Class 50/D400 MU Cables fitting date

[daveyb]

I have been looking at the flikr collections in the Class 50/D400 group, having had my interest piqued by a post on here. I knew some (all?) of the class were delivered without MU jumpers fitted (blanking plates instead) but had assumed it was a short term issue. I have narrowed the fitting date to Sep 69 - Mar 70, but pics of them in this era are quite rare.

 

Were they all delivered without? Why were they delivered without? Was it to do with the lease arrangements? As they were brought in to do a job that often required multiple working and they were obviously prepared for the cabling (we term it fitted for not fitted with at work), why were they worked in tandem for so long? Finally, when were the jumper cables fitted and where (works, depot or Vulcan)?

 

Thanks,

[ClikC]

400 and 401 we're delivered fitted, all others of the class we're delivered wired, but with blanking plates. The class were then retro fitted with them for the acclerated services crewe to glasgow (due to the requirement for double heading).

 

Rememeber these locomotives we're leased to BR, so likely the introduction was cost saving on EE's part, before approval of the new faster timetabled services.

 

HTH

 

Regards

 

Matt

[Flood]

Portrait of the 50s shows D401 with only the receptor under the driver's window at No.2 end and no cable or other boxes, dated 18 May 1969 (also shown here: http://www.class50.com/c50_zoom.php?img=0758040001310#)

 

I tried to make a note from the Railway Observers as to the dates the others were fitted but never managed a full list:

 

10/69: 416/29/37/8

12/69: 414/46

1/70: 403/25/41/9

2/70: 407/21

3/70: 402/10/4/42/3

4/70: 427

 

Whether they were fitted at Crewe Depot or Crewe Works I don't know. I doubt that they would have gone back to Vulcan though.

[keefer]

i wonder if the delay in fitting was simply down to some shortage/delay in supplying the jumpers/sockets themselves?

 

i'd have thought that MU working was definitely on the cards if they went to the bother of equipping/wiring the locos with the capacity to MU.

presumably, as flood says, they wouldn't need returning to vulcan for fitting, as it would simply be a case of fitting the jumpers and sockets to the wires already there - with possibly a bit lof testing to make sure it all worked

 

a similar thing happened when the 27/2s entered service on the E-G push-pulls - derby works knew that locos would be fitted with ETH, but the method of providing this hadn't yet been decided on. so locos were released with sockets/dummy sockets but no jumper cables - though presumably they would've been wired up internally

[daveyb]

Up to two and a half years is a long lead time for a set of cables!

 

A was struck by how clean they looked without the jumper fitted - a good option for the preserved ones, maybe?

 

Having done as much digging as is possible on a niche question, I too am of the opinion it must have been something to do with the lease agreement, but I can't find anything definite. What date were they 'bought'?

[Flood]

Class 50s in Operation states that they were bought "in early 1974". Apart from on wikipedia (stating 1973) I cannot find any more information on the purchase date. I know that Class 50s in Operation has a few errors in it (which I did ask the publishers to forward to the author) but I have no reason to disagree with the date of 1974.

 

A number of locos had already lost one or both of their hire plates by 1976 (the time I was previously modelling the West Country) but either Doncaster Works (from December 1976) or naming ceremonies (from 1978) ensured that no hire plates were carried after 1979.

[keefer]

TRACTION magazine no.15 (jan 1996) has the first part of a good article on the cl.50s

 

all it mentions about the jumpers is what has already been said - only D400/401 had them fitted until it was decided to use them in pairs on the accelerated WCML services (from may 1970). hence, the rest of the locos were fitted in early 1970

 

it goes into some detail re: the leasing agreement

the contract signed on 27th August 1967 had a 'Agreement to manufacture' between the BRB and EE Co.Ltd. This detailed the spec., manufacture and price of the locos ordered

there was also an 'agreement to hire' between BRB and EE Leasing Ltd. which covered the period of hire, hire charges and BR's responsibility in maintaining the locos.

The contract had an initial hire period of 7 years from the commissioning date of each loco, with indefinite extension to that period by further hire charges.

Apparently, there was, initially, no provision in the contract for BR to purchase the locos (to do with capital tax allowances for EE)

 

The general gist of the agreement was that EE Co.Ltd sold the locos to EE Leasing Ltd., who then hired them to BR

 

the end of the lease came about as penalties from poor availabilty etc. caused disagreement between BR and EE - BR usually claiming more redress than EE was prepared to offer. in the early 70s this got worse until it was agreed that BR would buy the fleet "and this was arranged during 1973 before the 7-yr hire period had expired"

 

EDIT: just notice BR Fleet Survey 3 (2nd. ed), haresnape/ian allan 1984 says the remaining locos had their MU jumpers fitted at crewe.

[daveyb]

Many thanks, chaps - seems to cover it.