Coventry Railcar

[Nearholmer]

DH

 

I think I'd be pretty cantankerous after your grandfather's experiences!

 

On MU control:

 

- the first MU control that I know of was on the Siemens Lichterfelde and related electric lines in the early 1880s, which used mechanical control of the electrical systems over up to (I think) three cars, which must have been exceedingly clunky;

 

- I'm fairly sure that, although the Liverpool Overhead trains had two cars, the electrical circuits were originally configured so that the motors were under direct control from whichever cab was in use, and I don't think more than one "set" could be operated in multiple;

 

- the system devised by Sprague, which he developed from his elevator control designs, which he had in turn developed after seeing a demonstration of an automated electric model railway, in England in (IIRC) 1882, is usually credited as being the first true MU system, was first applied in Chicago in 1897.

 

I've not tried to discover when MU was first applied to a PE, but the state of PE control system development (no integration between engine and generator controls) pre-WW1 would have made it astonishingly difficult, so I doubt it was achieved until the 1920s at earliest - my homework for this week is to try to find out!

 

And, yes, British domestic railways were conservative compared with some export markets, but I have a suspicion that maybe some of what was sent to far-flung markets wasn't exactly tried and tested ....... And, some of it was competetive in places that were short on coal or short on water, but less so at home.

 

Kevin

[russ p]

I'm sure I've read somewhere Kevin, that the LOR cars were the first in Britain to have MU control

[Nearholmer]

Russ

 

Information about this on the web seems confusing and contradictory, and the only contemporary description that I can find quickly (see below, from The Engineer in 1893) makes no mention of MU capability. I am still not convinced they had MU capability from the outset! although it might have been added later.

 

I will try to find time to follow this to a conclusion, but might not have time today.

 

Kevin

[Nearholmer]

Russ

 

A little more, which seems to entirely confirm my belief that LOR did not have MU, at least in the early years (I don't know about later) from the pen of Frank Sprague himself, to the NY Times.

 

The accident he refers to was an electrical fire on a train at Dingle on 23 December 1901, in which six people died. http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/d/dingle/bot_dingle1901[1].pdf

 

Kevin

 

PS: The Engineer published a big supplement about electric railways in 1911, a survey of progress to date, and although it mentions the LOR operating three-car sets, it does not mention MU control of their trains,whereas it does mention others, including the GWR/Met joint stock for the H&C line as having MU control.

 

PPS: I've now checked what Prof Duffy says in his history of electric traction, which is THE place to look. He asserts that LOR did use MU control from the outset, but, very unusually, because the book is very well referenced, he doesn't cite a source for this information. I have a horrible feeling that he is wrong ...,. Which puts me at odds with The Master in this area. I will try to establish contact and check with him, although I know he was very ill.

[PhilJ W]

The LOR at first only operated 2 car sets and from what I can gather they were operated as a single car with the trailing controls switched out. They were not MU controlled as I understand it, proper MU operation requires a separate low voltage curcuit from the line voltage. The regulations at the time allowed the line voltage to run through an electric MU train, the Waterloo and City trains used a cable running along the roofs of their stock for example. After some tragic fires in such stock the running of line voltage through a train was banned but fortunately reliable low voltage control systems such as the Spragg system had become available.

[Nearholmer]

Phil

 

You at exactly where I am with this.

 

I think that a lot of what has been written about the LOR having MU control is founded in a misunderstanding about the fundamental difference between "being able to control from either cab" and MU control.

 

From what I can discern, and I'm still hunting for a circuit diagram, the LOR cars used direct control of the traction power circuits from each cab, with power-circuit cabling down the length of the train. There were only two motors (one on each driving car), and I'm not even sure they had series/parallel switching, so the cabling wouldn't have been all that complicated.

 

IIRC the design was by Elwell-Parker, and they were by no means at the forefront of developments by the mid-1890s, so I really doubt they had devised an MU system before Sprague.

 

Kevin

 

The OP may be getting annoyed by this diversion from Coventry ....... If he is, we should move to a new thread.

[PhilJ W]

Getting back to the Daimler rail car. Is there any more information available on it? I would like to know what colour it was painted if theres any record of that.

[Nearholmer]

I didn't get time to hunt for the further detail yesterday evening, but it certainly won't discuss livery - it's all "tech detail".

 

Looking at the b&w photo, I wouldn't even like to guess - it might even still be in grey primer/undercoat!

 

Build one, paint it whatever colour feels right, then, at the first exhibition you take it to, a chap who looks as if has probably lived alone for many years will materialise, in possession of incontrovertible, but unpublished, evidence that it was actually a colour that will be really difficult to apply over the top of what you have already put on it!

 

K

[sharris]

Build one, paint it whatever colour feels right, then, at the first exhibition you take it to, a chap who looks as if has probably lived alone for many years will materialise, in possession of incontrovertible, but unpublished, evidence that it was actually a colour that will be really difficult to apply over the top of what you have already put on it!

 

We need a 'funny, but true' icon!

[runs as required]

Sorry to have drawn this (interesting) thread so far OT.

As to colour:

that b+w pic of the Beezer Daimler seems to have the tone of a mid grey workshop undercoat . As the coachwork has a lofty toplight Midland look about it, I'd suggest that a colour half way between Midland crimson lake and an NER 'dorty broon' would fox any guy wearing a dirty mac

 

dh

[Nearholmer]

And ....... Sneaking back OT for a moment:

 

I wonder if the LOR MU issue might be a confusion with the Mersey Tunnel Railway. There, the American electric trains used from 1903 did have MU, on the Westinghouse electro-pneumatic system, rather than the Sprague electro-magnetic system.

 

This could well have been a "first in Britain", because the C&SLR and CLR were (IIRC) still using locos at this date, and the W&C had (again IIRC) direct control.

 

K

[sharris]

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrwm421.htm

 

 

 

 

The one in the warwickshirerailways link is the Type 9 brought to the UK for the 1932 trials. The one in the youtube video (and the one that the diecast models are of - there was Marklin model too) is a type 11. There are small dimensional differences between them, but the chief distinguishing feature is that the type 9 has two passenger doors (front and rear) on each side, while the type 11 only has one at the front.

 

This page is interesting ... http://www.marklin-users.net/forum/yaf_postst22295_Conversion-A-D-the-Marklin-3123----Minerva-Micheline.aspx

as someone has taken apart the Marklin model to fit DCC - should provide some clues as to how to build a type 9 in EM!

[grandadgeoff]

Sorry to have drawn this (interesting) thread so far OT.

As to colour:

that b+w pic of the Beezer Daimler seems to have the tone of a mid grey workshop undercoat . As the coachwork has a lofty toplight Midland look about it, I'd suggest that a colour half way between Midland crimson lake and an NER 'dorty broon' would fox any guy wearing a dirty mac

 

dh

That "mid grey workshop undercoat" might not be too far off the mark.

 

I have a copy of an article on this Railcar that appeared in the April 1991 edition of the Daimler and Lanchester Owners club magazine. Although development and testing was affected by WW1, apparently the LNWR picked up the idea post war. It undertook testing in 1918 and, amongst other minor changes, had the machine painted "French grey, lined out in white, with a thin maroon line in the centre".

 

It was certainly a fascinating machine that combined petrol engines and electric motors much in the manner of today's hybrid drives in buses.

[Nearholmer]

That's the very article I have, stashed away somewhere safe (which means "not easily found").

 

I eat my words about it not containing livery information.

 

K

[Nearholmer]

And this, from Graces Guide synopsis of the history of AEC, may explain any forward transfer of technology from the Daimler/BSA railcar into AEC production:

 

"1926 AEC and Daimler merged to form the short-lived Associated Daimler Co which was to be floated so that it would be free of the financial control of L.G.O.C. and therefore would be able to supply other companies [1]."

 

The point about The LGOC origins of AEC explains a very close relationship that existed in, at least until WW2, between AEC and the railway side of London Transport, in that LGOC came to be owned by Underground Electric Railways Company, which became a major chunk of LT in 1933. A pal of mine worked at the LT rolling stock drawing offices at Acton in the 1970s, and tells me that there were many AEC railcar drawings on file there that had no obvious/direct connection to LT (LT did briefly try out a GWR AEC car on the Chesham and Aylesbury services).

 

K

[Nearholmer]

Footnote to the OT discussion of MU control:

 

Yes, the initial Waterloo & City stock was "direct" control, with a whopping great horizontal-shaft drum controller in each cab, and eleven traction bus-cables down the four-car length of the train, in order to get series/parallel control. The fixing and jointing of the bus-cables between cars looked like an accident waiting to happen!

 

The LOR was almost certainly very similar, but simpler.

 

K

[runs as required]

Um...more or less OT?

By far the most complete research of the Coventry railcar, the Michelines and the LMS Leyland multiple unit seems to be here

in Part 2 headed "La Micheline and the Coventry Railcars" which continues over into Part 3 and a  heading "The LMS Articulated Diesel Multiple Unit ".

 

I've trawled up more interesting pre BR DMU stuff which as Kevin Nearholmer suggests I ought to post on a new thread...

 

dh

[Nearholmer]

There is a pre-1950 diesel locos thread, so please start a pre-1950 railcars (not steam) one.

 

K

[sharris]

Um...more or less OT?

By far the most complete research of the Coventry railcar, the Michelines and the LMS Leyland multiple unit seems to be here

in Part 2 headed "La Micheline and the Coventry Railcars" which continues over into Part 3 and a  heading "The LMS Articulated Diesel Multiple Unit ".

 

I've trawled up more interesting pre BR DMU stuff which as Kevin Nearholmer suggests I ought to post on a new thread...

 

dh

 

If that page is true it looks like I'll have to add a Type 11 to my To Do list on top of the Type 9, Type 22 and 80001 DMU!

[PhilJ W]

A good source of information is 'British Railcars' by David Jenkinson & Barry C Lane ISBN 0 906899 64 8 published by Atlantic in 1996. It covers both steam and I/C railcars up until 1940. However it ignores the Colonel Stevens lines but they are covered by other publications.

[Nearholmer]

Diesel railcars before 1950, in general, rather than the specific ones under discussion here, would fit happily into this thread

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/107526-diesel-rail-traction-before-1950-discuss/page-2

 

K

[Michael Edge]

There wouldn't have been any point to the LOR trains having MU control - the stations were barely long enough for the eventual 3 car trains. This is probably the reason why the trailer cars were so short, nearly all the station platforms were the same length (based on the structure design) and the driver's and guard's doors won't fit on the platform at the same time.

[Nearholmer]

Michael

 

I think we still might be getting tangled between MU control as it is sometimes understood by railway enthusiasts (the ability to join two trains together, and operate from a single cab, or to operate a single train from the cabs at either end) and MU control as understood by engineers (control over multiple traction drive packages, from a single cab, by means of a control system separate from the traction system itself). In the latter context, even a single vehicle, which is never joined to any other, can sometimes have MU control.

 

And, I suspect that, although it didn't have it from the start (because it hadn't been invented in 1893), the LOR stock was fitted with MU control, either during the up-rating in 1902, when "modern" motors were fitted, or during the rebuilds in the late-1940s. It seems unlikely to me that they would have persisted with direct control of traction, which brings all the fire and electric-shock risks that go with lots of power cables along the length of the train, after the Dingle fire, and other incidents of a similar kind on other railways.

 

We are undoubtedly OT here; I have opened a new thread on it.

 

Kevin

[PhilJ W]

Perhaps we should ask Andy to open a new special interest group for pre 1950 I/C and electric stock?

[rue_d_etropal]

For more info on the Micheline type 22, which I think is pretty similar to the Coventry railcar, try herein Loco Revue magazine November 1989

 

http://fr.1001mags.com/parution/loco-revue/numero-520-novembre-1989

 

This website is a good resource for finding old articles, wish there was something similar for UK magazines.

One problem with website is that it can be slow. I have downloaded a few magazines in the past, in fact I am waiting for the above to download now. Best to only do one magzine at a time, and then yo copy to your computer with 48 hours or it is lost. Same process as is used to transfer large files elsewhere, I had some drawings from HMRS done in similar way.

 

I have found that it does appear to stick, but if you open another window you can log in ans se magazine, click on it and download as a pdf. I have just had to do this and it worked fine. Magazine now on compiuter, and it only cost 1 euro 16 cents. They add a small charge for paypal. You will need to set up an acount first.

 

It would not surprise me if there was not more infion other Micheline railcars. Magazines go all the way back to 1930s, but war time ones mssing.

 

Back to Micheline railcars. Markin have done an HO one of the original, similar the the first one trialed on Oxford line. I seem to remember Oxford club's Rewley Road used one. Fortunately Marklin do it in DC as well as AC under Hamo label. It is possibly a bit more basic than current models, and is of course HO.