Jump to content
 

Shunters moving from one location to another in BR days


TravisM
 Share

Recommended Posts

Surely the PWMs had mechanical transmission and didn't have a traction motor to de-mesh?

 

As a secondman at Rugby in 1975 a trainee train crew manager by the name of Pipes asked my driver and I to take the 08 to Bletchley for refuelling at 1600. For some reason the signalman point blank refused. Maybe Mr.Pipes hadn't realised that although Bletchly wasn't too far away time-wise on an express, with the 08 at 15 mph he'd be lucky if we got back by the next day! He also failed to take into account the impending evening rush hour on the 2-line sections. Needless to say the move didn't happen.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
24 minutes ago, roythebus1 said:

Surely the PWMs had mechanical transmission and didn't have a traction motor to de-mesh?

 


Ah no …. Diesel electrics see PWM details ,… for this very reason.

 

Ruston and Hornsby were very good at producing lookalike DE and DM locos….

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Had a few jobs second manning (Trainman D) or driving at Bescot usually on the night ferry turn or when spare taking 08's off the depot to various locations , Washwood Heath , Saltley , Tyseley , Oxley , Wolves Steel , Those weren't too bad but the bad ones where Rugby via Nuneaton or Crewe ! Nose first usually kept the loco's cool but cab first and you had to watch the engine temps . More rarer on daytime shifts though Wednesbury , Washwood Heath and Saltley where easily done if needed , Though a PITA if you ended up following one over the Sutton Park line !

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

St Neots used to have a Hitchin 08 outstationed for shunting, this would return to Hitchin for refuelling during the early evening.  At 25+ miles it was a 90 minute journey.

Hitchin used to have an 08 named "ELY", which was just a sticky label.  The bottom part of the first letter on one side got detached so it became "FLY".  So we can all say we've seen fly shunting !

  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Artless Bodger said:

Demeshed to prevent the motors birdnesting (bursting their armature winding banding) presumably? An LMS jackshaft shunter used by the WD to move railway guns at Dover overspeeded down through Guston tunnel and did that, it locked the wheels up (P. M. Kalla - Bishop; Locomotives at War).

I have a copy of that book somewhere but can't put my hands on it, but I seem to remember Bishop rode on the diesels and he quotes the driver demonstrated the speeds the locos could achieve, that was  before the armature banding burst!!

 

 

7 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

I remember reading somewhere that the theoretical maximum was 28.3 mph with the engine at permitted full revs. That would probably require that there was no tyre wear.

Makes you wonder if some fitters adjusted the governors if speeds of 40 MPH were achieved, a late friend of mine "adjusted" the governor of a JCB during a long tedious road trip and achieved a much more satisfying cruising speed.  It's not rocket science.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
18 hours ago, Phil Bullock said:


IIRC the PWMs had a lever in the cab which demeshed the traction motor allowing them to be towed at a faster speed than would have otherwise been advisable…. But as this was largely in engineering trains speeds above 25 mph should not theoretically have been common . 

Yes Phil - the PWMs had a lever to allow them to be de-meshed.  Maximum speed under their own power was 20 mph or 25 mph when hauled de-meshed.  Allowed to operate light engine on running lines outside a possession under their own power provided they carried a Conductor Driver in the line of promotion, no other restrictions or conditions applied to them except the one mentioned in the next sentence.  They were required in all running line movement circumstances to be stooped and given an intermediate examination every 25 miles during their journey if it was longer than that distance.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Phil Bullock said:

Ruston and Hornsby were very good at producing lookalike DE and DM locos….

The PWMs were the 0-6-0 version of the 165DE, Hornblower at APM was the early version of the 4 coupled one. Iirc the speedo went up to 30 mph, but we never took it much off the 0 mark, most of our track was spiked FB on pretty rotten sleepers by the late 70s and Hornblower had flanges on both sides of the tyres. If we'd have got it off the rails we'd have had a jolly time getting it back on as we had no mobile crane rated over 5T, Hornblower was 28T. Jack and pack I suppose.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for drivers adjusting the governor on diesel engines, I've had this discussion on bus fora and I'd suggest it's impossible. The fuel pump on the Ruston-Hornsby shunter at Rolvenden is very similar to that fitted to the CAV pump on the RM buses. Having fitted a number of those over the years, it is not really possible to get to the governor and adjust it without specialist tools. It requires a huge brass nut to be removed from the governor body, then a special tool to adjust the individual weights in the governor which will also require the engine to be turned half a turn by hand to get to the next one! 

 

Much the same for the shunters fitted with Gardner engines. But what may be possible is to adjust the maximum fuel stop, that would produce more power and a lot of black smoke, but unlikely to give much more speed. A diesel-electric will only run as fast as the back EMF on the motor will allow.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Our 03 that moved from n the changeover at Goole usually had a. match truck with them, unless two of them were moving. 28 MPH was about the top speed they would do, however they used to get a bit of a waddle on, so not the most pleasant of rides, most drivers would stick to just below 25. Have risen back twice from Sleepy Hollow on 03s back to BG and got a overtime each time.

 

So would expect things returning to Lincoln would be very similar, a slightly long day.

 

No point in tweaking the governor as Gardner LW don't like going much above 1200rpm and the gearbox and final drive are prone to overheating.

 

Movement of 08s, from around early 1985 towing of 08s with rods on was banned, if any 08 and a loco was required the 08 would be the leading engine. This was due to the increase in moved cranks and birdsnested traction motors. I was personally involved with one that seized a traction motor and bent the rods whilst been towed (40 mph +) they are not the pleasant to demesh whilst on the flat lying in the snow in the dark.

 

 

Al Taylor

 

Edited by 45125
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 45125 said:

Our 03 that moved from n the changeover at Goole usually had a. match truck with them, unless two of them were moving. 28 MPH was about the top speed they would do, however they used to get a bit of a waddle on, so not the most pleasant of rides, most drivers would stick to just below 25. Have risen back twice from Sleepy Hollow on 03s back to BG and got a overtime each time.

 

So would expect things returning to Lincoln would be very similar, a slightly long day.

 

No point in tweaking the governor as Gardner LW don't like going much above 1200rpm and the gearbox and final drive are prone to overheating.

 

Movement of 08s, from around early 1985 towing of 08s with rods on was banned, if any 08 and a loco was required the 08 would be the leading engine. This was due to the increase in moved cranks and birdsnested traction motors. I was personally involved with one that seized a traction motor and bent the rods whilst been towed (40 mph +) they are not the pleasant to demesh whilst on the flat lying in the snow in the dark.

 

 

Al Taylor

 

Absolutely right Al.  

On the LMR we could only haul a meshed 08 or 09 with similar - for the very reason of risking excessive speed.  08s were 15mph maximum apart from some that were plated for 20mph IIRC.  It was only later that we had the higher rated 09s on the LM.

 

08s and 09s could be demeshed and be hauled at 25mph but I cannot recall a distinction between rods on and rods off. Bescot used to be a staging point for jockos to and from Swindon works were they were overhauled and they passed on 9V01 the Tuesdays only Bescot - Swindon marshalled behind the fitted head.  This train was diagrammed a class 50 for a while, later a class 37. 

Andy Williams' excellent site has this image  BescotPlus - 50034 at Wednesbury

www.bescotplus.co.uk

  

Edited by Covkid
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dad had to visit a customer in Chippenham once (by train, we had no car) and on return told me he'd seen a train with diesel shunters in it at Swindon. I think he was trying to molify me in that I only had a Triang transcontinental diesel shunter and hankered after a big loco (beyond our means at the time, I eventually got the 3MT tank for Christmas + birthday at 63/- iirc). That must have been mid to late 1960s I suppose.

 

Somewhere I've seen a photo (Railway Bylines perhaps) of an 03 or 04 working the goods train at Bungay. Also seem to recall 04 used on the Rother Valley section of the KESR after withdrawl of passenger services?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps because many of those locos were mainline types or derived from such, with long wheelbase. Iirc Observers book of locomotives often described their purpose as 'shunting and light goods', the diesel equivalent would have been the class 14s and maybe the type 1s. The steam types more akin to 08s and 03s might have been the GER 0-4-0 tanks or GWR 1366 and 15xx etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 07/05/2022 at 14:30, Cwmtwrch said:

The 03 'match truck' was normally there to ensure that track circuits were activated, the loco on its own being insufficiently reliable in this respect. It would therefore need the match truck on the main line as well, unless attached to something else which would serve the same function.

Only in fully track circuited territory, and even then the problems that required the use of a semi-permanently coupled runner were really only in complex S&C areas where insulated joints had to be staggered out of necessity.

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, johnofwessex said:

Interesting that while most 'main line' companies shunters (Jinties, 57xx etc) could run at 'line speed' when their diesel replacements could not

Actually not so. In the late 1950s/early 1960s the WR WTTs quoted a maximum speed for freight tank locos of 20MPH, the same as for a 350 shunter.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The movement of diesel shunting locos on freight trains was sometimes shown in the Freight Train Notice.

When I was working in the Freight Train Planning section at WRHQ in Swindon one of my colleagues Carl was responsible for some of these items. He received some ribbing for his notice entry for 'dead shunters' being conveyed by train. The correct entry should have been dead in tow diesel shunting locos.

 

cheers

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, Rivercider said:

The movement of diesel shunting locos on freight trains was sometimes shown in the Freight Train Notice.

When I was working in the Freight Train Planning section at WRHQ in Swindon one of my colleagues Carl was responsible for some of these items. He received some ribbing for his notice entry for 'dead shunters' being conveyed by train. The correct entry should have been dead in tow diesel shunting locos.

 

cheers

I sometimes wonder what  happened to him?

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Some observations from 1974/5, only two such movements noted but there were bound to be more.

Bristol Parkway  26/8/74 08 113/140 and 09 024 noted moving south. Assumed at the time (possibly incorrectly as 09024 was still in green) to be from Derby works as 09 024 had just been reallocated from Allerton to Bath road. There may have been other locos in the consist but unfortunately my notes have not recorded it.

Bristol Parkway 3/1/75 08 668/937 plus 25 274, 58 and 46 053 heading North in probably a service to Derby works.

I don’t recall any coupling rods being detached (not to say they weren’t) , but I think I would have remembered this. Both consists were memorable as foreign shunters in Bristol were only in transit on their final journey or for reallocation/works moves. Bath road 08s were a daily sight working the Stoke Gifford spoil tip.

I remind readers of this thread to the rather excellent ICRS publication “Shunter duties” which details all scheduled shunter trips etc. Geoff Woodley, a a fellow Parkway spotter and friend, was co-author of this publication, unfortunately he died a few years back.

Neil 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/05/2022 at 00:21, TheSignalEngineer said:

Actually not so. In the late 1950s/early 1960s the WR WTTs quoted a maximum speed for freight tank locos of 20MPH, the same as for a 350 shunter.

 

Those Jinties and 0-6-0PTs that were passed for 60 MPH you mean?

 

They weren't classed as freight tanks despite the F rating. The clue is the steam heat and vacuum brakes. The wheels were also balanced for mainline running.

 

The Jinties were regular passenger tanks until the trains got too heavy for them when they were replaced by 2-6-2T and 2-6-4Ts. Especially around London and the major cities. Seven of the Jinties were even Pull/Push fitted. 

 

I have a feeling the description of "freight tanks" might be referring to the small tank engines that were banned from over 20MPH. Saddle Tanks were banned from express trains quite early on due to swirling in the tanks.

 

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 10/05/2022 at 00:21, TheSignalEngineer said:

Actually not so. In the late 1950s/early 1960s the WR WTTs quoted a maximum speed for freight tank locos of 20MPH, the same as for a 350 shunter.

SE - have you got any references for that please?   I wonder if it only applied to steam brake only only tank engines?   The running time, end-to-end, including the two intermediate station stops on our branch was, and still is 12 minutes for the 5 mile length of the branch  which equates to 25mph before taking into account the intermediate station dwell times.  The most common steam power on the branch 'internal' passenger trains were, in later steam years, 57XX and 94XX and like their diesel successors they would in places have been hitting well over 40 mph in order to keep time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 10/05/2022 at 00:21, TheSignalEngineer said:

Actually not so. In the late 1950s/early 1960s the WR WTTs quoted a maximum speed for freight tank locos of 20MPH, the same as for a 350 shunter.

The only WTTs I have are for the Cardiff Valleys 16/9/1957 to 8/6/1958, Passenger and Freight, but, while there are a lot of location specific speed limits, which sometimes vary by class, there is no general speed limit specified that I can find in either.

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

SE - have you got any references for that please?   I wonder if it only applied to steam brake only only tank engines?  

There would seem to be no obvious reason why a steam brake only 67xx or 6750 running light, for example, should be subject to any more restrictions on speed than any other member of the 57xx class.

Edited by Cwmtwrch
spelling
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

6-coupled steam tank engines with wheelbases around the 15-16’ ballpark were very common on all UK railways from about 1865 for the next 100 years.  GW panniers, LMS Jinties, LNER J50s, and many other fall into this category.  They were, like Thomas, an E2 of this general sort, ‘really useful engines’, GW 57xx/8750 panniers for example doing anything from Newport-Brecon passenger trains that were a 2 and a half hour journey with some serious climbing to heavy colliery clearances, and 60 wagon transfer freights, but they were the ‘go to’ yard shunting or station pilot duties, and many people were most familiar with them in this role.  

They were certainly capable of, and permitted, more than 20mph as timings from WTTs will show.  Even the likes of 16xx, with smaller driving wheels, were not restricted to such an extent.  Restrictions on locos with shorter fixed wheelbases are a different matter, and diesel shunting engines tended to have shorter fixed wheelbases.  The Southern built a diesel 0-6-0 that looked like a shunting engine that could do 40mph and used it for transfer freight work.  Most steam 0-6-0s on ‘normal’ fixed wheelbases ran happily up to 50mph or more. 
 

Safe running speeds are determined by the fixed wheelbase, weight distribution over each axle, and overhang beyond the outer axles, not by the denomination of a loco as ‘freight’, or a 3F or whatever power classification.  A speed restriction might be applied to a ‘Dock Tank’ or a 15xx, because the poor riding of such a loco on a running line is at best uncomfortable and damaging to track that has to carry fast expresses, probably damaging to the loco itself, and at worst dangerous. 
 

Not sure where Signal Engineer’s 20mph comes from; perhaps it refers to engines hauled dead in freight trains or to the likes of the Swansea Docks 0-4-0s. 
 

 

On 09/05/2022 at 18:33, johnofwessex said:

Interesting that while most 'main line' companies shunters (Jinties, 57xx etc) could run at 'line speed' when their diesel replacements could not


Jinties, 57xx, etc may have been commonly used as shunting engines but were not specifically designed for that purpose, as, apart from Dock Shunters and similar specialists, it was useful to have engines that could perform other duties and run fast enough to keep out of the way on running lines.  They may have been given steam reverse to assist with shunting duties.  
 

The 08s and the various 350hp types that preceded it were designed for yard shunting and hump shunting, and were peerless in this work, not to mention being suitable for station pilot work, but were in no way replacements for Jinties, 57xx, etc., which were far more versatile machines, and were never intended as such.  The real replacements for Jinties, 57xx, etc. were the various 800hp Type 1s, all of which were marked by poor reliability and did not last long in traffic, a mixture of disappointment and the loss of much short-haul trip freight work meant that, by the 70s, there were no locos except 08s doing such of this work as remained, slowly and inconveniently as any signalman who had to hold traffic up while they cleared running line sections and junctions and generally got on the way will testify. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/05/2022 at 10:40, Artless Bodger said:

Dad had to visit a customer in Chippenham once (by train, we had no car) and on return told me he'd seen a train with diesel shunters in it at Swindon. I think he was trying to molify me in that I only had a Triang transcontinental diesel shunter and hankered after a big loco (beyond our means at the time, I eventually got the 3MT tank for Christmas + birthday at 63/- iirc). That must have been mid to late 1960s I suppose.

 

Somewhere I've seen a photo (Railway Bylines perhaps) of an 03 or 04 working the goods train at Bungay. Also seem to recall 04 used on the Rother Valley section of the KESR after withdrawl of passenger services?

Yes, Drewry diesels were used to replace Terriers from 1957 and were based at St Leonards (Rolvenden shed closed after the end of passenger services in 1954).  Unfortunately the working timetable for the period doesn't include light engine workings, so I don't know what the timings were between St Leonards and Robertsbridge.  Possibly shown in the loco workings which I haven't had sight of.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe freight tank locos were restricted to 20 mph for the reason they only had a steam brake. Vacuum (or air) fitted locos could run at higher speeds making use of the additional brake power provided by the fitted head on the train. Anyway, the speed of a train was usually determined by the lowest speed vehicle in the train and other factors we've discussed elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...