RMweb Gold RFS Posted December 20, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) A significant amount of detail on the HALs and BILs here, though I'm not sure why on this site! http://www.bloodandcustard.com/BIL001.html (2-BIL) http://www.bloodandcustard.com/HAL001.html (2-HAL) The article on the 2-HALs makes reference to the 10-coach scheme introduced in the 1950s on the South Eastern division, whereby some rush-hour services consisted of 6-HAL/4-SUB configurations, but does not elucidate further. The last of the 2-HALs - the "tin HALs" - were completed in 1948, some 7 years after the first 4-SUBs and I would have thought it unlikely that both types would have had incompatible control systems. The very last 2-HAL (2700) actually had a motor coach from 4-SUB 4590. Edited December 20, 2013 by RFS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 20, 2013 Author Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) Re. 4 SUBs and their compatibility with other units, I am still none the wiser. Having re-read p.10 of 'The 4 SUB Story' (Brown-Rayner 1983), it is not clear quite what is meant: "on express electric units built between 1932 and 1938 the control potentiometer had been replaced by motor generators and batteries, which also fed the lighting circuits, but this development would have made the '4SUB's' incompatible with the earlier suburban units." So, as 2 HALs & 2 BILs most definitely had motor generators, how could they run with any suburban unit, let alone a 4 SUB? Someone must know! Colin Edited December 20, 2013 by Colin parks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAB Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) Re. 4 SUBs and their compatibility with other units, I am still none the wiser. Having re-read p.10 of 'The 4 SUB Story' (Brown-Rayner 1983), it is not clear quite what is meant: "on express electric units built between 1932 and 1938 the control potentiometer had been replaced by motor generators and batteries, which also fed the lighting circuits, but this development would have made the '4SUB's' incompatible with the earlier suburban units." So, as 2 HALs & 2 BILs most definitely had motor generators, how could they run with any suburban unit, let alone a 4 SUB? Someone must know! Colin Hello Colin, That is a most definite "most definitely" there!! Are you sure? I confess to always thinking that they were not so fitted - I certainly remember the lights going out pretty quickly when they got gapped! Four (incomplete) bits of evidence:- 1. Can't see one on Godfrey's pics of 2090 at the NRM 2. Hornby did not fit one to theirs (so what? They did not fit a compressor either) though they did fit a potentiometer box 3. You did not fit one to yours! 4. ISTR them always carrying tail lamps On the "blood and custard" page you reference above (which is quite interesting) there is indeed reference to 10 car trains formed of 6HAL + 4 SUB and I had always assumed that the 1936 equipment (ie no MG) was fitted to everything which was not an express (ie COR/BUF/RES/PUL/PAN/CIT/BEL... ...) Another little query in your note there - why "let alone a 4 SUB" what was different about the SUBs from any other Sub? (body work apart) Yours, Rather puzzled of the East Midlands, Edited December 20, 2013 by HAB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAB Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 and another thing... In the supreme example of interworking the two motors of 4377 [no less] worked in 4 LAV unit 2932 - p65 of 4 SUB story. OK so that is not a BIL, but I am pretty sure I will lay my hand on a pic of a HAL running with a SUB Motor before the evening is out... Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted December 20, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) This clip shows evidence of a 4-SUB working with 2-BILs See the train starting at around 1m50s into the clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi3De3HaCaU I initially thought the first train was another example but it appears to be a tin HAL not a 4-SUB! Edited December 20, 2013 by RFS 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 20, 2013 Author Share Posted December 20, 2013 Oh Dear! I think I have confused myself on this matter. I was thinking of compressors when talking of motor generators (and as Howard says it is only the Express stock that had motor generators. Very sorry to all who have put me right. I put it down to the paint fumes....... Colin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium New Haven Neil Posted December 20, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 20, 2013 ...green-ish fumes, one hopes. That film above has set the modelling juices (sorry!) flowing.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAB Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 ... and here was me thinking the solvent bottle was the issue... No apology needed - I'm sure we all enjoyed the sport! Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAB Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) This clip shows evidence of a 4-SUB working with 2-BILs See the train starting at around 1m50s into the clip. In the "prototype for everything department - what about the JB plus 4 BIL at 3.52!!! I dare anyone to try getting away with that! Cheers, Edited December 20, 2013 by HAB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 20, 2013 Author Share Posted December 20, 2013 ...green-ish fumes, one hopes. That film above has set the modelling juices (sorry!) flowing.... Hi Neil, The fumes are at present of the grey variety as the bodies are having a good dose of Humbrol Matt 27 applied first! All the best, Colin 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 20, 2013 Author Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) ... and here was me thinking the solvent bottle was the issue... No apology needed - I'm sure we all enjoyed the sport! Cheers, Oh Dear again! This is nearly as bad as my faux pas last year re. running motors on DC, direction of travel, etc., etc.. Solvent has never had this effect on me. (Partly the fault also lies with modelling bits of underframe gear without really understanding their function.) Colin Edited December 20, 2013 by Colin parks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasatcopthorne Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 It was after the London to Brighton cycle race where the riders went on scheduled services and the bikes were loaded onto specials which were formed of SUBS (and EPBs?) which had the seats removed, each compartment took about 20 or so bikes. Hi Guys. I remember these workings. Went down to Three Bridges to see them. Seat cushions turned over and bikes stuffed in where ever they would go. Trains made long stop at TB to unload where necessary. Trouble is, I can't locate the photos. Cheers Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david65061 Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 In the "prototype for everything department - what about the JB plus 4 BIL at 3.52!!! I dare anyone to try getting away with that! Cheers, As it pulled away there was a puff of smoke so was it working on diesel to? Were the shots of the electro- diesels propelling taken when there were problems with the third rail or was that usual? A fantastic clip almost want to model southern electric now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 As it pulled away there was a puff of smoke so was it working on diesel to? Were the shots of the electro- diesels propelling taken when there were problems with the third rail or was that usual? A fantastic clip almost want to model southern electric now. I think so, yes. It's an unusual working in another respect: no tail lamp! Some of that film was clearly a railtour which ended up at Broad Street. The pictures of EDs propelling rather than hauling are quite normal; the units in question were TCs (Trailer Control - no motors so operated push pull) and designed to be able to operate either a loco (ED or 33/1) or another unit, usually a 4 REP down to Bournemouth. Adam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 21, 2013 Author Share Posted December 21, 2013 (edited) Hi Guys. I remember these workings. Went down to Three Bridges to see them. Seat cushions turned over and bikes stuffed in where ever they would go. Trains made long stop at TB to unload where necessary. Trouble is, I can't locate the photos. Cheers Dave Hi Dave, We all hope you can find those photos at some point! All the best, Colin Edited December 21, 2013 by Colin parks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stadman Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 As it pulled away there was a puff of smoke so was it working on diesel to? Were the shots of the electro- diesels propelling taken when there were problems with the third rail or was that usual? A fantastic clip almost want to model southern electric now. As it pulled away there was a puff of smoke so was it working on diesel to? Were the shots of the electro- diesels propelling taken when there were problems with the third rail or was that usual? A fantastic clip almost want to model southern electric now. ED"s operating in diesel mode were common in some areas of 3rd rail. Often had them out of Waterloo on an Exeter bound service to Basingstoke (Not with TC but standard Mk2's) Diesel was standard due to short conductor rail lengths and whilst gapping wouldn't be a problem for the ED's the delays to the network in restarting would. Kev S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted December 21, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 21, 2013 (edited) Looking through the comments on the Youtube video it seems that a significant part of the 2-BIL footage was that of the 2-BIL farewell tour. This was scheduled to be worked by 3 units, but part way through the tour one of the units failed and was replaced by a 4-SUB. Later on the 4-SUB was replaced by a 2-HAL. The footage appears not to be in chronological order as we see the train with 4-SUB attached entering the station followed immediately by the train with 3 2-BILs. I can only assume the sequence with the ED and a pair of 2-BILs was for working over a section of non-electrified track which might explain why the ED was on diesel power, but not why there was no tail lamp! Perhaps that had been left behind on the failed 2-BIL? Later in the sequence there's a train of 3 4-TCs being propelled by a single ED. Shortly before the end of steam working on the Bournemouth line in July 1967 some workings were taken over by EDs propelling 4-TCs. Sometimes there were a pair of EDs at the rear and there were also instances where the EDs were marshalled in the middle of the train. A contributory factor in the need for these workings was a delay in the delivery of the 4-REP tractor units, which also caused the full switch-over to be delayed from June to July 1967. The ED was on the rear so that at Bournemouth a 33/1 could take the leading TC (or two) on to Weymouth. Edited December 21, 2013 by RFS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwr Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 Colin Re your 313 project. I have in stock some Sprinter style bogies that were I think from Lima or Hornby and these are I believe more or less the same as fitted to the 31x EMU classes. I bought them when I was going to scratch build a 4-PEP train. As I now work in 7mm they are of no use and I wondered if you might like them. Send men a direct message if you want them, There are 8 bogies. There are no wheels however just the bogie frames Paul R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 (edited) For the farewell tour with the 2 BILs, there was a part of it where only two units at one time could be transferred to the North London side, over a gap in the third rail coverage. The ED was used on diesel power to effect the transfer of the train in two portions.I have a feeling that platform length was the issue on that line and they had to run as two trains (4 BIL and 2 BIL), which were later reformed into the 6 BIL again to continue the journey.From memory, they also called at Broad Street before its closure.It is all documented in a DVD I have on Southern Electrics but I haven' watched it for a while so all of this is from my less than perfect memory. Edited December 22, 2013 by SRman 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 22, 2013 Author Share Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) Ok, it's time to decide on the shade of green for the 4 SUB On the left is Phoenix-Precision P.118 BR Multiple Unit Green (pre- 1954). On the right is a tin of the same maker's P.124 Southern Electric Stock Green with some black added to it (the patch on the lid being over-painted). Well, what does anybody think?! Colin Edited December 22, 2013 by Colin parks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Enterprisingwestern Posted December 22, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 22, 2013 Ok, it's time to decide on the shade of green for the 4 SUB On the left is Phoenix-Precision P.118 BR Multiple Unit Green (pre- 1954). On the left is a tin of the same maker's P.124 Southern Electric Stock Green with some black added to it (the patch on the lid being over-painted). IMG_7272.JPG Well, what does anybody think?! Colin I think you've photographed a green eyed monster! Seriously, SR green was about 50 different shades depending on the length of time it had been in service, so I would go with whatever you think is correct to your eyes. Mike. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Bel Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Ok, it's time to decide on the shade of green for the 4 SUB On the left is Phoenix-Precision P.118 BR Multiple Unit Green (pre- 1954). On the left is a tin of the same maker's P.124 Southern Electric Stock Green with some black added to it (the patch on the lid being over-painted). IMG_7272.JPG Well, what does anybody think?! Colin Hi Colin, To my eyes the one on the right of the two lefts in your post looks good to me, but as Mike says SR green is a complicated shade to capture. Go with what you think. Cheers for now, Ian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAB Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 On the left is Phoenix-Precision P.118 BR Multiple Unit Green (pre- 1954). On the left is a tin of the same maker's P.124 Southern Electric Stock Green with some black added to it (the patch on the lid being over-painted). Hello Colin, In a tunnel, at 75mph at midnight, no one will see the difference... Which tinlet is in the best condition? You don't want another HAL on your hands! Good Luck!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 22, 2013 Author Share Posted December 22, 2013 Hi Colin, To my eyes the one on the right of the two lefts in your post looks good to me, but as Mike says SR green is a complicated shade to capture. Go with what you think. Cheers for now, Ian. Thanks Ian, Two 'lefts' = Christmas stress while posting! All the best, Colin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin parks Posted December 22, 2013 Author Share Posted December 22, 2013 Hello Colin, In a tunnel, at 75mph at midnight, no one will see the difference... Which tinlet is in the best condition? You don't want another HAL on your hands! Good Luck!. Hi Howard, I've checked the quality of the opened tin and it is fine. I did reject a tin of Humbrol Matt Grey 27 which also turned out to be 'gritty' just like the paint on the Tin HAL. All tins have to undergo a smear-test if you can pardon the expression. The dried paint smears are then carefully examined for this gritty problem. So far only the Humbrol grey has failed the test. If that particular tinlet had been used it would have been a disaster! All the best, Colin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now