Condor Speeds

[Evertrainz]

Hello, the Class 28's seemed to be a great locomotive plagued by failures. My question is, how did the Metrovicks pull the high-speed Condor London-Glasgow? More specifically, how did they manage to "do speeds up to 75mph", with 28 loaded conflats? If they didn't, what was the actual max speed of the Condor services in its early years with 28 conflats, before it got cut to 13 wagons?

 

Thanks, Ron

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Since no one else has volunteered, there would be no problem with such a maximum speed on level track provided the equipment was working. Then again there were locations on the route where this speed could have easily been exceeded with no engine power whatsoever, and the braking system was much the most important thing...

[Clive Mortimore]

Hello, the Class 28's seemed to be a great locomotive plagued by failures. My question is, how did the Metrovicks pull the high-speed Condor London-Glasgow? More specifically, how did they manage to "do speeds up to 75mph", with 28 loaded conflats? If they didn't, what was the actual max speed of the Condor services in its early years with 28 conflats, before it got cut to 13 wagons?

 

Thanks, Ron

Hi Ron

 

From the 1964 Freight Trains Load Book, LMR (Midland Lines) the maximum loads for the Condor were

 

One type 2 diesel OR one class 5 steam..........25 Conflat "P"

One type 4 diesel..............................................42 Conflat "P"

Two type 2 diesel OR two class 5 steam............46 Conflat "P"

 

This does not include the fitted brake van with roller bearings.

 

It does not mention the maximum speed for the Condor but does mention that the maximum speed for a class 4 train is 55 mph. There is note stating that "A maximum speed of 60 mph will apply in respect of certain trains specifically indicated in the Working Timetables."

 

I do not have a LMR (Midalnd Lines) working timetable for the period the Condor was running.

[cctransuk]

Hello, the Class 28's seemed to be a great locomotive plagued by failures. My question is, how did the Metrovicks pull the high-speed Condor London-Glasgow? More specifically, how did they manage to "do speeds up to 75mph", with 28 loaded conflats? If they didn't, what was the actual max speed of the Condor services in its early years with 28 conflats, before it got cut to 13 wagons?

 

Thanks, Ron

 

I used to watch the southbound evening Condor on a regular basis at Wigston Magna station, south of Leicester.

 

Two Co-Bos going flat out - and a noise and exhaust that you had to be there to believe !!

 

The Co-Bos were quite capable locos when they chose to run as intended - they just chose not to do so on an increasingly frequent basis !!

 

Rgards,

John Isherwood.

[kevinlms]

Hello, the Class 28's seemed to be a great locomotive plagued by failures. My question is, how did the Metrovicks pull the high-speed Condor London-Glasgow? More specifically, how did they manage to "do speeds up to 75mph", with 28 loaded conflats? If they didn't, what was the actual max speed of the Condor services in its early years with 28 conflats, before it got cut to 13 wagons?

 

Thanks, Ron

Given the nature of the failures, how could they be considered 'great locomotives'? Breaking down in such a fashion as reported, they must have been an operational nightmare!

[MarkC]

I think that the big problem with them was the engine that was fitted, a Crossley 2-stroke beast. 2-strokes are best running at high loads for extended periods of time, which is why the Co-Bos did well on the Condor service. On local passenger services and the likes of pick-up goods operations, well, not so good...

[beast66606]

Timing allowances for the Settle and Carlisle - 1960

 

[Baby Deltic]

There were problems with resonance in the power units which caused crank case failures, I believe. Later on they were never given full power, and I read a story somewhere of a traction inspector riding on a Co-Bo who questioned the driver as to why he never went above (notch 7?). After being told they don't because it causes failure, he instructed them to give the Crossley notch 8 and it failed shortly thereater.

[stovepipe]

So 113 mins down and 120 mins up for 88 miles. That's an average speed of 47 and 44 mph respectively. Though the Appleby - Carlisle section is a 60 mph average on the down run, as is Blea Moor - Settle Jct on the up.

[JeremyC]

I think that the big problem with them was the engine that was fitted, a Crossley 2-stroke beast. 2-strokes are best running at high loads for extended periods of time, which is why the Co-Bos did well on the Condor service. On local passenger services and the likes of pick-up goods operations, well, not so good...

 

 

There were problems with resonance in the power units which caused crank case failures, I believe. Later on they were never given full power, and I read a story somewhere of a traction inspector riding on a Co-Bo who questioned the driver as to why he never went above (notch 7?). After being told they don't because it causes failure, he instructed them to give the Crossley notch 8 and it failed shortly thereater.

An interesting article is reproduced here http://nicwhe8.freehostia.com/d5705/australia/australia.html [about half way down the page] about Australian experience with the Crossley Engine.

It appears that basically the design was extemely poor; the list of faults with the engine is  impressive; I'm glad I've never met one:-)

 

Jeremy

Edited to correct link

[russ p]

I think they had 10 notches, the red circle multiple working system was probably better than the blue star system as there was no air involved so no leaking regulating air pipes

[Dava]

If you look closely at delivery photos of the clsss 28, the detail design & finish is very fine (windows, door handles etc) but of course the engine was a poor choice

 

Terence Cuneo's night painting of The Condor was impressive on the Triangle Hornby catalog cover in 1972, www.trianghornby.net

 

Dava

[russ p]

Apparently the standard of build quality was very good on them even today when you look at 5705 its not as rotten as some preserved class 37s.

I remember years ago talking to a thornaby driver who did the test runs with them when they built at Stockton

[Fat Controller]

An interesting article is reproduced here http://nicwhe8.freehostia.com/d5705/australia/australia.html [about half way down the page] about Australian experience with the Crossley Engine.

It appears that basically the design was extemely poor; the list of faults with the engine is  impressive; I'm glad I've never met one:-)

 

Jeremy

Edited to correct link

I believe CIE also (briefly) had some Crossley-powered locos, which were very soon re-engined. Is this the same Crossley who built lorries before WW2?

To return to the Condor service; the un-modified vac-fitted Plate wagons had a maximum speed of 60 mph (later downgraded to 55 mph), so I can imagine the modified wagons, with their improved suspension would be allowed to run somewhat faster.

[Arthur]

It is the same Crossley Brian and they were still building buses and trolley buses into the 1950's, not surprisingly Manchester Corporation were a major customer as they were in Manchester, not that far from Beyer Peacock and the former GC's Gorton works. Metropolitan Vickers (MV) were also Manchester based though, as mentioned above, the locos were assembled at the, then new, Stockton on Tees works. Presumably the choice of a two stroke was partly inspired by their more successful application to rail traction by General Motors/EMD in the States.

 

As already stated, they were built to a high standard of finish and the electrical equipment was also rated as being very good, MV already being well established in the field. BR did consider them for re-engining, I cannot recall now with what but it was an engine of higher horsepower that the 1250hp Crossleys. MV assured BR that the electrical equipment was well up to the extra power. Being a small class this idea was soon dropped and they finished their short lives not long after.

[russ p]

I think the engine intended for the re-engining project was an English electric 8CSVT the same as the northern Irish hunslets, basically a class 20 engine with charge air cooling

[Evertrainz]

Given the nature of the failures, how could they be considered 'great locomotives'? Breaking down in such a fashion as reported, they must have been an operational nightmare!

All failures aside, I should have said that this would have been a great locomotive, had it not chewed up its engine full throttle.

[Evertrainz]

I'm just going to say it: I value the Condor, and sympathize for the engines that pulled it. The Condor was one of Britain's most important freighters in the Midlands, and respect BR for putting Metrovicks at the lead. But, apparently they hauled wagons marked for max speed of 75 mph at only 55-60 (?). I'd read somewhere that the Conflats in the Condor were specially marked for said speed. 

 

Another question, why did 2 Metrovicks not even come close to the power of a single duff? 2,400 hp is only few less than 2,750 hp, but twin Metrovicks seemed to do worse than a Class 37, even when twinned. My uncle said that he had close ties to the local railways, and frequently saw these beasts idle in the yards at Euston, though he said that he wasn't sure if they had worked many freights or light workings. This honestly has nothing to do with models, but I want to know, out of general curiosity.

[Crantock]

I'm just going to say it: I value the Condor, and sympathize for the engines that pulled it. The Condor was one of Britain's most important freighters in the Midlands, and respect BR for putting Metrovicks at the lead. But, apparently they hauled wagons marked for max speed of 75 mph at only 55-60 (?). I'd read somewhere that the Conflats in the Condor were specially marked for said speed. 

 

Another question, why did 2 Metrovicks not even come close to the power of a single duff? 2,400 hp is only few less than 2,750 hp, but twin Metrovicks seemed to do worse than a Class 37, even when twinned. My uncle said that he had close ties to the local railways, and frequently saw these beasts idle in the yards at Euston, though he said that he wasn't sure if they had worked many freights or light workings. This honestly has nothing to do with models, but I want to know, out of general curiosity.

That power comparison is undermined by the condor loading table which has 2 class 2 at 46 flats and one class 4 at 42 flats.  Not quite sure if the class 4 envisaged would be 40 or 45 (I suspect the latter).  I am not sure where metrovicks (LM) would come up against 37s (ER) but I may be a late 70s man in my views. 

[Arthur]

 

Another question, why did 2 Metrovicks not even come close to the power of a single duff? 2,400 hp is only few less than 2,750 hp, but twin Metrovicks seemed to do worse than a Class 37, even when twinned.

 

How are you arriving at those conclusions? I'm not saying that you are wrong, I'm just curious as to the source.

 

As for speed, just because a wagon is rated at 75mph that doesn't mean that the service itself will be required to run at that speed. Lots of passenger stock runs around at speeds well below their maximum permitted.

[Mark Saunders]

The maximum potential speed that a wagon can run at does not take into account the characteristics of the route performance of the Locomotives and point to point timings.  Stopping and Starting takes time!

 

At first sight using two class 50's on a passenger train hauling very little weight in comparison to a Freight train seems poor value but to maintain the timings two locomotives were required, Gradients eat speed and time!

 

Also given that over the years many stations/lines have been remodelled allowing faster running, take Carlisle currently 20 mph likewise York and Newcastle present similar constraints and Peterborough was rebuilt for through running at speed with the introduction of HST's to the East Coast!

 

Comparing today with yesterdays railway does not work!

 

Mark Saunders

[bigherb]

 

Another question, why did 2 Metrovicks not even come close to the power of a single duff? 2,400 hp is only few less than 2,750 hp, but twin Metrovicks seemed to do worse than a Class 37, even when twinned. My uncle said that he had close ties to the local railways, and frequently saw these beasts idle in the yards at Euston, though he said that he wasn't sure if they had worked many freights or light workings. This honestly has nothing to do with models, but I want to know, out of general curiosity.

Two locomotives weigh more than a single loco of the same power, along with the extra frictional loses of the extra loco wheels, bearings, gears which the engine has to overcome.

[railroadbill]

If you look closely at delivery photos of the clsss 28, the detail design & finish is very fine (windows, door handles etc) but of course the engine was a poor choice

 

Terence Cuneo's night painting of The Condor was impressive on the Triangle Hornby catalog cover in 1972, www.trianghornby.net

 

Dava

 

British Pathe newsreel of Cuneo sketching a co-bo with  Condor headboard for a BR poster in 1960.

 

 

 

Some good detail of the class 28 buffer beam at the beginning as well. Excellent atmosphere!

[Dava]

Great period film. I should have said the painting was called 'Night Freight' not just the Triang-Hornby catalog cover! Sensible of Sir Terence to buy a 9F rather than a Co-Bo though, much longer lasting.

 

Dava

[ozzyo]

I did not think that Cunio bought a 9f I thought it was David Shepard (he also bought a standard class 5). It may sound daft but the class 28 have had just about the same life span as the 9Fs. If not longer.

But not as many have been persevered.

One of the main problems with the 28s was that un-burnt fuel would accumulate in the exhaust pipe silencers and set alight (think about 2 stroke engines of the time).

When they came to Barrow the fitters and crews got to know them well, and the locos had a very good mileage between main overhauls.       

 

OzzyO.