is preferable to run trains slower  to compensate in part IMHO

Edited February 4, 2018 by Il Grifone

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi Guys

 

In have been doing some maths and train running. Scale speed reasons.

 

A scale mile in 4mm scale is 23.15 yds. The outer running line on Exchange is 20.62 yds (according to Anyrail). A train running at a scale 60 m.p.h. will cover 23.15 yds in a minute. Therefore to go around the running lines on Exchange at a scale 60 m.p.h will take 54 secs.

 

I have been running a couple of trains and it took quite a bit of adjusting to get them down to a scale 60 m.p.h. It didn't 'alf look slow. 

 

Now to write a "Check your speed" chart based on the number of seconds it takes to circumnavigate the train room per lap.

[john new]

There is a separate issue in that the distance covered on a layout is generally foreshortened so that as well as the issue regarding cuvature mentioned real speed scaled will not necessarily look right on any given layout. The other difference is the position of the eye in relation to the object being seen. There is a big difference in perceived speed watching trains run through a station non-stop from a couple of metres away than watching them from the other side of the valley. it is all about watching the distance across the V angle of sight.

 

Same factor applies to perceived layout size, wonderfully explained years ago in an old modelling mag (Model Railway News IIRC) but rarely covered as well since.

Edited May 13, 2018 by john new

[bgman]

For those who may be interested this was published some years ago

 

http://www.entwinesolutions.co.uk/scalespeed/

 

It was a Blog entry by a parishioner named "knapper" I believe.

[RexAshton]

There's really no point in working out mathematical scale speeds unless you are lucky enough to have a mathematically scale layout. Most if not all layouts are compressed to a degree which is bound to impact on the visual impression of speed. In reality a train travelling at a scale 60MPH on a layout that is compressed will appear to be travelling faster and will probably look wrong. If it looks right it probably is.