Furka-Oberalp Tunnel Motors Ge 4/4’’’

[Keith Addenbrooke]

I wonder if I might ask some questions related to the two Furka-Oberalp Ge 4/4’’’ Tunnel Motors #81 and #82?

 

My knowledge of Swiss Railways is limited, and I’m afraid I’ve never been to Switzerland, although I’ve been really enjoying reading different threads in this Forum over recent months, and asking a few questions.  I find both the model and prototype videos fascinating (very much “re-watchable”), and if you were to ask me to list my top 10 personal favourite locomotives of all time (say), the FO Tunnel Motors would be long standing members of my list.

 

Why?  

 

I think I was just at the right impressionable age when they were commissioned, and I guess I must have seen photos of them somewhere that simply grabbed my attention - knowing little about Continental Railways, to me they looked fascinating (and clean).  I wouldn’t have known then they were a derivative class of just two locomotives for running shuttles through a tunnel that was still being built, or that they were unable to operate Services over the much of the FO without cogwheels (so went out on loan to the RhB).

 

So my questions are these?

 

1.  Am I right in thinking they only ever carried the familiar red with large FO logo livery prior to the formation of the MGB (I haven’t seen any other photos)?  I get the sense Swiss metre gauge lines don’t change their liveries too often (advertising perhaps excepted).

 

2.  When they were loaned to the RhB prior to the Tunnel opening (1982?) were they used on freight and / or passenger services?  And am I right in thinking this is the long transition era when passenger rolling stock was still changing from green to the original red (“small logos”).  Is it right that RhB locomotives were similarly a mixture of green and red around this time?

 

3.  As a tangential question am I right this is about a decade before the first panorama coaches started to appear on the FO (1993 if I’m reading tables on the very helpful haribu.ch website correctly?).  I think panorama coaches came later to the RhB - or did they run as through Services on the Glacier Express (perhaps that should be a different topic altogether - it’s another fascinating subject).

 

I realise this kind of question comes up from time to time - especially with regards to coach liveries (sorry).

 

Hope it’s OK to ask - I’m between projects at the moment* so researching other things I really like.

 

Thanks, Keith

 

(* my polite way of acknowledging I decided not to pursue a layout idea I’d been working on)

Edited December 13, 2021 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Satan's Goldfish]

This thread may be of some help: 

Looks like they were seen on both freight and with green coaches. 

[Gordonwis]

2 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

I wonder if I might ask some questions related to the two Furka-Oberalp Ge 4/4’’’ Tunnel Motors #81 and #82?

 

 

Some non exhaustive comments (Its really past my bed time as I write this!) 

 

Yes, the FO livery has always been essentially red in modern times. I'm not 100% certain when the large logo was applied, but I think these were the first locos to carry said logo as they were for the then 'big news story' on the FO namely the base tunnel.

 

They were built as adhesion only because rack equipment makes vehicles heavier, and the priority for any base tunnel (a long straight new track) is speed and good acceleration (as one of the main purposes of a base tunnel is to greatly reduce journey times) .

 

Personally I don't 'hurry' to designate them Ge4/4III. There are differing views on the designation of 81 and 82. They aren't really 'Ge4/4III' on the FO/MGB as there are no other Ge4/4 on the MGB.

 

Until the early 1990s the Glacier Express was formed of 'standard' coaches, generally a mix of FO and RhB vehicles. Panoramic coaches were pioneered by the MOB and didn't arrive on the FO/BVZ/RhB until later.

 

The 1980s was  the transition period on the RhB from green to red. By the early 1990s most RhB stock was red but a few green locos remained (and of course the brown 'oldies' were never repainted - apart from the blue Croc obviously ). 

Edited December 14, 2021 by Gordonwis

[Keith Addenbrooke]

On 13/12/2021 at 22:14, Satan's Goldfish said:

This thread may be of some help: 

Looks like they were seen on both freight and with green coaches. 

 

Thank you - a ‘hole in one’ for @Satan's Goldfish.  Thanks too of course to @Talbotjohn for the original 2018 question (“and he’s got a layout,” methinks 😀).

 

On 14/12/2021 at 00:39, Gordonwis said:

Some non exhaustive comments (Its really past my bed time as I write this!) 

 

Yes, the FO livery has always been essentially red in modern times. I'm not 100% certain when the large logo was applied, but I think these were the first locos to carry said logo as they were for the then 'big news story' on the FO namely the base tunnel.

 

They were built as adhesion only because rack equipment makes vehicles heavier, and the priority for any base tunnel (a long straight new track) is speed and good acceleration (as one of the main purposes of a base tunnel is to greatly reduce journey times) .

 

Personally I don't 'hurry' to designate them Ge4/4III. There are differing views on the designation of 81 and 82. They aren't really 'Ge4/4III' on the FO/MGB as there are no other Ge4/4 on the MGB.

 

Until the early 1990s the Glacier Express was formed of 'standard' coaches, generally a mix of FO and RhB vehicles. Panoramic coaches were pioneered by the MOB and didn't arrive on the FO/BVZ/RhB until later.

 

The 1980s was  the transition period on the RhB from green to red. By the early 1990s most RhB stock was red but a few green locos remained (and of course the brown 'oldies' were never repainted - apart from the blue Croc obviously ). 

 

Thanks Gordon - I can see the debate about whether the FO Tunnel Motors are really a Ge 4/4’’’.  I’m afraid I wouldn’t know enough to know what is an ‘official’ designation and what is an ‘informal’ one.  If I’ve looked up the dates correctly, when the Tunnel Motors were on loan to the RhB, the first batch of RhB Ge 4/4’’ locomotives were already in service, but I’d have no idea whether that alone would be enough for the two FO Tunnel Motors to need designating as third generation?

 

I have some other questions on the panorama coaches, but I think that may be best as a separate question, now I have the answers I was looking for on the Tunnel Motors   Hope that’s OK, Keith.

Edited April 5, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Keith Addenbrooke]

 

 

I’ll just leave this here for now (it needs the detailing adding and will no doubt benefit from running in when I can sort something out).  My thanks to Contikits.  
 

May I wish you all a peaceful Christmas, and thank you for the help as I’ve been starting to explore the amazing world of Swiss metre gauge railways, Keith.

Edited March 31, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Further to previous posts I was wondering if anyone had a parts list (I think the correct term is: 'Ersatzteilservice') or instruction sheet ('Bedienungsanleitung') for the Bemo Tunnel Motors (Bemo 1260)? 

 

Mine has come with extra details to fit but only limited additional instructions - perhaps as it is an older model?  I've managed to find the online Bemo product archive but it doesn't show downloadable sheets which I think would be useful (if they were produced).  @JimFin kindly pointed me in the right direction for the Ge 4/4i / ii  - see linked post below - but I don't know if items like the snowploughs, for example, have the same product code / fittings on the FO Tunnel Motors.

 

A related question would be where spares are best sourced from in the UK now (Jan 2022) - I understand Winco used to have them but have now retired I think?  It would be useful to know the price of spares as well as their availability (not least for comparison with the second hand market).  Hope that makes sense.

__________________________

 

I'm also wondering about starting a general thread for my questions rather than starting new topics each time - any observations on whether this would be helpful to others?  I'm not an experienced modeller or layout builder, but I do find RMWeb is a great place to learn.  Thanks, Keith.

Edited January 2, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke

[JimFin]

Cannot help with the data sheets as they are not in the Bemo archive but would strongly suspect the snowplough is the same as on the Ge 4/4 11 as it was the same lineage and actually used by RhB for some time.

 

Getting spares can be a bit tricky, with Winco, Peter has retired but still trades to order and clearing stock I understand. In the past however, I found that he would only supply spare parts for loco's he had sold. May be different now - worth asking. 

 

I have used Mike Marno ( http://www.marnoltd.co.uk/index.html ) fill in and e-mail the contact form with the details - part number and description - of what you want. He will come back with a price and availability and if acceptable will add them to his next order, seems to be monthly and let you know when they arrive. Make payment (bank transfer) and he posts them out to you. Works for me - but bit stuck until you have the part number......

[Keith Addenbrooke]

On 02/01/2022 at 14:07, JimFin said:

would strongly suspect the snowplough is the same as on the Ge 4/4 11 as it was the same lineage and actually used by RhB for some time.

Thanks Jim, comparing the snowploughs on my Tunnel Motor with the picture on the Ge 4/4ii data sheet, the parts do look the same, but I wouldn’t want to assume a manufacturer uses common parts / fixings on different models (even if the prototype did).  I guess they can change over time too, when tooling is refreshed.

 

Having bought both the Tunnel Motor and some FO liveried Panorama Coaches - per separate thread - I accept I have a problem working out how to run them together (thanks to this Forum, I did know this when I bought them).

 

I could use the Tunnel Motor as a general purpose road engine in the 1980-1982 period (on loan to the RhB), but the Panorama coaches only appeared a decade or so later.  Without rack equipment, Tunnel Motors couldn’t pull coaches over the FO, and videos I’ve found only really show Tunnel Motors at Realp: film at Oberwald suggests shuttle locomotives don’t come out of the tunnel when unloading.  Modelling the shuttles would be a challenge anyway, as cars always face the direction of travel, as well as using special wagons.

 

When I started thinking about a Narrow Gauge layout last year, a diagram I used to position myself was this:

 

 

 

While the detail and accuracy of the Bemo models is very much at the top end of my scale, I think I’ll still need to be fairly in the middle if I get as far as running trains - which is still my aim, Keith.

 

Edited March 31, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke
(insert link)

[JimFin]

Rule 1 - it's your layout, you run what you want.... Simples.

[brack]

There were several proposals for both adhesion (though it'd be more spectacular climbing than the bernina!) and rack lines down the grimselpass to meiringen. I believe there was an idea floated for putting a 20 mile tunnel in for both rail and power lines a couple of years back.

Likewise you can get an adhesion line from goschenen over the sustenpass to link up with the brunig line.

 

So if one of those had been built, then perhaps the FO might have needed a few more ge4/4 to run them, and they'd be running outside of tunnels.

[Gordonwis]

8 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

 

 

Having bought both the Tunnel Motor and some FO liveried Panorama Coaches - per separate thread - I accept I have a problem working out how to run them together (thanks to this Forum, I did know this when I bought them).

 

I could use the Tunnel Motor as a general purpose road engine in the 1980-1982 period (on loan to the RhB), but the Panorama coaches only appeared a decade or so later.  Without rack equipment, Tunnel Motors couldn’t pull coaches over the FO, and videos I’ve found only really show Tunnel Motors at Realp: film at Oberwald suggests shuttle locomotives don’t come out of the tunnel when unloading.  Modelling the shuttles would be a challenge anyway, as cars always face the direction of travel, as well as using special wagons.

 

 

 

 

To keep things on the 'realistic' side of Rule 1, you could depict the Realp end of the Furka Base Tunnel (FBT). Like the Loetschberg tunnel, the FBT has different characteristics at each end of the tunnel with Realp, like Kandersteg, having some open line between the car loading area and the tunnel entrance. You could run the tunnel locos back and forth, and perhaps obtain another FO traction unit to add to the scene

Edited January 3, 2022 by Gordonwis

[Gordonwis]

49 minutes ago, brack said:

There were several proposals for  lines down the grimselpass to meiringen. I believe there was an idea floated for putting a 20 mile tunnel in for both rail and power lines a couple of years back.

 

 

 

The Grimsel tunnel project is more than 'an idea floated'.

 

It is a live project with quite a lot of detail already worked out.

 

The Grimsel pass area is essentially one big power station , with loads of infrastructure for hydro electric power generation dating back to the 1920s. The Meiringen - Innertkirchen railway was a private electricity company railway which had no public passenger service until  1946. Much of the landscape is covered by stuff (power lines, staff only cable cars etc) belonging to the electricity company, hence the idea to share tunnels for rail and power lines. 

 

https://www.grimseltunnel.ch/projekt/

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Thank you @JimFin, @brack and @Gordonwis for the responses: all interesting and informative.
 

In the right hands, it looks to me like Realp could make a fascinating large club / exhibition layout, with the twin station, the opportunity to include steam trains, regular car shuttles and a variety of local and express trains passing through (incl. the Glacier Express to impress viewers).  Trains aren’t too long, and the mountains would provide a natural backscene.  While the curve at the non-tunnel end of the FO / MGB station might need to be flipped the other way to curve inwards, I think it would be very impressive, even if the auto shuttle operation was a bit static (forgive me if it’s already been done, of course).

 

I do find ‘might have been / still could be’ schemes rather intriguing, and had several weeks of enjoyment last year looking at various nineteenth-century UK proposals from the “railway mania” period.  It was quite fascinating.

 

As a practical modeller however, the five-fold combination of my ‘time / space / money / inexperience / capacity for distraction’ constraints means any Regeleinsbahn layout I might have a go at would really be little more than a test circuit.  That said, I got that far in H0e / HOn30 last year and still derived a lot of satisfaction from a small project.

 

Thanks again for the suggestions - all good stuff, Keith.

Edited January 3, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke

[DIW]

12 hours ago, brack said:

There were several proposals for both adhesion (though it'd be more spectacular climbing than the bernina!) and rack lines down the grimselpass to meiringen. I believe there was an idea floated for putting a 20 mile tunnel in for both rail and power lines a couple of years back.

Likewise you can get an adhesion line from goschenen over the sustenpass to link up with the brunig line.

 

So if one of those had been built, then perhaps the FO might have needed a few more ge4/4 to run them, and they'd be running outside of tunnels.

I'll leave this link here: