Ken.W

Yes that's right, to move a single power car you'd simply uncouple and put the ETS on.

Even moving sets around on Heaton depot, we'd still have the ETS turned on.

Thanks Derek, for your comments on my career.

I did actually, get on HSTs right from the start on the East Coast in 78 as a secondman, as at first at Gateshead we had some turns to Edinburgh with an HST one way, but a steam heated set the other, so a secondman was needed for the boiler - although 2 drivers for HST running most main line drivers then were ex steam drivers who'd then learned the diesels as drivers, so hadn't learned the heating boilers.

Then, at Gateshead, we needed to learn the HST as 'passed men' in order to cover the ecs and Heaton depot turns. From being made driver in 86, and on the spare link, l started getting regular main line turns with them, and then from our depot (by then Newcastle) sectorisation in 90 l was fortunately the on Intercity, so enjoyed the last year of full HST ECML operation before we got the 91s. Following privatisation l went through all the ECML franchises, leaving in late '19 as the HSTs were also leaving.

These days, you wouldn't even think of showing visitors around the depot, never mind giving them a cab ride 'around the bridges', you were fortunate there, changed times indeed.

When starting the engines from the cab both start up together.

There are local start buttons, in the engine room, but it's never normal proceedure for the driver to use them.

ETS, normal practice is always to run with this supplied from the rear power car.

Yes it does give a quieter cab environment at times, the engine supplying ETS runs at Notch 2 revs, ldle and Notch 1 both are at the same revs, but...

Battery charge on HST Power Cars is only supplied via the ETS.

This is what allows a train to run when the leading engine's shut down, as ETS from the rear will keep the front's batteries charged, thus keeping the control circuits energised.

It therefore also means you never run without the ETS on, as a driver on a pair of back to back power cars LE from Heaton found out around Selby when they were new.

So, if running with ETS on from the rear and it fails for any reason, you simply reach across the desk and press "ETS ON"

If its on from the front you've to go to the other end to do it, stopping if necessary if you don't have a booked stop soon - and even then it would take considerably longer than the average 2 minute station stop.

This system also allows you to get around one power car having flat batteries when starting up, putting the ETS on will charge the other's  batteries, enabling it to be started.

Nothing extra needs to be done to work a single power car, they simply work in multiple by having the jumper cables connected, much like older diesel locos.

The ancillaries the OP heard of the rear pc supplying the front through the ETS would just be the battery charge.

As for question 4, any of the designers around on here?

Although the OP specified in BR days, there's been no change with regard to any of this.

Ken.W

Driver, Gateshead / Newcastle

Passed on HST ~1983 - 2019

19 hours ago, Titan said:

Reminds me of my time changing brake blocks on 309's at Clacton.  You never let two units out together that had just had their blocks changed, as it took a little while for the new blocks to bed in. So a freshly changed unit always went out with a part worn so the reduction in brake power on the first couple of applications was not too significant. Wonder if the drivers ever noticed that the brakes could often be a bit less strong until you got past Thorpe-le-Soken? There was mind you an incentive to do it right as often my train home was the one I had just re-blocked!

It was definately something you had to watch out for taking a loco LE off the depot when you got one that had just been re-blocked

I'd agree with previous posts it's most likely due to a reversal en route to save having to run the van round the train.

When l started as a secondman, late '70s, it was still practice to do this when possible on the NE local mineral (ie coal) trip workings when a trip was going involve an en route reversal. There more often wasn't a spare van available though.

Tender first workings on such trips wouldn't have been an issue in steam days, collieries, power stations, etc would have lacked turning facilities for main line engines, so they'd have been spending one leg of each trip tender first anyway.

Unlikely to have been for braking purposes, the usual procedure with unfitted trains when extra braking was required was simply to stop and pin down some wagon brakes.

25 minutes ago, roythebus1 said:

With the advent of the Westcode brake that put paid to the air brake pipe, continuity is now proved by a wire running from front to back and back to the front. Having left the railway industry in 1988 I don't know what the present arrangements are, but do know that there's been a number of "incidents" including some where a train has been prepared with loco on train and left overnight as "fully prepared" and "somebody" has been along during the night and interfered with brake cocks between wagons. 

Still plenty of trains around which use a train brake pipe and therefore require a brake continuity test.

Few remaining HSTs and Mk4 sets, plus other loco hauled trains such as TPE Mk5s, Calley Sleepers, charters etc, not forgetting of course, all freight trains.

Yes, I've heard of incidents of brake pipe cocks being shut after a trains been left "fully prepared"

BUT, when "Mobilising"  a train that's been left already " Prepared", one of the main requirements is...

A Brake Continuity Test.

Even when Mobilising a train stabled in a station platform after terminating a previous journey, such as at Kings X,  a Continuty Test is still required, and monitored on any OTMR checks.

On the Azumas where the brake cylinder pressure on each coach is directly controlled electronically, this function is still observed by thr driver sequence testing the brake while observing the brake function page on the TMS, which displays the brake pressure on each coach. On one occasion, while Mobilising a set for a training run, l found the brake to be non-functional on one of the coaches, it turned out to be due to a tripped circuit breaker.

On 08/01/2024 at 17:35, Dutch-Traindriver said:

But for the sake of imaging, which is an interesting subject after all, is a stationary braking test also taken before departure? Or is the driving brake test the only one?

There's been two different 'brake tests' for different purposes which have been discussed here, so yes, both are required.

A ' brake continuity test', before starting a journey or after alteration to train formation, simply confirms that continuity of the brake throughout the train, or fitted portion when there were partially- fitted trains.

A 'running brake test' is to confirm the effectiveness of the brake.

The running brake test is perhaps more noticeable these days, as with on train monitoring recording this is something which is monitored.  Also some operating company's seem to mandate a more severe application that was traditionally used.

Mention was made previously of DOO operation, this doesn't affect the need, or ability to perform a continuity test. On LNER, and during several previous operators, although they do still have 'guards'  it's the driver who's done this from the leading cab

The HSTs and Cl.91/Mk4s both have E70 type electrical brake pipe pressure controllers which applies the brake from both ends of the train, so a brake test on HSTs was done by...

Driver realises brake to an initial or step 2 application to hold the train.

Then isolate the E70 on leading power car

A full service brake application is then made and brake pipe pressure observed to fall, which now can only be applied by the E70 of  the rear power car.

Controller then brought back to release, observing brake does not rise, only the (now isolated ) leading E70 can release the brake.

Brake controller now returned to step 2, front E70 de-isolated, and brake pipe pressure obsrvered to now rise.

The principles the same with Cl.91/ Mk4, but done with a test switch which performs the same isolation at front and applying from rear functions

Yes definitely similarities to the Calidonian Sleeper incident, in the a brake cock being accidentally closed resulted in the train brakes being unable to be applied from the loco.

As was mentioned previously, following the Darlington incident the brake pipe isolating cocks were changed to make the coupling pipe side self venting if the cock's closed. In addition to this though, the cock handles were fitted with latching handles which need to be squeezed (similar in maner to a traditional signal lever) in order to operate them.

Both modifications which were seemingly forgotten in privatisation

On 01/01/2024 at 15:57, The Stationmaster said:

I wonder if any loss of NRN frequencies was amything to do with 3G or 4G mobile requirements for extra bandwith?

I do seem to recall hearing at the time that the timing of the NRN shutdown south of Stoke Tunnel was due to the band being required for other use

On 29/12/2023 at 08:40, eatus-maximus said:

 

If the signaller has set the junction for the train to pass AND it will be clear to proceed (no conflicting movements), the process will start four signals away from the junction. The driver will see two flashing yellow aspects, followed by one flashing yellow aspect, then a steady single yellow aspect and finally a red aspect before the junction. As the train approaches (distance may vary by junction), the final signal will change to an appropriate proceed aspect (single yellow if the next one is red for example) and a route/junction indicator.

 

As always, if the route clears and the junction is set whilst the train is approaching, a signal may change. For example, a double yellow aspect could change to a single flashing yellow.

 

No, Flashing Yellow aspects indicate that the the junction signal is cleared, but, for a lower speed diverging route, as the purpose is to allow the driver to brake according to the diverging speed at the turnout, instead of to stop at the junction signal. You do not get flashing yellows and then approach control. The sequence will be G - FYY - FY - Y With Junction indicator which can clear up on approach to YY or G if the line ahead is clear to permit.

A junction equipped for flashing yellows will operate as traditional approach control if the routes not clear to allow the junction signal to be cleared. The junction signal will then clear on approach if the route is then clear but the driver would be prepared to stop if it didn't.

A common example of this is Platform 1 Southbound at Darlington. Approach speed is 125, reducing to 90 on Up Main past the station. Speed for Pl.1 is 50 Main to Main then 40 into platform. Flashing yellows are provided, so normal sequence would be FYY - FY - Y+Position 4 feather - R at platform end. However, if a unit is departing from No.2 Bay this conflicts with the overlap beyond the Pl.1 end signal preventing the flashing yellows and normal approach control operates.

5 hours ago, Goodnight Sweetheart said:

140 running on the ECML had a fifth aspect added to signals another green.

 

So you’ve get GG G YY Y R as a normal sequence of signals for a stop, or GG G YY FYY FY G + Feather for a crossing move, I think there was one junction up north somewhere set up for very high speed crossing so the sequence would be different probably with primarily route indicators in addition to the crossing sequence of signals.

The fifth aspect signaling on the ECML - actually just Peterborough / Stoke Summit - is a flashing green aspect not an additional one, so the sequence is FG - G - YY - Y - R. For a diverging route with flashing yellows the normal sequence after the G follows, there isn't an additional steady YY aspect.

The FG permitted 140 mph running, for test running of the 91s when being introduced only, and a steady G meant reduce to 125. For the reason you gave it was never used for normal service, though we did* take a steady green as an early warning of a YY ahead where the next signal ahead couldn't be seen.

They do, mostly, still operate*, though there are some where the flasher unit has clearly failed and hasn't been replaced

* l last saw these 4 years ago now

All incidental really, unless you happen to be fortunate to be signaling Mr Waterman's Making Tracks layout, as these signals should be around a mile, and at least 3/4 mile apart. The OP referred to 125 running, and at that speed a train takes a full mile stop - and even that's with a full emergency application

3 hours ago, 18131r said:

Hi

 

Please do you have the web address for this supplier.

I have tried searching for it without success. I've found every other 3d print supplier but not this one.

 

Thanks

 

Richard

Hi

He doesn't have his own website, and just sells them on ebay

(which seems to mean only currently available items are listed)

Search ebay for floyd_kraemer

Edit: Oops, beaten to it

10 hours ago, MikeTrice said:

This is a crual enlargement of one of their LNER 4mm Torpedo Vents. Beautiful.

 

Indeed

These arrived in my latest order at lunchtime (Thurs)

The Torpedo vents are the best LNER Vents I've seen, other than on the real thing!

Kitchen roof vents, first time I've seen them available

Buffet counter set, the till even has some of the price flags raised

Two of the three types of dynamos and battery boxes, and a dynamo regulator box - another first AFAIK. Handles on the boxes even have gaps behind them

I'm very impressed with these

There was some discussion on here earlier regarding driving standards and knowledge of the highway code (ie lack of it)

Well, we currently have this at the bottom of the street...

I hadcsome amusement this afternoon ehile taking the dog out watching the number of motorist who carried on charging up the hill regardless...

Only to get half way up and find they'd to turn around and come back down

I came to the conclusion  that...

At least 50% of drivers...

Can't read!!!

Note, the pictures taken from the opposite side of the T-junction, and they have to drive round that sign when turning into the road. There's also the usual red 'Road Closed' signs, and there's been advance notice signs up for about two weeks

On 22/08/2023 at 20:04, nathan70000 said:

Hello,

 

I have a few questions about the formation of the "Yorkshire Pullman" in the 1960s. I have a Heljan Lion as well as various other locomotives that were used on this service in the given time frame and I would like to assemble a representative rake (not a full one since I only have a small layout and a limited budget!)

 

What was the formation of the Hull portion at this time? I've seen a few photos that show the older "K-Type" brakes running alongside the 1961 Pullmans built by Met-Cam. There were typically only three or four coaches which makes it very model-able.

 

Bachmann make these but some have white roofs and are named whereas others have grey roofs and are simply numbered. Are the white roofed named ones "as preserved" or did they run like this in service?

 

Would there have been a parlour or first class car in the Hull portion or would it have been exclusively seconds and thirds?

As there were no Mk1 Pullman brake cars built, they initially ran with the existing K-type brakes until around 64/65 when they were withdrawn and, as 45125 posted, replaced by standard Mk1 brakes.

Yes, the roofs were white initially, but naturally didn't stay that way for long, so were soon painted grey instead.

The Pullman convention was that first class cars were named and second class (which was third class pre-1956)  were numbered, its not to do with roof colour. Bachmann did both classes with white roofs, and l believe also did for grey roofs.

Pullman Second Class was withdrawn around 68/69, the former 2nd class cars remaining in service being re-classified as ordinary first and painted in standard blue-grey

Newcastle Central still had two station pilots, one for each end, into the early '80s

A number of overnight trains would detatch or attach parcel or motorail vans there.

There was a turn where we'd stand heating some sleeper cars in one of the east end bays while passengers joined, then in the early hours attach them to the rear of a through train from the north.

Another was a terminating sleeper from King's X, where the train engine would detach the leading sleepers and shunt them onto the front of the stock for the mornings first Edinburgh slow, providing a sleeper service for some minor intermediate stations.

The last train in the evening round the Durham Coast route to Darlington was loco hauled stock, instead of the usual DMU, and with a couple of sleepers on the rear. The route brought it into one of the south Bays at Darlington, a through sleeper from the north would then arrive in the adjacent platform znd its train engine would detach, pick up the sleepers off the back of the coast train, and attach them to ifs own.

I believe one of the the northbound newspaper trains detached vans off the rear there, and maybe a northbound sleeper did too.

We also had a southbound parcels train that the train engine detached vans off the front into the south bays at York.

The classic one for attaching en-route was the Heaton - Red Bank newspaper empties, which must have picked up at most major stations on the way

On 09/07/2023 at 13:03, kevinlms said:

Did any British railways ever have right hand running when first built?

I'm not referring to drivers on the rhs, such as the Midland and GWR. 

On 10/07/2023 at 05:09, phil-b259 said:

 

Its  not a dumb question - but London Bridge to Charlton is hardly a long distance and moreover the rest of the SER used left hand running so if you are looking in a general UK wide context then the answer would be no (unlike France where substantial lengths of railway it inherited in Alsace–Lorraine  have remained right hand running up to this day).

 

So, for long distance, at 60 miles, what about the  Newcastle & Carlisle Railway?

Opened between 1835-8, and the first railway across Britain, it had right- hand running.

The line was converted to left-hand running a couple of years following its 1862 amalgamation into the NER

7 hours ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Hi Ken,

Were these car carriers also used in the summer 1962 TuO and ThO Cars and Sleepers - 925pm Dover to Newcastle which ran via High Wycombe? There was also a MO and WO 845pm return! 

If not , what would have been used for the cars?

Cheers

Paul

Hi Paul

Well, from the workings posted above

The vans from the Down day car carrier return on the Up night sleeper,

And vice-versa for the vans on the Up day car carrier.

So, with 6 vans to each of these circuits, that accounts for 12 of the 14 TCV vans built, leaving 2 spares and none available for other services.

On 30/07/2023 at 18:09, kitpw said:

My interest in the couplings is very much to do with how trains start, move and stop and how far that can be represented in model form so your comment pointing out the different behaviour of 3 link and instanter is exactly the sort of difference I've been thinking about although, at the moment, I don't have any instanter couplings on the layout.

 

Indeed. Starting off slowly until the whole trains taken up was important with loose coupled trains, otherwise the brakevan (and unfortunate guard) would out-accelerate a Ferrari! (unless the couplings broke)

Instanter couplings though, when in an unfitted train or portion, should have been in the long position, so effectively the same as a 3-link. They were to  e in the short position when in a fitted train or portion, mimicking a screw coupling.

Starting as a secondman in '77, and with the first 6 month on unfitted coal trains, l never came across a 3 link fitted vehicle, they were instanter fitted by then.

With fitted vehicles though, note the buffers should still be in contact with the couplings taught (except with buckeyes where theyre retracted out of use) - something which still doesnt work in model form, even with 'scale' couplings and sprung buffers.

On 30/07/2023 at 19:24, Wickham Green too said:

Unless one of the vehicles is a locomotive - para 1.1 ( or 1.4 if the loco's only got a thee-link ! ).

Other way round, only an unfitted loco could have a 3 link. 1.4  refers to coupling a loco (screw or buckeye fitted) to an unfitted vehicle, where the unfitted vehicle's instanter or 3- link was to be used

The above formation with 10 vans will be for the original formation using bogie CCTs, as shown in the picture above. (Yes, that is a Thompson dining coach, presumably a substitute as the booked formation shows a Mk1).

With the introduction of the TCVs, the formation was reduced to 6 vans (inc. 1 for Newcastle), bearing in mind the TCV carried twice as many cars as a CCT. Also, the BSK was replaced by a BSO.*

Also it seems, the vans from the Down day train were transfered empty to Perth to return on the night tran, and similarly the vans off the Down night train returned on the day train from Edinburgh

* Hint to tell Mk1 BSO from BSK

BSK: 4 compartment, 2 pairs of luggage doors to van, no corridor-side window opposite toilet

BSO: 5 Bays, one pair of luggage doors to short van, clear window opposite toilet

Ref: LNER Passenger Trains and Formations, Banks and Carter

Okay send thanks for the reply, l take it that one already has the tender you want.

That sounds quite a nice tribute

From a quick comparison of Bachmann standard Mk1, M-C Pullman, and 101models

The M-Cs, Pullman and 101, have windows the same depth

The Mk1 and 101 have windows the same length.

The Met Cam windows are shallower depth, but the Pullman ones are  a scale foot longer

On 28/04/2023 at 19:29, Wickham Green too said:

You sure it's not a fireperson ? ...... dealing with flammable - or is that inflammable things !

I definitely remember the the historical name for those employed to put fires out being fireman, they've now become firefighters since they (allegedly by some news reports) became PC.

On the railways, here at least, its always a been fireman, so at the same time you had some fireman employed to keep fires going, and others employed to put them out.

I've a feeling though, did the Americans call their (railway) fireman stokers?

After all, they didn't know the difference between a Driver and an Engineer either 

Hi gc4946

If it helps, I've a surplus Bachmann 4200g high-front in my spares box

Its the B1 style of course with high level tool box, here it is for comparison with Dominion's modified example above, and the loco it came from now sporting an ex-NER C7 (Z Atlantic) tender, a Dave Alexander kit

PM if you'd like it

On 19/04/2023 at 10:45, Graham108 said:

From my Hornby collection I have:

MHA's as part of R6699 which included the Class 67 are numbered 394652/3/4

RMC PGA's are numbered PR14365/6/7

PCA (Grey) are numbered 9198/99/200 - I also have PCA (Blue Circle) numbered 9343/44/45/46/48 although I'm not sure if any were part of a triple pack or not

HAA (EWS) are numbered 352487/8/9

HEA (Loadhaul) are numbered 361878/79/80

What? They missed out 47?

Surely a mistake

Hmm, 4 pages of discussion on this so far, and the easy solution was posted among the first posts.

There's a long history of abuse at this crossing

There's now a RAIB report into a very serious near-miss incident as a result of this abuse.

The crossing should be immediately declared unsafe and closed on safety grounds. Make the lazy s*ds walk the long way round, whatever that is

Then sit back and wait to see how quick the footbridge plans get approved