DMUs in Cheshire

[Jeff]

Apologies in advance as this is the first time I have attempted to post a new topic and I'm sure to have made some mistakes.

 

I'm considering adding a 2 or 3 car DMU to my 00 layout set in Cheshire circa 1959/60, but only if this can be achieved by using one of the rtr models now available. Being a steam enthusiast I know nothing about the various DMU prototypes or where they operated, except that they were becoming ubiquitous at that time, so I would want to consider including them if this can be done with minimum effort. Can anyone advise if the models on offer from the manufacturers would have operated into Birkenhed Woodside in this time period?

 

Thanks in anticipation.

 

 

 

[Clive Mortimore]

Bachmann Derby Class 108 would be ideal.

[Jeff]

Bachmann Derby Class 108 would be ideal.

 

Cheers Clive and thanks for replying.

 

Can't believe it's that simple.

[Fat Controller]

Cheers Clive and thanks for replying.

 

Can't believe it's that simple.

I believe  Derby Lightweights (available from Bachmann) were to be seen in the area as well..

[Jeff]

I believe  Derby Lightweights (available from Bachmann) were to be seen in the area as well..

Thanks FC. So now I'm confused. You are saying Bachmann Class 108 is not the same as Derby Lightweights?

 

I ask because the Wikipedia page which comes up if I search on Class 108 DMU has a pic at top right with the caption "Class 108 DMU, nos. 50980 and 52054, at Bodmin on 28 August 2003. This unit is preserved on the Bodmin & Wenford Railway in Cornwall." Above the pic is a header as follows "British Rail Class 108 (Derby Lightweight)".

 

Is this information wrong then?

[Fat Controller]

This is a Derby Lightweight (were they Class 100, Clive?):-

http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/image_box.php?image=images1/branchline/32-517.jpg&cat_no=32-517&info=0&width=650&height=211

and this is a Class 108:-

http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/image_box.php?image=images1/branchline/32-905.jpg&cat_no=32-905&info=109&width=650&height=174

There are one or two differences between them..

The 108 was on a shorter chassis (57' vice 64'6") than many units, which might have led to someone thinking they were 'Lightweight'

[Jeff]

This is a Derby Lightweight (were they Class 100, Clive?):-

http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/image_box.php?image=images1/branchline/32-517.jpg&cat_no=32-517&info=0&width=650&height=211

and this is a Class 108:-

http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/image_box.php?image=images1/branchline/32-905.jpg&cat_no=32-905&info=109&width=650&height=174

There are one or two differences between them..

The 108 was on a shorter chassis (57' vice 64'6") than many units, which might have led to someone thinking they were 'Lightweight'

 

Ah, right. So wiki does not equal a reliable source and Derby lightweight does not equal a class 108.

 

Slowly, slowly, knowledge is acquired.

 

I'm much more at home with Stanier pacifics etc.

 

Thanks again FC.

 

 

[Clive Mortimore]

This is a Derby Lightweight (were they Class 100, Clive?):-

http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/image_box.php?image=images1/branchline/32-517.jpg&cat_no=32-517&info=0&width=650&height=211

and this is a Class 108:-

http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/image_box.php?image=images1/branchline/32-905.jpg&cat_no=32-905&info=109&width=650&height=174

There are one or two differences between them..

The 108 was on a shorter chassis (57' vice 64'6") than many units, which might have led to someone thinking they were 'Lightweight'

Hi Brian and Jeff

 

Not seen the Derby Lightweight called a class 100 before, I think they all had been withdrawn before the TOPS class numbers were allocated to DMUs.

 

Both are Derby lightweights. The original series with the flat front are normally referred to as the Derby Lightweight. The 108s with the sloping front were also lightweight in construction methods, the use of aluminium for the body parts being a feature. Derby also made some "heavyweights" the class 107 on short underframes, the class 114 on long underframes and the classes 115, 116, 125 and 127 with suburban bodies.

 

As Brian says both types were used in the Cheshire area. As were the Metro-Cammel class 101 which Hornby do, but I would wait for the Bachmann version that is due out soonish.

[Jeff]

Hi Brian and Jeff

 

Not seen the Derby Lightweight called a class 100 before, I think they all had been withdrawn before the TOPS class numbers were allocated to DMUs.

 

Both are Derby lightweights. The original series with the flat front are normally referred to as the Derby Lightweight. The 108s with the sloping front were also lightweight in construction methods, the use of aluminium for the body parts being a feature. Derby also made some "heavyweights" the class 107 on short underframes, the class 114 on long underframes and the classes 115, 116, 125 and 127 with suburban bodies.

 

As Brian says both types were used in the Cheshire area. As were the Metro-Cammel class 101 which Hornby do, but I would wait for the Bachmann version that is due out soonish.

 

Very helpful clarification Clive.

 

I have a picture of Birkenhead Woodside showing a DMU at one platform and  Fairburn 2-6-4T at the other. The DMU has a 3 window sloped end and with the gutter extending along the sides and right around the front horizontally, with a small destination blind box set in the domed roof above the gutter. I take it this is the Class 108 as in the second link provided by FC? I note that the later livery version shows this with a much larger headcode display box.

 

 

The first link shows the type with a vertical 3 plane front and where the gutter line is stepped upwards at the centre. This is the "true" Derby Lightweight and described as such in Bachmann's listing?

 

Lastly the forthcoming Class 101 has a high domed end with the gutter not continuous across the front and the destination blind box set in flush just above the centre window.

 

If I have got that right then it seems the 108 in green with speed whiskers is just about perfect for my period and location.

[DavidB]

The 108 was on a shorter chassis (57' vice 64'6") than many units, which might have led to someone thinking they were 'Lightweight'

Yes indeed - and that 'someone' included their owners: BR stencilled LW for Lightweight above the front buffers of 108s in the 1980s. AFAIK this was done to avoid confusion in areas such as Lincoln where the 108 Lightweights operated alongside their superficially similar 114 Heavyweight cousins - the longer steel-bodied Heavyweights were permitted to take heavier trailing loads than the aluminium-bodied 108s, and the depot staff at Lincoln told me that the stencil markings were added near the couplings to avoid mistakes that could be made when the different classes worked similar duties. The differences in length and bodyside profile are clear to DMU enthusiasts in broad daylight, but on a cold, dark and wet night in East Anglia or the East Midlands, the extra clue for the crew that a 108 was a lightweight was presumably a helpful addition.

 

David

[chrisf]

The Class 100s were the Gloucester RC&W two car units. The original Derby lightweights were, as has been said above, withdrawn before the advent of TOPS numbers.

 

Chris