50 years since the first day of diesel and electric only timetabled service.

[newbryford]

Makes me wonder why the Blue Pullman sets weren't retained after the introduction of HSTs.

Their rough riding qualities are well-documented but even so, the 'Trams' were largely pivotal in saving BR from oblivion, in fact perhaps it wasn't the HSTs themselves but the working practices.

No loco (as such)

Thus no brake test

Thus no Shunter

 

And so on.

 

So why were the BPs binned off, when the principle of a power car at either end in fixed formation was in essence the saviour of our railway.

 

Maybe if more BPs had been built, then that would have made a difference to their longevity. They were partially victim to BRs policy of the time at removing small fleets -  as an exception, the d*lt*cs soldiered on as a supporting act to the incoming HSTs.

As mentioned above, the BPs were a premium service. The HST was available to the average paying passenger.

 

Dieselisation was supposed to be a stop-gap in many areas, but the HSTs were so good that they probably did the cause of electrification no good whatsoever.

 

The HST was a collection of the right stuff at the right time, but there wasn't anything spectacular in their engineering IMO. (And every respect to the HST team that put it together)

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Clive Mortimore]

Makes me wonder why the Blue Pullman sets weren't retained after the introduction of HSTs.

Their rough riding qualities are well-documented but even so, the 'Trams' were largely pivotal in saving BR from oblivion, in fact perhaps it wasn't the HSTs themselves but the working practices.

No loco (as such)

Thus no brake test

Thus no Shunter

 

And so on.

 

So why were the BPs binned off, when the principle of a power car at either end in fixed formation was in essence the saviour of our railway.

Hi E3109

 

As I stated before. The Pullmans were withdrawn as they were no longer economic, or reliable and loss of passengers on seats before the prototype HST took to the rails.

 

The prototype HST had two locomotives not power cars, one each end. The intention was for them to be used on over night freights, they had a drivers position, it can't be called a cab  at the rear end. The Pullman power cars were passenger carrying. HST power cars never have been passenger carrying, even the guards (train managers) were soon moved into their own accommodation in the train. The only similarities of the HST prototype and a Blue Pullmans was they had pointy ends and wore the same reversed passenger livery. Had the HST prototype been painted in blue grey with all blue locomotives on the end people would not keep comparing 1950s technology with 1970s. 

 

The idea of using power cars as night time freight locos reappeared on the class 91s, and how often in BR days were they used on freights?

[4069]

I remember cycling over to Moor Park station with a friend to see the last steam train on that part of the line. But I thought that was more than 50 years

 

The last BR steam train through Moor Park was in September 1966, and then the GC was closed north of Aylesbury.

 

The last LT steam train through Moor Park was in June 1971, and then the Panniers were withdrawn.

 

You pays yer money...

[Nearholmer]

Something that seems relevant to the decline and renaissance in rail passenger travel 1950s to 2010s is what road travel was like over the same span.

 

From 1960 onwards road travel became increasingly affordable, cheap even, and very much liberating, allowing nearly everyone to get nearly everywhere, nearly any time. Then I think three affects bit: the novelty wore off; road congestion wore on; and, trains became quite pleasant.

 

Now, people who have access to cars choose to travel by rail for some trips, or parts of some trips, and the aspiration to own a car has ‘backed off’, especially for people who live in urban areas and don’t have children.

 

And, as for BR doing nothing much after HST: a bizarrely motive-power-centric view of the world. The BR of 1990 was hugely different from the BR of 1976, if you doubt that, go and buy and read a small stack of contemporary copies of ‘modern railways’.

 

The elimination of steam traction might look like the defining moment of ‘modernisation’, and symbolically it was, but in truth it was only one step on a long march. That march was slowed down by the recession of the 1930s, and effectively halted for c10-15 years by WW2 and its economic aftermath.

Edited August 6, 2018 by Nearholmer

[phil-b259]

 

 

Sorry to go off topic, but nothing seems to have been learned because class 700s now seem to be working from Sussex to Peterborough. 

 

They (the 700s) do - but please remember that only a tiny number of people actually use Thameslink to make the journey between the two places you mention.

 

99.99999% of passengers from both Sussex and Peterborough are only commuting into and out of London, not right the way across it - and however comfortable modern cars might be, driving into (or across) the centre of London* is regarded by most people as something to avoid even if it does mean putting up with the 700s!

 

* where average traffic speeds are slower than in the days of the horse and cart, where various Mayors have been introducing extra charges to deter you and parking is a expensive / a problem.

Edited August 6, 2018 by phil-b259

[Pacific231G]

I think our nostalgia for the steam era stems not just from the disappearance of the steam loco itself but from everything else that was disappearing at around the same time from the mass closure of rural branchlines and stopping services to local goods services and many other things that brought the railway into our lives.  In other European countries those withdrawals tended to happen far more gradually and a couple of decades or more after the general ending of steam. So, in other countries the "traditional" railway was diesel or electric rather than steam for a generation but in Britain it has been far more symbolised by the steam engine. 

 

From what appears at shows and what manufacturers produce I'd guess that the most popular epoch for British modellers is probably from the grouping to the end of steam but in Europe Ep.IV, is apparently the most popular. That covers 1965-1990 so from the end of most steam to the general decline of "traditional" and local railway working

[Reorte]

The HST was a collection of the right stuff at the right time, but there wasn't anything spectacular in their engineering IMO. (And every respect to the HST team that put it together)

Good engineering isn't always spectacular engineering, and in many ways making something new that works well without resorting to the spectacular is all the more impressive.

[Clive Mortimore]

I think our nostalgia for the steam era stems not just from the disappearance of the steam loco itself but from everything else that was disappearing at around the same time from the mass closure of rural branchlines and stopping services to local goods services and many other things that brought the railway into our lives.  In other European countries those withdrawals tended to happen far more gradually and a couple of decades or more after the general ending of steam. So, in other countries the "traditional" railway was diesel or electric rather than steam for a generation but in Britain it has been far more symbolised by the steam engine. 

 

From what appears at shows and what manufacturers produce I'd guess that the most popular epoch for British modellers is probably from the grouping to the end of steam but in Europe Ep.IV, is apparently the most popular. That covers 1965-1990 so from the end of most steam to the general decline of "traditional" and local railway working

The 1960s was an era for change, long over due change.

 

Just think pop music and mini skirts that will help us forget branch line closures. 

[Fat Controller]

Makes me wonder why the Blue Pullman sets weren't retained after the introduction of HSTs.

Their rough riding qualities are well-documented but even so, the 'Trams' were largely pivotal in saving BR from oblivion, in fact perhaps it wasn't the HSTs themselves but the working practices.

No loco (as such)

Thus no brake test

Thus no Shunter

 

And so on.

 

So why were the BPs binned off, when the principle of a power car at either end in fixed formation was in essence the saviour of our railway.

The Blue Pullmans went about three years before the HST appeared in commercial service; it was the arrival of Mk2 a/c stock that finished them off. They weren't particularly fast (90 mph max, IIRC), hammered the track, and an eight car set carried only the same number of passengers as four Mk2 coaches. 

[Pete the Elaner]

So how have things really moved on in the 50 years since steam?

 

We hear the arguments for & against speed. InterCity services are all faster & more regular, but some rural locations have suffered closures, so that is not always a clear step forward. Re-cycling LTs D stock for use as 40mph rural units is hardly progress!

 

Safety: SPADs are treated much more severely & thorough accident investigation seemingly treated as a priority over re-opening the line.

Trains are unquestionably stronger now. If the Grayrigg derailment in 2007 had been Mark 1s, there would definitely have been more than the 1 death suffered in the Pendolino.

 

Economy: D & E both produce less dirt than burning coal & re-fuelling is a lot easier & quicker (In Electric's case virtually, but not entirely, non-existent) than a regular trip to the ash pits & coaling stage.

 

These last 2 are not specific to railways but a general trend in today's ever increasing economy & safety-driven society.

[Wickham Green]

The Blue Pullmans went about three years before the HST appeared in commercial service; it was the arrival of Mk2 a/c stock that finished them off. They weren't particularly fast (90 mph max, IIRC), hammered the track, and an eight car set carried only the same number of passengers as four Mk2 coaches. 

As a slight aside, don't forget the Blue Pullmans were't the first double-ended DEMUs as the Hastings Units were more numerous and had a far longer innings ....... they could go significantly faster than 90mph - in the last few weeks before withdrawal at least - they also hammered the track but carried many more passengers than a Blue Pullman.

 

( As even more of an aside, it's a shame we never had a mainland version of the NIR 80 class.)

[The Johnster]

I worked a double set of Hastings units on an excursion to Barry Island (1974 I think) from Swindon down and return to Cardiff when I was a freight guard at Canton; I relieved a Reading guard at Swindon and the train was driven by a Redhill man piloted by one of our drivers from Swindon.  For some reason we were booked via Bath and Dr Day's, and the 12 coach train maintained the same timings as the (theoretically 95mph maximum) 47 hauling 9 a/c mk 2s on the Paddington-Bristols.  Made a bit of noise and a good bit of fumes doing it and the ride in the van was, um, interesting, but great fun!

 

I was stopped at Barry by the signalman who had not read his General Appendix and did not understand about Southern Region red blinds and no tail lamps.  We went over the causeway using my Bardic.  We considered it our duty to take the Redhill driver out for chips and a pint on the Island; happy days...

Edited August 6, 2018 by The Johnster

[Dunsignalling]

Makes me wonder why the Blue Pullman sets weren't retained after the introduction of HSTs.

Their rough riding qualities are well-documented but even so, the 'Trams' were largely pivotal in saving BR from oblivion, in fact perhaps it wasn't the HSTs themselves but the working practices.

No loco (as such)

Thus no brake test

Thus no Shunter

 

And so on.

 

So why were the BPs binned off, when the principle of a power car at either end in fixed formation was in essence the saviour of our railway.

The obvious answer to that, is that a/c Mk2s (and soon after, HSTs) were considerably superior in comfort, without a supplementary fare being payable.

 

In engineering terms, the BP's were relatively unreliable, non-standard and small in number, so their fate tallied with that of pilot-scheme diesel classes similarly blighted 

 

John

Edited August 6, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[Reorte]

So how have things really moved on in the 50 years since steam?

 

We hear the arguments for & against speed. InterCity services are all faster & more regular, but some rural locations have suffered closures, so that is not always a clear step forward. Re-cycling LTs D stock for use as 40mph rural units is hardly progress!

Depends what you need and what is really an improvement. I'm sceptical about speed as something particularly desirable (obviously there are limits because I don't just want to walk everywhere), travel twice as fast and you'll probably just end up travelling twice as often. What is meaningful progress though is reliability and probably frequency. If the recycled D stock are regular and reliable it may well be progress. There have been plenty of closures but these days a reopening is more likely than a closure.

[Wickham Green]

I worked a double set of Hastings units on an excursion to Barry Island (1974 I think) from Swindon down and return to Cardiff when I was a freight guard at Canton; I relieved a Reading guard at Swindon and the train was driven by a Redhill man piloted by one of our drivers from Swindon.  For some reason we were booked via Bath and Dr Day's, and the 12 coach train maintained the same timings as the (theoretically 95mph maximum) 47 hauling 9 a/c mk 2s on the Paddington-Bristols.  Made a bit of noise and a good bit of fumes doing it and the ride in the van was, um, interesting, but great fun!

 

I was stopped at Barry by the signalman who had not read his General Appendix and did not understand about Southern Region red blinds and no tail lamps.  We went over the causeway using my Bardic.  We considered it our duty to take the Redhill driver out for chips and a pint on the Island; happy days...

Last time (?) the Hastings Unit was down your neck of the woods we stopped short of Newport on the return as the crew couldn't get the horns to work on the 'London' end ......... someone had the bright idea of turning us a Maindee* and we proceeded eastwards - but for some reason used the whistle for warning as we entered the Severn Tunnel and I don't recall the horns being used thereafter ! ............... moreover we reversed again at Woking so the first end was leading once more - but I think the Master Brew was detracting my mind from listening for horns or whistles by that stage !

 

*all of a sudden famous for a different type of 'Flyers' !

[adb968008]

Steam only went so fast because of the Beeching plan.

Too many diesels were built, and as lines closed they rounded on the steam fleet.

However that wasn’t enough,and even post 1968 hundreds of diesels went to the same place as steam.

 

Diesels didn’t replace steam, buses, lorries & cars did.

Diesels only helped the railways continue to exist in the 1970’s but even then the network continued to lose business into the 1980’s right upto the 1990’s... which is why pacers came around... if the railways were healthy, pacers wouldn’t have been needed not even thought of.

Maggie thatcher only despised railways because it was the dog it was.

 

Like it or not privatisation of the railways has done more for the network than at anytime prior to 1914.

Network retrenchment didn’t start with Beeching or the war, the big four were closing loss making lines and running bus services back in the 1930’s.. the LMS timetable in front of me is advertising scheduled air services... the future wasn’t the railway even back then.

It’s safer, more modern, more carrying capacity, more frequency and as a result carries more passengers than at anytime in history, achieved by reliable assets managed in a much more efficient manner than the past.

 

It’s feasible that had WW2 not happened, many lines may have closed, the LNER could be 1500v D.C. and direct LMS and LNER services may be running Thameslink style, across London direct to Croydon Airport. We might even have fast lines on the tube too. The LMS may not need Duchesses.. people would have flown up north, instead, the LMS could be a network of regional services cross crossing its landscape. Rather contentiously, but diesels could have come from the US much sooner... the UK was way behind the diesel curve, whilst we were messing with 40hp petrol shunters, the US already had over 1000 diesels with a HP equivalent to a class 33 in service before 1945, it’s conceivable that the GWR or LMS would have been talking to General Motors, as EE, Ruston, Paxman etc advanced technology due to the war, not in spite of it, their pedigree before was limited.

Edited August 6, 2018 by adb968008

[peanuts]

I watched one of them from Uppermill Cricket Club!

and i watched it from our living room window with your eldest sister 

[Nearholmer]

There are some interesting simplifications in this thread.

 

Writing-off the 70s/80s Railway was tried at the time, and didn’t wash then any more than it does now, for the simple reason that railways are very good at what they are good at: fast-interurban passenger; high-density urban and suburban passenger; and, heavy haul land freight, especially 100+ miles or simple-circuit.

 

The area railways struggle most in is low-density passenger over relatively short distances, because they can’t do much that a bus on the same route way could, hence the pressure on costs being super-intense in that area.

 

And, don’t write-off the D-stock ‘phoenixes’ until you’ve seen what they do in practice. I confidently forecast smiley passengers.

[The Johnster]

Depends what you need and what is really an improvement. I'm sceptical about speed as something particularly desirable (obviously there are limits because I don't just want to walk everywhere), travel twice as fast and you'll probably just end up travelling twice as often. What is meaningful progress though is reliability and probably frequency. If the recycled D stock are regular and reliable it may well be progress. There have been plenty of closures but these days a reopening is more likely than a closure.

 

Speed is sexy, and sells, and has the further advantage from the operator's point of view that more trains, which equate to more revenue earning seats, can be fitted on to a given amount of railway line in a given time, and the frequency of service can be increased as well.  To take Cardiff-Paddington as an example because I know it,  a train every 2 hours that took a minimum of 3 hours and 10 minutes one stop Newport hauled by a Castle, Brit, or King with up to 16 on was replaced over little more than a decade by a HST every 30 minutes, 1 hour 40 minutes one stop Newport and even the stoppers taking less than 2 hours, but with only 8 on.  A better service, with more and more comfortable seats and capable of moving more people replaced steam, and has not been surpassed on the route; even the new electrified servics when it is instituted will only equal this level of service whatever that nice Mr Grayling said about the fastest journey times ever on this route (true, but a bit mendacious and redolent of deliberate misinformation).  But ask passengers, sorry customers, sorry service users what they want and they are happy to take longer over their journey so long as the departure and arrival times are reliable and they get a seat.

 

But in other ways, the level of service has declined.  In steam days, it was possible to arrive at Abergwynfi, now an even more remote and isolated village than then, at 23.55 on the last auto from Bridgend, having connected with it off a down Paddington-Swansea that left Paddington after 20.00.  The Newport and Cardiff Valleys could be accessed from even later down expresses; good luck trying it nowadays when the last bus goes at about 8 o'clock from Bridgend, and later ones terminate at Maesteg.  

 

Modern service is good during office hours and for office commuters, but everybody else is left out in the cold a bit, except in the South East of England's London commuter belt, where overcrowding and unreliability of peak services is the big problem.

[turbos]

Standard gauge coal/steam railway traction came to an end in the UK in the late 60s (hopefully that covers all pedantry!). The first time an internal combustion engine (ICE) was used as a source of traction on a rail mounted vehicle marked the beginning of the end of steam, just as the first steam powered rail mounted vehicle marked the beginning of the end for horse drawn rail vehicles, it's all just a part railway evolution and technological development. I predict that one day in the future the last timetabled ICE powered train operates, with a farewell railtour shortly after. Then to be followed by an unplanned use of planned to be  withdrawn train on an obscure passenger carrying move so creating debate among enthusiasts for decades!

I think that the appearance of the HST so soon after the end of steam was more to with the development that BR had been doing over many years and the unconscious ignoring of these developments by the enthusiast press as it focused on the end of steam.

I've always considered the Edinburgh - Glasgow class 27 push/pulls to have been the technological and operational father of the HST, 90+mph, air disc brakes, eth not from the locomotives generator but supplied from the locomotive, fixed formation with no run round at terminus and dedicated locomotives and coaches with a tailored maintenance plan. The Blue Pullman was more like an example of how not to do an HST!

 

Brian.

[LBRJ]

I just find it so bizarre ( not sure why in such a loco-centric hobby) that the method of traction changing means so much to so many people.

The Railway still stayed the same!

[E3109]

Thanks for the comments re Blue Pullmans gents, I suppose if they'd been more reliable they could've been downgraded internally so as they were just another unit.

 

Incidentally, it was mooted at the time of their withdrawal that one of the Eastern European countries showed an interest in purchasing them. Yugoslavia I think it was?

[DY444]

To be honest it was the waste of equipment that bothers me (again, said in hindsight), I mean if steam was being binned then why build the Standard classes at all? Some locos saw just five years' service.

 

 To understand fully you need to dig deeply into this countries financial, social, and political history, mainly in the first half of the 20th century, and in particular, the mid 1930's to mid 1950's. 

 

Indeed.  One of the great "Riddles" of post-war railway politics!!

Edited August 7, 2018 by DY444

[Pete the Elaner]

Like it or not privatisation of the railways has done more for the network than at anytime prior to 1914.

 

I can't agree with that.

We have been in the privatisation for around 20 years now.

 

In that time, relatively new traction (class 58s & class 60s) have been replaced with brand new (class 66s) for no apparent reason. Actually there is a reason..because we sold off the railways of Britain to foreign companies who want to support their own countries by buying their own products. Who can blame them?

WCML has been upgraded, but this was planned with the 225 project, both of which were canned just before privatisation as a cost-cutting excercise.

BR class 91s are still the backbone of the ECML.

HSTs which were intended to be life-expired at the onset of privatisation are only now being replaced, in many cases by electro-diesel, but the diesel part is powerful enough to just struggle with HST timings.

Anglia have the old WCML stock. The upgrade to 110mph for this line which was mooted before privatisation got quietly dropped.

 

It is only relatively recently & quite deep into privatisation that stock has been renewed. Trains are getting safer but seats are getting smaller & harder to save costs. Services are often cut because of a lack of staff because employing less saves them money.

 

& certainly in the early days of privatisation, TOCs were handed out huge grants from the government.

 

Any advancement is not a result of privatisation. It is because of natural progression, but hampered by privatisation.

[adb968008]

Slight observation,

 

But 5 years between 01/1968 and 01/1973 BR only delivered 1 class 47 (D1961) and ( 46 class 50’s on lease, as the money was already gone).

 

Kestrel / APTE & HST prototype being non-revenue.

 

Similarly between 1973 and 1980 the only other deliveries, were 36 class 87’s and 70 class 56’s and HSTs.

 

It’s clear the taps were turned off once the objective of replacing steam was finished.

 

If Marples had done his transport plan properly, he’d have let Beeching run his course, not invest in Diesel/ Electric technology but leave steam in place.. the railway would have died an unnatural death in the early 70’s. It was the sheer excess of diesels delivered on his watch that actually saved the railways, and bought it an extra 2 decades to survive as it fed off the fat of these purchases and dwindled down the diesel fleet.

 

Between 08/1968 and 1980 over 1000 Diesels/Electrics we’re disposed of, comprised of 300 diesel shunters were scrapped, alongside nearly 700 Mainline diesels, including all Hydraulics, 24’s, various Type 1’s etc.

Edited August 7, 2018 by adb968008