Petrol Electric Railcars

Standard

When researching material for my book on the history of GEC Traction, I came across a description of the “British Westinghouse” petrol-electric railcars, which were of course the design developed for the Great Central Railway, and which took to the rails in 1912. The British Westinghouse Co. became Metropolitan-Vickers, and ultimately part of the GEC Traction empire.

Britisah Westinghouse - cover imageThe development of an effective internal combustion engine had been going on for centuries, but the true petrol engine was ‘invented’ in the later 19th Century, developed from gas engines then in use, but the most successful was of course the engine designed by Nikolaus Otto. This ‘free piston’ design arrived in an 1864 patent, in England, and 12 years later, in 1876, in partnership with Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach, the 4-stroke, compressed charge engine. The 4-stroke arrangement has also been described as the “Otto Cycle”.

Leaving aside the patenting in England of the first 2-stroke internal combustion engine in 1881, the earliest recorded use of the word ‘petrol’ appeared in 1884, when Edward Butler designed and built the first engine to use spark plugs, magneto/ignition coil, and spray jet carburettor. Butler had invented these last essential components of the 4-stroke petrol engine.

Still waiting in the wings was Rudolf Diesel and the compression-ignition engine, but for the years between 1884 and the First World War, petrol-electric transmission was attracting the attention of the transport industry, and especially some railways.

Why petrol-electric, and why railcars?

In essence, the railcar idea had been around since before the turn of the 19th to 20th Century – commonly known as steam railmotors, and were set to work on the railway companies’ lightly loaded, and rural branch lines. The economics of self-propelled rolling stock was all well and good for urban and intra/inter-urban operations had been long proven before the start of the First World War, but of course, these were electrically powered, both overhead and by conductor rails. On top of this, urban and suburban tramways had seen considerable expansion, with the electrical technology and vehicles manufactured by the likes of Dick, Kerr & Co., another GEC Traction business as English Electric in later years.

Acsev14

Railcar n°. 14 of ACsEV (United Arad and Csanád Railway Comapny) in Hungary (since 1919 in Romania). One of the first petrol-electric railcars, which were built since 1903, serially since 1905/6, by Johann Weitzer Company (Arad). The internal combustion engine came from De Dion-Bouton, the electric equipment from Siemens-Schuckert        Photo: Original author unknown – http://villamosok.hu/bhev/jarmuvek/mavatvett/acsev14.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=23108680  

 

Benzin-elektr_Weitzer(DeDion-Bouton)1906

Petrol-electric railcar of ACsEV (Arad & Csanád United Railways), built 1903/1906 ff. by Johann Weitzer AG in Arad with an internaml combustion engine from De Dion-Bouton and electric equipment from Siemens-Schuckert

Overseas railways were more enthusiastic to the development of non-steam motive power, and the British Westinghouse railcar design had been supplied to Hungary, where 16 such vehicles were in service on the Arad to Caanad Railway Co. On top of this another 18 were running on the Ooster Stoomtram Mattschappij in Holland, and smaller numbers of similar types at work in France, Germany and Sweden.

The North East Railway Autocar

Autocar_at_Filey_Station

NER 1903 Autocar at Filey Station Photo: Ken Hoole Study Centre – http://www.electricautocar.co.uk, FAL, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15891980

Back in the UK, the Great Central Railway railcar was not the first – although it was, at that time the biggest – in service in Britain. The honour of being the first non-steam railcar goes to the old North Eastern Railway company, when in 1903 it introduced a pair of what the company described as “autocars”. The idea to look at this form of traction for the NER was said to have been attributed to Vincent Raven, then the railway’s Assistant Chief
 Mechanical Engineer, who was drawn to the technology, and its advantages by expanding use on tramcars and tramways in the early 1900s.

The magazine “Automotor” (now “Commercial Motor”) published an article in 1909 that included this comment on those “autocars”:

“The North-Eastern Railway Company—one of the most progressive in this country—attempted such a solution a few years ago, and, largely owing to the persistence and the considerable genius of the district mechanical engineer, Mr. W. Murray, who had charge of the experiments, a couple of self-contained petrol-electric 50-ton coaches were successfully evolved and were running until quite recently in regular service with every satisfaction. That, however, was a fight against long odds. It was a mistake to attempt to convert heavy bogie passenger coaches of standard design.”

Whilst this was certainly the first such example in regular commercial service, other countries were making much more rapid progress, and by the time this story appeared in the press, Hungarian State Railways had no fewer than 150 petrol-electric railcars in operation. They were, like the NER design, lightweight vehicles, typically weighing a mere 19 tons, with 100hp deDion power technology.

The NER railcar (https://www.lner.info/locos/IC/ner_petrolelectric.php )was initially fitted with an 85hp Napier engine, but this was replaced in 1904 with engines from Wolseley Motors Ltd, initially of 100hp, in a flat four layout. In turn, the petrol engine was connected directly to the main generator from British Westinghouse, which supplied the electrical power to a pair of 64hp d.c. traction motors carried on the bogie under the ‘engine room’.

1904WolseleyFlat4Engine

The Wolseley Motors Flat 4 Engine for NER railcar

The fact that Westinghouse was involved is interesting, and demonstrates perhaps the enthusiasm that some engineers were pressing in the rail industry for non-steam traction, built on the considerable success that Westinghouse, Dick, Kerr and others had gained with tramways. However, it was the lack of enthusiasm and speed of the take-up of electric, or non-steam traction, by the railway companies, and equally in the slow progress of tramway growth in Britain that ultimately led to Westinghouse leaving the market before 1920.

The NER railcars survived in service in North East England, in particular on services to and from Scarborough, Harrogate and Selby until they were withdrawn in 1931. The body of No. 3170 was used as a holiday home at Kirbymoorside until it was rescued by an enthusiast in 2003, and is now fully restored and operational at the Embsay and Bolton Abbey Railway.

Whilst the NER can justly claim to have built the first petrol-electric railcar, with support from British Westinghouse, it wasn’t long before others became interested in the technology. Working with the Great Central Railway, the British Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co., designed and built the company’s first petrol-electric railcar, which took to the rails in 1912. According to the makers, this was a straightforward attempt to overcome some of the drawbacks of steam rail motors in urban and branch line workings.

In their publication of 1912, the company made this florid assertion about the benefits of their new railcar for the Great Central:

“The solution of this problem, offered by the British Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Co., Ltd., is the petrol-electric car. All of the disadvantages peculiar to the steam auto-car are done away with, and, at the same time, a great number of the advantages, which result when suburban railway systems are electrified, are also secured. The principal among these advantages are smooth and rapid acceleration and the absence of smoke and dirt.”

It has been stated that Sam Fay, General Manager of the Great Central Railway (GCR), had been impressed by the performance of petrol-electric railcars in Hungary and the rest of Europe, which opened the door to another example of this emerging technology. In this new example, the vehicle was ordered from British Westinghouse, as prime contractor, with the car body built by the United Electric Car Co., in Preston.   The United Electric company’s workshops were just across the road from Dick, Kerr & Co., which later formed the core of English Electric, and the competition for rail traction equipment orders between the Preston and Manchester based companies continued until long after their absorption into GEC Traction.

The GCR – Westinghouse Railcar

This could have been described as the first petrol-electric railcar designed and built by a private company, and sold to a British railway – clearly both the Great Central and British Westinghouse wanted this to be a success that would generate sales. In general layout, this was a saloon coach, fitted with two bogies, one of which carried a pair of dc traction motors.

1912-great-central-railway-petrol-electric-railcarPlan and elevation of railcar

Main Dimensions

Main Dimensions Table

Westinghouse engineThe power unit itself was a six-cylinder 90hp unit, and included 140mm bore x 156mm stroke cylinders, cast as three pairs, and running at 1,150 rpm. The engine was, like any conventional petrol engine, water cooled, and directly coupled to a d.c. generator rated at 60 kW, through a flexible coupling. The whole assembly was then mounted on a ‘bent channel iron bedplate’, making it as compact and rigid as possible. Given that steel was also available, it is a wonder that, given this new technology, a new, stronger material was not used.

Exhaust and engine cooling made use of the car’s roof, where the engine silencer and radiator were mounted.

Westinghouse generator in GCR carThe engine and generator unit was fitted at the leading end of the coach, and as the manufacturer stated: “ … all parts are in easy view and readily accessible for inspection and adjustment.”.   The generator supplied power to a pair of 64hp axle-hung d.c. traction motors carried on the bogie in what became the classic arrangement for diesel electric traction for the following decades. The Westinghouse traction motors were totally to provide protection from dirt and moisture.

Control, unsurprisingly, made use of the company’s standard series-parallel controller, as used on tramcars, and light rail vehicles already in service. The single driver’s handle managed both the excitation of the generator field coils, and the petrol engine speed – and two control positions at either end of the vehicle were provided.   In an early adoption of the “dead man’s device”, if a driver released his hold on the handle, power to the traction motors was automatically cut.

Interior of Westinghouse GCR coachThe coach body was of course built in wood on a metal underframe, with the outside finish being “teak painted, lined with gold”, and the interior in a mixture of polished oak and American ash, all it was stated in accordance with GCR practice.

Operations

On completion, trials took place in and around Manchester, near the British Westinghouse (Metropolitan-Vickers) factory where the railcar was built, and followed by a press trip on 28th March 1912 between Marylebone and South Harrow.   A practice continued to this day, when new trains are delivered, or new technology is deployed.

Much the same as happens today, with new trains, over a century later.

The GCR-Westinghouse railcar has received little attention in the press, and in the first couple of years was likely operating some rush hour services out of Marylebone, as London’s suburban empoire grew. By the outbreak of the First World War it was based at Dinting and operated the Glossop branch. By all accounts it was unreliable too, and during severe winter weather, and periods of hard frosts, meant that the radiator had to be drained and emptied each night.

Following the end of the hostilities, the company introduced a new service from Macclesfield Central to Bollington, which later became known as the “Bollington Shuttle”.   This service was begun in August 1921, and the railcar earned the affectionate (?) nickname, the “Bollington Bug”. An interesting photo was published in ‘Cheshire Live” in May 2019, showing the “Bollington Bug” at Macclesfield Station in 1925 (see link below). The railcar continued to operate this service until its final withdrawal on 6th July 1935.

Westinghouse_Petrol-Electric_Railcar_1914_(10467965833) copy

The Westinghouse petrol-electric railcar as supplied to New Zealand in 1914, just a couple of years after the GCR prototype in England.       Photo: Archives New Zealand from New Zealand – Westinghouse Petrol-Electric Railcar 1914, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=51251174

Undeterred, Westinghouse made what it described as ‘tropical versions’ of this design, some of which ended up operating in Australia and New Zealand. In appearance they were the same as the Great Central Railway versions, but with a number of detail differences, as shown in the image below.

Ironically perhaps, the ex-GCR railcar on that service was replaced by a Sentinel steam railcar. Steam and coal were still king in the 1930s, 40s and 50s in the UK, but the inter-war years also saw one or two other diesel powered railcar developments, including on the GWR, and the LMS, where “Bluebird” appeared. But no other petrol-electric railcars appeared in passenger carrying service after these isolated examples.

Useful Links & Further Reading:

 

-oOo-

Coniston Branch – Gateway to the Lakes

Standard

Foxfield – Junction for Coniston and the Lakes

Although in existence for 100 years, it has not acquired the fame of its near neighbour, the shorter Lakeside Branch. Yet, it is, or rather was, equally picturesque. Running for nearly ten miles on continuously rising gradients – well almost, there were a couple of sections of level or falling grades – the terminus at Coniston was set against the dramatic backdrop of “Coniston Old Man”, towering to some 2000ft. above village and
railway.

Foxfield Jct_1

Foxfield as it was in 1919, with the ‘old railway’ connection to Broughton noted at the very top of the map.              “Reproduced by permission of the National Library of Scotland”

The Coniston Branch of the former Furness Railway Co. was actually formed as a separate company by a group or Furness directors, and incorporated on 10th August 1857. Opened on18th June 1859, and closed only seven months short of its centenary, in October1958, the track was very soon lifted, and the impressive station building at the Coniston end of the line demolished.

Peter Millar photo from FB

The terminus of the Furness Railway’s branch at Coniston with its impressive, mountainous backdrop, where, from nearby quarries, both slate and copper had been extracted for many years. Coniston was also the birthplace of the famous water colour artist, w. Heaton-Cooper. Photo: Peter Millar

Strictly speaking the line to Coniston, as the Coniston Railway, was built from Broughton, the one time Junction of the Furness Railway with the Whitehaven & Furness Junction (W&FJ) main line from Millom. The inverted “Y” connection proved troublesome in operation, with main line trains between Barrow and Millom having to reverse at Broughton. The Furness absorbed the W&FJ Co. in July 1866, in order to remove the threat posed by that company’s plan to build a viaduct across the Duddon into F.R. territory. This direct threat to Furness traffic was thus effectively removed, although the plans to carry the main line across the estuary by a viaduct were retained for a time, unti1 the costs of construction forced the company to use the present roundabout route
to Millom and West Cumberland.

Broughton Station copy

First station on the branch to Coniston was Broughton, seen here in a view taken in later years.

However, their was a penalty to be paid for this., and as a consequence of abandoning the Duddon Crossing Scheme – Bills for which were laid before Parliament – the Furness was required for many years, to carry passengers around the coastal route for the same fare as would have been paid over a shorter, more direct line, using the viaduct. From 1870 onwards then, the main line was taken over the Duddon Just north of Foxfield, on a much smaller bridge. The short cut-off line from Foxfield to the Duddon Bridge forming the third side of a triangular Junction, replacing the previous end on connection with the W&FJ line, and putting Broughton firmly on the Foxfield to Coniston branch line.

Broughton_1

The original end point for traffic from Coniston, before the link to Foxfield was built, was Broughton, but shown here in an 1892 map, and connecting to the Furness Railway.    “Reproduced by permission of the National Library of Scotland”

 

Woodland Station

Woodland Station – the second along the branch – seen here in a postcard view – also shows the passing loop alongside the platform on the south side of the line.

Remaining stations on the Coniston line included Torver, a moderately sized village, two miles from Coniston, and the single platform at Woodland, the midpoint of the line. Construction ran into difficulty almost straight away, 
as the main contractor, Mr Charles Pickles of Bradford was, as they say, financially embarrassed, and declared bankrupt in August 1858. That is not to say that the work involved the Coniston line had proved complicated, rather the opposite in fact, and was easily completed by local sub-contractors under direct Furness Railway supervision.

RPB Photo 1156

The sad remains of the derelict goods shed at Torver, captured in the 1980s.  Photo (c) Rodger Bradley

The ·main purpose behind the building of the line was to provide transport for the copper and slate mined and quarried in and around Coniston, to the existing railhead at Broughton, and finally exported over Furness metals to Barrow and beyond.

Bearing this in mind, it is curious to note that it was in fact opened for passenger traffic first, on 18/6/1859, with the Board of Trade Inspector passing it fit for the carriage of goods traffic the following year. In 1862 the line was absorbed into the Furness Railway proper, and from the later Victorian era, some effort was made to establish tourist traffic, which continued until the 1950s as part of numerous road/rail/steamer tours in Lakeland.

Torver Station copy

Torver Station was the last stop before Coniston, and at the summit of the branch, from where the last 2 miles into Coniston were on gently falling gradients.

Geographically – always good to bear in mind for scenery and the like! – the approach to Foxfield from the south, is over Angerton Marsh, following the shores of the Duddon Estuary, across which the massive bulk of ‘Black Combe’ can be clearly seen. On the southern shore, the railway enters Foxfield by way of a short cutting through the limestone ridge of Foxfield Bank. The double track main line is separated by the station’s island platform, which houses, or rather housed, the station building, signal box, partial overall roof, and a small goods shed on a parallel road, outside the down main line. The main lines come together again immediately north of the station, curving away to the north west, whilst the Coniston Branch Junction made off to the right, or north easterly, heading for 
Broughton.

Coniston Station_1

The impressive location of Coniston Station, shadowed by the Furness Fells, and with stunning views of Coniston Water. As goods traffic declined, tourist traffic grew, but sadly no longer extant – what might have been?        “Reproduced by permission of the National Library of Scotland”

The main lines were carried past the site of the former Junction
at Foxfield Farm, on an embankment built out from Foxfield Point, to carry the railway over the Duddon River on a short viaduct, and on into Cumberland. Back at Foxfield, the station and Junction is a mere 25ft above sea level, whilst almost from the ends of the points set for Coniston, the line began its upward climb. For almost 1·mile, the Coniston line curved away northward on a quite gentle gradient of no more than 1 in 3970, but steepened rapidly through 1 in 400 to 1 in 229, and entered Broughton only 1-¼ miles from the junction, on a rising grade of 1 in 59. Passing the rocky outcrops of Eccle Riggs and The Knott, through Broughton Station the gradient steepened further to 1 in 49 as the line turned north eastwards towards Woodland Station.

Sandwiched between Broughton Moor to the north west, and Woodland Fell to the south east, the route followed the break in the high ground along the course of two rivers – Kirkby Pool and Steers Pool. Even along these two ‘valleys’, the track pursued its upward climb on gradients of between 1 in 179 and 1 in 81 to reach the small station at Woodland. Entry over a level crossing – one of five on this route – the single platform supported buildings constructed from local stone and slate, including a telegraph office and signal box. The smallest station on the line was just 4 miles 110 yards from the junction.

Coniston copy

Coniston Station seen here in LMS days, had a suitably imposing overall roof that reflected the imposing backdrop of the Lake District fells, and with Coniston Water only a few hundred yards away, clearly visible, provided an important destination for many tourists.

Leaving Woodland behind, again on rising grades, the summit of the line was reached just before Torver, at around 7 miles from Foxfield. At 34ft above sea level, this summit was in fact the highest point reached by the whole of the old Furness Railway network. At this point, with some of the quarries responsible for the line’s existence nestling in the lower slopes of Walna Scar (2,000ft), on its northwestern flank, the railway was almost within sight of Coniston Water. The village of Torver, almost 7 ¾ miles from Foxfield, and just over 2 from Coniston, the track was again sandwiched between two fells, almost encroaching on the settlement, and obscuring a clear view of the lake from Torver Station. Just before the station, the last but one level crossing on the route – “Dalton Road Crossing” – was negotiated, with the small goods yard and shed on the south side of the line. The points here were controlled by the single line tablet carried on the engine, which could not be removed from its position on the ground frame until the points were reset for trains to pass on the main line.

Coniston with FR Railmotor

The Coniston Branch was home in Furness Railway days to the company’s own designed and built railmotor – which must have looked colourful in its blue and white livery. In the background in this view, the lower slopes of the fell “Coniston Old Man” can be made out – walking distance from the station!!

The remaining two miles of the branch found the line turning more directly northwards, and for the most part on gently falling grades, following the shoreline of the lake before turning through almost 90 degrees to reach the terminus at Coniston. The final level crossing on the line was situated almost mid way between Torver and Coniston at “Park Gate”. The end of the line was of course provided with the ‘greatest’ facilities for passengers, its station sporting an impressive all over roof, large goods shed, a 42ft diameter turntable, and small, single road engine shed. The backdrop to the Coniston Branch terminus was to say the very least – impressive – towering over both village and railway was the 2,635ft high fell, “The Old Man of Coniston”.

The Furness Railway’s milepost here was 43 miles from Carnforth, but in a dramatically different location.

Operations

Ulverston Mirror 1862 Extract1

Extract from the Ulverston Mirror 1862

Three years after the opening of the branch, and in the same year as the absorption of the W&FJ, the Furness company’s passenger train timetables, published in the Ulverston Mirror (Sept. 13th 1862), listed 4 down and 4 up trains daily.1st, 2nd and 3rd class being provided on all but two services; 3rd class passengers were not permitted on the 11-15 am express from Whitehaven (The Coniston connection left Coniston at 12 noon), or the 5-15pm down service from Barrow.

Locomotives were by many standards, small in the early days, at first using 2-2-2 well tank engines hauling 4 or 6-wheel coaches on passenger turns, and the old Bury 0-4-0 types on freight duties. These latter have left their most famous example in the care of the National Railway Museum today – engine No.3 “Coppernob”. As traffic increased on the much larger parent system, bigger, heavier locomotives came into service, and the older 6-wheelers gave way to non-corridor and corridor bogie coaches, this was eventually reflected in the type of rolling stock seen in regular service on the Coniston Branch. Naturally, on branch lines, changes took longer to occur, since the traffic was proportionately less, and in later years, until the early 1930s, ex-Furness Railway 4-4-2 tank and 0-6-0 tender classes were regular performers. The 4-4-2T class was specifically designed for branch line service by the FR’s CME, W.F.Pettigrew. This innovative engineer was also responsible for the introduction of the steam railmotors used on the Coniston line around the turn of the 20th Century. The railmotor was unique in the sense it was the only motive power both designed and built at the company’s railway works in Barrow.

 

Later, under LMS and BR (London Midland Region) management, the archetypal British 0-6-0 held sway on al, freight traffic, including former Furness Railway and Midland (Johnson) designs, whilst Fowler and Ivatt tank engines were allocated to Coniston to work the passenger trains, based at Barrow’s only sub-shed.   On the main line, local passenger duties were worked by Fowler 2P 4-4-0 types, along with Stanier, Fowler and Fairburn 2-6-4 tank engines, and of course the inevitable Stanier ‘Black Five’ 4-6-0. Visiting motive power on the London turns rarely ventured north of Barrow, where rebuilt and unrebuilt “patriot” and “Jubilee” class 4-6-0s were frequently seen. Mainline freights however often included the ubiquitous Stanier 8F 2-8-0s, amongst the ‘Black Fives’ and Fowler 4F’s, and at least one surviving “Super D” 0-8-0 of LNWR origin was allocated to Carnforth. This latter could be found working the odd mineral train around the coast – even in BR days.

 

FR tour No8_1

Most of the rolling stock transferred to this area for regular service had seen better days elsewhere, a practice still common today – “Pacers” being the obvious example. In the early 1960s, the ill-fated 2-stroke Metro-Vick Co-Bo’s were pensioned off to work passenger services into and around the Furness and West Cumberland areas. Of course they were put to work on longer runs down to Preston, or up as far as Carlisle. The Metro-Vicks had proved troublesome on the prestigious “Condor” fitted freight service over the Midland main line from Hendon To Gushetfaulds Depot in Glasgow, and were no better on the less demanding duties on West Cumberland lines, being stopped frequently for repairs. Some of the first Derby built dmu’s of the mid 1950s were put to work in this area from new, and were still at work out of Barrow MPD in 1964 – though nowadays of course, these have long since disappeared. They were replaced in later years by a variety of the first generation dmu’s, and later by British Rail’s “Sprinter” designs.   Most recently the area has seen a mix of new and 40 years old designs, with questionable operational efficiency.

This reflection of the changing face of passenger traffic, or perhaps its ongoing decline, was equally apparent on the freight side, with the run down and closure of mining operations, quarrying and the once enormous iron and steel industry. Today, there is little or no freight traffic, beyond the transport of spent nuclear fuel to the West Cumberland reprocessing site.

RPB Photo 1155

Looking back down the line towards Barrow-in-Furness, long after the Coniston Branch was closed, and Foxfield no longer a junction station.              Photo (c) Rodger Bradley

RPB Photo 1292

Taken from the level crossing, with the water tower on the left, and station buildings and signablox on the platform to the right, these are typical former Furness Railways structures. Still in place in the 1960s.          Photo: Lens of Sutton

Previously, mineral and steel products traffic to and from the works at Millom in particular had to pass through Foxfield, and although the closure of the Coniston Branch in 1958 meant lost traffic, it did not, initially affect the facilities at Foxfield. Nowadays, the impressive stone built station buildings, goods shed and other structures have long since been demolished, and replaced by the less costly ‘bus shelter’. To add to this ignominy, many stations on the Furness and West Cumberland lines, including Foxfield, were demoted to “request stops” – the train being stopped by intending passengers, jus as you would attract the attentions of a bus driver!

The following tables showing freight and passenger working through Foxfield in 1940 and 1948 respectively, represents an interesting period, when there was intensive main line traffic, and the Coniston Branch was still open.   That said, the emphasis and benefits of Lakeland tourism – so ably developed by Alfred Aslett, and deployed by the Furness Railway – has also long since disappeared.   Access to the area by and for tourists simply means today driving, towing a caravan, or riding in on a bus or coach – a situation delivered by the short sighted planning from the late 1950s and 1960s.

 

Table 2a

Table 2b

 

 

Table 3

Table 1

The following tables list the level crossing and signalboxes included in the Furness Railway’s 1918 Appendix to the working timetable:

Signalboxes Etc

Level crossings

A final view of one of the Furness 0-6-2 tank engines, taken by the late Frank Dean.  The second photo looks out across the station throat, beyond the engine shed to Coniston Water in the background.

L2 Class 0-6-2T at Coniston

L3 Class 0-6-2T at Coniston

Further Reading & Useful Links:

  • “The Coniston Railway”; Michael Andrews, Pub. Cumbrian Railways Association, 1985

Coniston Railway book cover

Northern Rail Nadir

Standard

So finally, Northern Rail has been de-privatised – I’m not sure simply cancelling the franchise contract, and appointing a quango to oversee the operation counts as nationalisation.

No changes will take place operationally for some time, and in so far as the infrastructure upgrades and developments are concerned, the existing projects are still ongoing.  New work is still needed to cope with the existing increase in passenger numbers, and not just to Manchester Piccadilly’s platforms 13 and 14.

Northern Rail passenger milesOver the past 10 years, Northern Rail – in both Arriva and Serco formats – has seen passenger miles increase by 31%, from 1,209 million to 1,606 million miles, between 2009/10 to 2018/19.  Using the published ORR figures – although the most recent figures have changed to kilometres from miles.

This table is based on those published figures, Northern have received over £3 billion in direct subsidy – ironically perhaps that is also a 31% increase over 10 years, but obviously that is not the whole story, and it is more complex.  There is clearly much to be done, and in some cases, work that was cancelled needs restarting.

Northern Rail Subsidies

In the same period, it appears that Northern were able to pay a little over £39 million back, as part of the revenie share.

Is that good value for money?

I would not suggest that simply transferring it into a quasi publicly owned and operated rail service will suddenly make it a profitable operation, as even in BR days, whilst InterCity and Freight were profitable, Provincial, regional services were not.  Maybe we are heading back to the era where, for social, and community reasons, as well as sound environmental and sustainable reasons, we need the rail network.

Too many train operating companies, leasing stock from rolling stock companies (mainly owned by banks and financial institutions), seems to make for a complex, and bureaucratic  management of train services.  Quite apart from running trains, there is contract management and negotiation with Network Rail (yes I know that is governed within the franchise arrangements), inter-operation with other train operators – freight and passenger, together with day to day asset management.  It seems the UK style of privatisation has added a number of layers to the running of a railway, and Northern Rail has been the most serious symptom of failure.

It will be interesting to see how this develops, and how changes to funding and management models are implemented to deliver the improvements and, hopefully success, that the private train operator was unable to achieve.

The Northern website on 1st March had this updated front page:

Northern front page

-oOo-

Further reading:

Northern franchise enters new future

Northern press release cover

Rail Delivery Group response to Northern franchise announcement

Northern rail franchise to be renationalised

Northern franchise termination was the only option, says Transport for the North

 

HS2 – Off We Go – Better Late than Never?

Standard

Well, now it’s official, HS2 gets the go ahead by the Government – well, as far as Birmingham at least, since that’s the only bit that has been sanctioned by Act of Parliament.  The arguments will continue to rage about its benefits and certainly its costs, but those who are using the environment to plead against the project have already lost, and hedgerows and woodlands, as well as houses will disappear.

The main argument in favour of the London to Birmingham link now being advanced is that of increased rail capacity, which it must be assumed is that removing passengers travelling on the existing London to Birmingham link will move to HS2.  That it is said will free up the paths on the WCML for freight, and other, regional and semi-fast connections.  The questions that this now raises is how will that freed up capacity be allocated, how will it be regulated – unless of course the rail network is nationalised, there will be further negotiations around passenger train franchising.

 

Of course it will not ‘rebalance the economy’ as one commentator offered on the TV news today, but it could be seen as starting in the wrong place and going in the wrong direction, as another commentator implied.  It should, as is widely acknowledged now, have started as HS3, linking the northern towns and cities, between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, etc., and then driven south towards the midlands.  One politician on the TV commented that, as a midlands MP it would help him get to Westminster quicker, and would provide a jobs boost for commuters to London.

Then, there is the technology question, and interoperation and compatibility with existing high speed train services – unless these just stop at interchange stations, and passengers change platforms from one train to another.  Of course, the other infrastructure element that needs investment is the power supply.

Back in 2000, there was a great deal of concern about the supply of electricity from the national grid to key areas and sections of the WCML, but I imagine that this will not trouble HS2 for a while yet – nor when it runs alongside the existing routes?

This is a vital piece of work, not only from the UK’s railway industry, but it MUST be only the start of projects that “rebalance the economy“, and it is ESSENTIAL that HS3, or Northern Powerhouse Rail follows.   The Railway Industry Association CEO, Darren Caplan made the following comments:

“The Railway Industry Association and our members support the Government’s decision today to get HS2 done, a decision that could unlock a new ‘golden age of rail’.

“HS2 will not just boost the UK’s economy and connectivity, but will also enable other major rail infrastructure projects to be delivered too, such as Northern Powerhouse Rail, Midlands Rail Hub, East West Rail, Crossrail 2, and a range of other schemes.”

Overall, the announcement made today has also drawn positive comments from a range of sources.

Dr Jenifer Baxter, Chief Engineer at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers said:

“The Institution of Mechanical Engineers is delighted that the Government has retained confidence in the benefits of the HS2 project.  The resulting improvements to both north-south and east-west flows in the North of England will lead to economic growth, modal shift from road and air to rail for both passengers and freight. This will provide significant benefits for reduced greenhouse gas emissions and reduce pollutants that contribute to poor air quality.

The routes minimise the impact of construction on the operation of today’s railway with opportunities to investigate how the high-speed rail link can be delivered with minimal environmental impacts. For example, more refined modelling using information from High Speed 1 might indicate where some expensive tunnelling may be avoided.”

I would like to agree with Dr Baxter, especially with regard to modal shift for freight, but the trend so far in the rail capability does not support that idea – there is an increased demand yes, but connecting up existing facilities in the north has not happened.

In 2015, a £3million+ intermodal facility was opened at Teesport, and PD Ports saw its customers choosing to use intermodal platforms, with a “significant modal shift” continuing.

Perhaps the most telling comment made by this port operator is this:

“There is a significant demand from our customers to be able to move freight east to west through this Northern corridor allowing shorter distances to be covered by rail. Without a viable alternative route for rail freight with the necessary capacity and gauge, the growth we are experiencing will be limited and at risk of reducing due to transport restrictions.”

In addition then to the lack of investment in rail freight generally, there is a very considerable difference in any economic strategy to enable the oft-quoted “Northern Powerhouse” to actually fulfil its aspirations.  The approval for HS2 does not, improve that situation at all, and the extension of the initial HS2 project as far as Crewe, could likely create a bottleneck as freight and passenger services converge.

By 2017/18, the total goods lifted by rail in the UK was down to only 75 million tonnes annually, and according to ORR estimates, represented less than 5% of total freight moved.  The non-bulk services offered by British Rail under Speedlink, and other services have long since been replaced by 1,000s of “white vans” from DPD, UPS DHL, etc., etc. – many travelling hundreds of miles a day.  How can they be integrated and improve connectivity on the back of HS2?

The impact on freight and modal shift?

Babcock Rail Wagons 4For passengers HS2 might well assist in faster commuting to London from the West Midlands, but it has little or no prospect of improving rail transport in the North, and perhaps only marginal in the Midlands.  Couple that with the failure to build and investment in the northern rail infrastructure – indeed the cancellation of electrfication projects – it is difficult not to say that the project is starting from the wrong place!

Useful links:

            -oOo-

HS2 – The Wait Goes On

Standard

The leaking of the draft report to the Financial Times newspaper about the recommendation for a “pause” after HS2 reaches Birmingham, is cold comfort to the businesses and passengers who depend on rail services from Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle.  Of course it was bound to stir up controversy – but really, where is the demand for 1,000s of passengers from London to Bimingham to arrive 29 minutes earlier?

It is suggested that the trains will provide over 1,000 seats, and operate at 14 per hour in both Birmingham and London Bound directions.  Imagine that, and assume a 50% occupancy, then you have 7,000 passengers per hour across the peak to peak periods, in either direction.  Or – let’s be generous and say over a 6-hour day – that’s 42,000 passengers between London and Birmingham, who then either go home, or travel on, northwards.  Really??

What then?  A 2-hour wait for an onward service to Crewe, then change trains again, and wait another hour for a service to Liverpool or Leeds.

In Phase 2b, Leeds is set to be reached from Birmingham – is there more dmand for passenger services between Bimingham and Leeds than say Manchester and Leeds.

HS2 is, and always has been an idea with no economic or strategic objective.  Compared with the electrification of the 1960s and 1990s, when the West and East Coast Main lines were electrified, or even HS1 – completed long after the Channel Tunnel opened.

HS2 is the rail to nowhere.  The people of Birmingham deserve better, as do the travellers and businesses of the North of England – invest in improvements to the existing routes.

Has anyone involved in HS2 ever asked the question – “do you get from London to Glasgow by travelling through Birmingham?”.  Probably not.

Newspapers today are full of coverage on costs spiralling – as t hey should be – but has anyone looked at the logic, or strategy of the plan overall?

Screenshot 2020-01-20 at 11.45.18

Screenshot 2020-01-20 at 19.12.52

If this is all about populations, in 2011, the population of the North West (Lancashire, Merseyside and Greater Manchester), added to that of West and North Yorkshire was over 8 million people.

In contrast, the West Midlands Region boasts a population of 5 3/4 million

Today, HS2’s own website claims:

“HS2 trains will serve over 25 stations connecting around 30 million people. That’s almost half the population.”

So if there is a need to meet the needs of millions of people – surely the North is the place to start – a) because of the massive rail network problems, and b) the sheer size of the regional population.  The North is where the investment in rail is needed as the highest priority – surely??!!

It seems then we either get a high-speed rail link from London Euston to Birmingham, or we may get later extensions to Crewe (Phase 2a), and Manchester (Plhase 2b), at some time in the future – or nothing.  The initial line into Birmingham is to a terminus, where the trains will ‘turn round’ to restart a journey northwards to Crewe and Manchester, and in each case will bypass centres of population.

Overall this project has successfully conflated the need for additional rail capacity, with the wish to have a high-speed line on the UK’s main rail network.   Whilst I have no argument at all about separation of traffic types (slow versus fast trains) on broadly the same route – ignoring alignment for the moment – since in a perfect world this would improve capacity.  These graphs show that really well.

But does that mean you just move the bottleneck further along, at an ever increasing price.

There is clearly no doubt that extra capacity is needed, but HS2, Phase 1 does nothing much to deliver that at these costs.

-oOo-

Britannia Rules The Rails

Standard

Sometimes, it just has to be done.  Back in 1951, British Railways unveiled its brand new steam locomotive, at the same time as the Festival of Britain was showcasing the country’s capabilities, and the author also appeared!  This class of steam locomotive broke many of the traditional design and building rules of the old ‘Big Four’ companies, and these were especially noticeable in its appearance.

Light_engine_(3319833486)

The now preserved 70013 Oliver Cromwell heading light engine backwards to Cardiff to get coal and water.                       Photo: Ben Salter CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=22446886

Gone were the days of hiding the workings away from public gaze – and the dificulties faced by crew and maintenance fitters in day to day oiling and repairs.  These were intended to be the most efficient, modernising locomotives, and brught together the best aspects of railway engineering that the UK could muster.  At least that was the plan.

“The object of the designer has been to make these standard engines easy to build, easy to maintain, and easy to repair. Many of the parts and fittings are interchangeable between the six types being built in 1951 so that spares tall be kept to a minimum.”

As a classic design, the BR Standard Britannia pacific was the pinnacle of steam locomotive development in Britain. At least, that argument could be held true for the mixed traffic design. Clearly, in other more specialist categories – express passenger, freight, etc. – the argument may be much more tenuous. Quite apart from statements from the Railway Executive in 1951, the new standard range of locomotives for British Railways embodied many of the most up to date characteristics of 20th century British locomotive design. In truth, it also sought to include some rather more international features, especially some aspects that were derived from Continental European and North American practices.

Click on the image below to read on:

Booklet cover

Read on ….

Some useful & interesting links

BRSTD - web page

http://www.iconsofsteam.com/locos/britannia/story/

http://www.royalscot.org.uk – preserved locomotive 70000 “Britannia”

-oOo-

British Rail – InterCity Catering

Standard

I have travelled on the West Coast Main Line in Britain for many years, from the days of steam, to the days of the Pendolino, and it seems to me all that the general public are fed is a diet of stories about the curly sandwich. This seemed especially true of the nationalised network.

Inter City Press Release Images March 1993 1The last time I made a journey by a main line service, all that seemed to be on offer was a vending machine, several varieties of crisp, bread rolls, burgers and a coffee from an automated dispensing device. Fast food seems to have taken a stranglehold on train travel in the 21st Century.

Well clearly that’s not much better than the impression that the nationalised system was offering nothing more than a dried up sandwich, and watery tea – or coffee.

Inter City Press Release Images March 1993Back in the later British Rail years, where InterCity was making a profit, the food offering could be quite impressive too. In fact, under BR’s Sectorisation – InterCity was set up in 1987, and made an operating profit of £57 million in its first year, £56 million in 1989, and £49 million in 1990. That despite a cut by the Government of 29% in the passenger grant for rail operations. (Yes, I know it covered other BR sectors, but it would have been impacted.)

In the Spring of 1993, under the custodianship of Chris Green, BR InterCity embarked on a marketing campaign, following a successful introduction in 1992 of what were described as “Express Diner light menus”. This resulted in a 20% increase in the demand for restaurant car meals, and in 1993 more innovation was introduced, including the “Great British Afternoon Tea”

The “Express Diner” menu had a wider choice of meals, including: Rack of Ribs with Barbecue Sauce, Cumberland Sausage and Mash, and Steak and Kidney Pudding alongside existing items such as Fish and Chips and Rib 
Steak. They also went on to include innovations as Chicken Tikka Masala, Beef Stew and Dumplings and Thai-style vegetables with rice
, Jacket Potatoes and even Pizza. (Obviously a novelty in the 1990s!) Oh, yes, and of course a selection of reasonably priced wines was available for lunch and dinner.

Now I’m not suggesting that they were all a great success – but considering the sector’s profitability as a nationalized enterprise, they were giving it a go. At the same time this was happening, of course the 1991 EU Directive about separating infrastructure from operations was being put in place, and the next few years became chaotic, and these innovations dried up.

Mark III Coach Interiors – 1980s

Mk III Coach interior

A nice spacious interior in the Mark III coaches from the late 1980s – in this case a First Class Open.

Mk IIIb 1st open Coach interior with telephone

Another generation of the Mark III design was – unsurprisingly the Mark IIIb, but in this example a First Open with an on board telephone. After your meal, why not make a phone call from the train – so long as you had cash or a phone card in 1986 you could.

Today’s fare is a staggering list of coffees – or at least, various ways of serving coffee – together wraps, bagels, burgers and ciabatta rolls, along with a range of wines, beers and spirits, and even porridge. But that’s in the on-board shop section, alongside the usual vending machines. The only way to get a meal served at a table is in first class though, and only on certain trains – and the menu, like our tastes may have changed – and now includes such as mushrooms in a pastry case with butternut squash.

Not something that was common 20 years ago – but then neither were the veggie and deli specials. Even first class travel on some trains does not mean you get a meal, it may be just wraps, sandwiches or rolls for lunch, or perhaps grilled salmon, beef and potato pie, or salad for an evening repast.

Train Innovations Too

But the on-board food and menu changes were not the only improvements to be planned for the early 90s, in BR days. The existing HST sets and coaches were goiung to be fitted with a range of facilities, many of which we take for granted today. This is what was planned in 1993 – 26 YEARS AGO! :-

  • Audio entertainment system with a selection of CD and FM radio channels available at seat.
  • Electronic seat reservation information on luggage racks and new information displays (including time and journey information using a satellite-based system).
  • Improved toilets with new vanity units and lighting.
  • Brighter entrances to provide a better, warmer welcome for customers.
  • Improved tables, seat access and luggage storage.

Inter City Press Release Images March 1993 3Changes to the internal layout of the coaches was intended to break the saloon into smaller areas, with the Senior Conductor’s office located in the centre of 
the train; near the buffet and accommodation for the disabled, for better customer accessibility.

Clearly some of these were incorporated into the Pendolino trains in later years – some 10 years after BR had planned to introduce them.

Interior of Virgin Voyager - Milepost 92 and half

Not long after the 1993 innovations, along came the likes of the Pendolino and Voyager fixed formation trains from Bombardier and other makers, and hey presto, the above seat reservation details appeared – and of course in-coach entertainment.

When all is said and done though, it has always been unfair to cast aspersions at the state of the on-board catering on British Rail, as undoubtedly, there are occasions when even 20 odd years later, there are no doubt examples of failures. It is not nationalised rail system that was the cause of these issues, but maybe it was us – our changing tastes in food and service.

Inter City Press Release Images March 1993 4

Maybe the initiatives were from BR’s InterCity Sector, but we just took a different path to get there. At least that sector was profitable – but then, maybe there is another story there too.

 

 

 

The whole idea behind this marketing campaign was to persuade travellers not to do this:

Inter City Press Release Images March 1993 2

-oOo-

Useful Links:

Intercity Rail in Britain a Landmark Paper-25-years-on/

 

North American Steam

Standard

As is well known, steam power was invented and developed in Britain country for both stationary and locomotive purposes. Its introduction and use in the United States very likely came about as a result of illegal activity here in England. At around the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th century, it was deemed an offence by ·the government of the day to transmit any information about the development or use of steam power to North America. In fact it was punishable by a one-year prison sentence in addition to a £200 fine! But, evidently news of James Watt’s success was transported across the Atlantic it would appear that industrial espionage is not a modern phenomena!

The first practical use of steam power, as applied to railways, in the USA, was first witnessed in the shape of locomotives imported from England by the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co., which operated a sixteen-mile horse and gravity operated coal railway in Pennsylvania. The first steam locomotive to run in the USA was in fact the English built “Stourbridge Lion”.

Replica Stourbridge Lion - United_States_National_Museum_(1956)_(14781532311)

A replica of the first steam loco to run in the USA – built in 1932 by the Delaware & Hudson Corp.   Photo: Internet Archive Book Images https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=43475790 

Best friend

Built at West Point Foundry, the “Best Friend of Charleston” was the first home built steam loco for a US railroad. Photo courtesy Norfolk Southern Corp.

The first American built locomotive to be operated by an American railroad, was built at the West Point Foundry in 1830 and made its inaugural run for the South Carolina Canal and Railroad Co. of Charleston, on Christmas Day 1830. The locomotive was appropriately named the “Best Friend Of Charleston”. In appearance it hardly resembled a steam locomotive as we know it at all, powered by a vertical boiler positioned behind the driver, driving four coupled wheels it was not entirely dissimilar to the rather less successful “Novelty” locomotive, entered for the Rainhill Trials in England the previous year. But, it was a beginning, from which the North American steam locomotive was developed, ultimately to produce some of the World’s largest and most powerful steam locomotives ever to be built.
 In the early years of railway development, steam locomotive design in the USA progressed along similar lines to that of their European counterparts.

But then, there came to be a number of what at first could be seen as small, technical differences, providing a divergent path along which North American loco. design progressed. One of the principal foundations to this alternative to the British school of design, was the predominant use of bar frames as the principal technique of chassis construction, whereas in Britain, plate frames were the preferred method. Although bar frame techniques were actually first Introduced in the U.K. by Edward Bury, their development in the USA resulted ultimately in the use of techniques for manufacturing the chassis or frames of steam locomotives as enormous one piece castings. In many cases with cylinders and ancillary items of equipment ”cast on”. Style, an arbitrary idea in itself, was possibly the one most obvious difference between North American and British types.

North American 2 copy

The first cantilever trestle bridge in the USA, carrying the Cincinatti Southern Railroad across the Kentucky River, with a typical passenger train of the period. The “High Bridge” was opened in 1877, and rebuilt in 1911 – this view is of the original bridge. Photo courtesy Norfolk Southern Corp./RPB Collection.

Whereas in this country designers placed great emphasis on the aesthetic appeal of their machines, the era of elaborate ostentation in the USA reached a peak in the 1860s and. 70s. These then gave way to more logical concepts of the steam locomotive as a machine, where it was not a sin to trail pipework and fittings
 on the outside of the locomotive, making the working parts more accessible and maintenance infinitely easier.

CP_steam_loco

A recreated Central Pacific # 60 steam locomotive at the Golden Spike National Historic Site in Utah          Photo: Mr Snrub at English Wikipedia. – Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3488328

To many of us though, thinking of nineteenth century design in the USA, immediately there comes to mind the wood burning 4-4-0 types, replete with ‘cowcatchers’, ornate bell and enormous chimneys. (Diamond stacks as they were known.) These locomotives were a tradition, if not a legend of North American railroads, and engendered a folklore and many legends of their own., from ‘Casey Jones’ to the ‘General’. The latter, in particular, having quite an entertaining history, culminating in its seizure by Union forces during the Civil War. The elaborate ornamentation of some of those mid-nineteenth century designs achieved well nigh indescribable levels, with gold plated scrollwork and paintwork and lining schemes that would have done justice to any regal palace!

By 20th century standards such locomotives were small, yet it’ was with just such engines as these that the vast mid-west and western seaboards of the USA were penetrated. Possibly the most outstanding achievement being the linking by rail of both east and west coasts at Promontory, Utah on May 10th 1869.

Alabama Southern 4-6-0 - 1905

Typical of US motive power at the beginning of the 20th century was this 4-6-0 on the Alabama Southern Railroad in 1905.    Photo by: By Internet Archive Book Images. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=43245503

The locomotives of the Central and Union Pacific Railroads were brought
 to within feet of each other and the ceremony completed by driving in a golden spike. From this point, railroading in the USA entered a period of explosive growth, as the government endeavoured to foster settlement of the West. New routes and companies sprang into existence, almost on a par with the ”Railway Mania” period in this country. In terms of Locomotive design though, there the resemblance ended. Railway companies in this country, for the major part, relied on their own designs, whether built in their own workshops, or by contractors. In the USA however, contractors to a much greater extent were relied upon to produce the designs as well as constructing the engines.

There emerged the idea that locomotive manufacturers as specialists in design and construction of steam locomotives would develop their own ranges of ‘standard’ designs, to be bought virtually, “off the peg”. Naturally there were exceptions, though in the sphere of technical development, the manufacturers were often first in the field. This approach was not unknown in this country, but developed to a much greater extent in the USA. A resultant feature being that whereas here it is traditional to refer to a class of locomotive by its owner and designer; in the USA it is almost invariably that of the manufacturer. The names of which were virtually household in this country also; Baldwin, Lima, Alco, etc. Many of these companies’ products were owned by almost all railroads, where the manufacturer, being a specialist, designer and builder, could supply in greater numbers than could the railroads, who were left free to concentrate on the business of carrying passengers and freight.

In the early years of the 20th Century, locomotive design in the USA was moving towards progressively larger types, with which, ultimately, that country became world famous. Its largest locomotives though, owed their development to a French engineer. These were enormous articulated designs, capable of hauling the heaviest of loads, and often in many cases, their tenders alone were larger then the largest British Pacific locomotives, indeed, particularly with the articulated types of the Union Pacific and Norfolk &Western Railroads, even the fireboxes could be bigger than an average living room.

AAR 7 copy

A picture to evoke nostalgic memories of steam, as a pair of Northern Pacific’s giant Mallet articulated locomotives stand in the yards at Missoula, Montana, and ready to handle the huge transcontinental freight working. Photo courtesy; Association of American Railroads.

The most popular form of articulation in N. America was the Mallet arrangement, whose originator was the French engineer M. Anatole Mallet. Basically it consisted of two separate chassis supplied by a single boiler, the leading chassis being pivoted about, the rear. Principle wheel arrangements of this design were of the order of 2-8-8-2, 4-6-6-4etc. Although originally designed to make use of compounding arrangements, most of the N. American types were simple expansion machines, Such locomotives were designed primarily for heavy freight haulage, although on the Union Pacific, a smaller version of the enormous 4-8-8-4
 “Big Boy”, albeit a not much smaller 4-6-6-4 type, was intended for fast, long distance passenger turns. (Long distance on the Union Pacific, was the 5000 odd miles between San Francisco and Chicago). Many railroads in the USA used the articulated types, but there were of course some quite remarkable exceptions. Notably, on the Pennsylvania Railroad, whose rigid frame 4-4-4-4 and 4-4-6-4 locomotives, known forever as Duplexii, were of comparable proportions to the articulated types. Built during the “Streamline Era” and sporting an air smoothed casing, these were really spectacular designs.

C&O Class K4 at Chief_Logan_State_Park_-_C&O_2755

C&O Class K4 at Chief_Logan_State_Park, as preserved at Logan, West Virginia. 92 of this 2-8-4 design were built for C&O, where they were known as the “Kanawha” type, and although a number of other railroads operated them, they were also referred to as the “Berkshire” type.     Photo By Brian M. Powell, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9374221

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Santa Fe 5011 Texas Class 2-10-4 No.5017

Santa Fe “5011” “Texas” Class 2-10-4 No.5017. Built by Baldwin in 1944, this example is now at Green Bay Railroad Museum, 8/70. Baldwin started building these in the 1930s, and they were the heaviest (247.5 tons) and most powerful (T.E. 93,000 lbs) “Texas” type ever built and also had the largest piston thrust (234,000 lbs) of any locomotive.                 By Hugh Llewelyn – 5017Uploaded by Oxyman, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=24387751

Steam in the USA reached its zenith in the, early 1930’s, at the beginning of that decade there wore over 56000 locomotives in service. It was at this time, marking the ·beginning of the “Streamline Era”, that some of the most impressive and largest locomotives were built. The largest, as we have noted, were the mammoth Mallet articulated types, for heavy freight haulage. On the passenger side, as in this country, passenger schedules with improved timings, demanding higher speeds, dictated the design of more powerful locomotives, capable of handling the heaviest loadings. But, whereas in this country passenger locomotive design reached a peak with the heavy 4-6-2 Pacific types, in the USA. passenger locomotives became even larger. Amongst the largest and most impressive of these were perhaps the 4-6-4 Hudson and 4-8-4 Niagara types for the New York Central Railroad.

North American 1RPB Photo 488 NYC Niagara No 6000

Classic North American steam locomotives for express passenger or freight services, are perhaps nowhere better illustrated by the streamlined 4-6-4 “Hudson” and 4-8-4 “Niagara” designs for the New York Central Railroad.

Photos: Assoc of American RRs / RPB Collection

Of these, the former was probably the more popular for passenger haulage, the design being used in quantity by most, if not all of the U.S. Class 1 railroads. The New York Central’s design was possibly the most successful, though seeing a variety of improvements and alterations from its first inception, the overall design remained the same, its capacity for sustained high speed haulage of heavy loads was surpassed by few, if any others.

It might well be imagined that all North American steam locomotives were of massive proportions, such however would be far from the case, though it must be said that even the “Branch Line” locomotives were more often than not
 as large as many British main line types. Again, not all locos. were conventional in design. Apart from the several narrow gauge lines, the USA possessed some quite unique examples in the “Shay” and “Heisler” geared drive locos. intended for use on logging railroads, where the gradients, curves and clearances were often extremely severe.

The changeover from steam to diesel traction was begun earlier than here, but unlike this country, when the final elimination of steam took place, the railroads had a fairly lengthy experience of the new motive power behind them. The first diesel appeared on the Central of New Jersey Railroad in 1925. It was not an immediate success however, its power to weight ratio made it uneconomic, but these were problems of course, that were subsequently overcome, since 27 years later, the number of diesel locomotives outweighed that of steam. An interesting comparison can be made with these figures; in 1929 there were only 22 diesels in service, compared with 56,936steam types, by 1955 diesels were in the majority with 24,786 and only 5,982 steam. For steam, the worst years and complete elimination came between 1955 and 1962. During this period the number of diesels rose by 3,318; steam locomotives being reduced from 5,982 to 51! There are still, at the time of writing, seven steam locos in service on Class l railroads, six of which are narrow gauge types.

-oOo-

Further Reading & Useful Links:

From Railway Matters: New York Central Giants

 

 

Class 158 – New Lights for Old

Standard
Upper Image:   A Class 158 twin unit entering Edinburgh Waverley station.

Photo courtesy: Ad Meskens – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=29600938

The BREL built “Express Sprinter” dmu’s of 1989-92, constructed at Derby’s Litchurch Lane Works are some 30 years old now, and have been dispersed around the UK through BR’s Regional Railways Sector, to the post-privatisation TOCs.  The 40 two-car sets allocated to Abellio/Scotrail may soon be receiving another minor refurb, with a proposal to fit LED lighting in the driving cabs and saloons – or perhaps not.

LED Procurement Tender Notice extract

Extract from the August 2019 procurement notice for Abellio Scotrail

The successful tenderer was to be retrofit the 40 2-car sets with the fitting – and the ongoing management of these installations, and the original tender was announced in December 2018, then cancelled, and re-posted in July 2019. Both the interior lighting question and these last BR built multiple units have had a bit of a chequered history, and their design has been unkindly referred to in some quarters as a “garden shed” approach. Yet still, after more than three decades of service, they are fulfilling some of the intermediate to long distance passenger train duties – at least in Scotland.

Class 158 in 1990 on Glasgow to EdinburghThe Class 158 “Express Sprinter” were the 3rd gestation of the British Rail “Sprinter” range of 2nd generation dmus. Unlike the earlier “Provincial Sector” designs, these were not designed from either older emu designs, like the ‘Sprinter’ series, but they were driven by the 1980s financial constraints on BR. At the time, between 1989 and 1991, the application of inter-city style seating and layout for these longer distance regional services were still dependent on the first generation dmu’s. These were by this time more than 30 years old, and increasingly unreliable, and the refurbishment programmes of the 1970s really did nothing other than a new paint job, or interiors. Then there was the ongoing cost of asbestos removal from the 1950s designs, which, coupled with the financial strictures and operations in the days of sectorisation in the 1980s, ultimately, led to the building of new multiple units.

The end result was the “Express Sprinter”, built at Derby, to the BREL design, and using the key features of the main line and inter-city rolling stock designs, to meet the increased needs and performance criteria for Provincial Sector. The BREL built 158s were first put to work on the Scotrail Sector, over the time when BREL was being privatised by the government, firstly as BREL Group Ltd under ABB Transportation, and later as Adtranz (ABB-Daimler Benz). Each of which is now consigned to the history books. BREL built 447 vehicles, most as 2-car sets, but with a small number as 3-car, and the last was handed over in 1991.

The idea of this latest modification for Abellio ScotRail Ltd was to gain the benefits from energy saving and an increased lighting lifespan on these trains. The most recent upgrade/refurb of the Scotrail units was carried out at the now closed Springburn Works, then operated by Knorr-Bremse, back in 2015.  The work carried out then included the current ‘Saltire’ livery and modernisation of the interiors with new carpets, surface finishes and toilets.  At the same time, the 137-seat trains were equipped with new CCTV systems and automatic passenger-counting systems.

The 2015 renovation and upgrade/update work was carried out at Springburn under the Railcare banner.

The 2015 renovation and upgrade/update work was carried out at Springburn under the Railcare banner.

So, new lights for old may be seen as another minor, but useful upgrade to this long-lived type of rolling stock.  The technology itself may not seem so new, but ranks up there with proposals some years ago that one single light source could supply – through the use of fibre-optic cable – individual lighting throughout a train.  Gone are the days of 60-watt incandescent bulbs in the centre of the passenger compartment – now departing are the harsh glare of fluorescent tubes, with or without luminaires on the coach ceiling.

Some 17 years ago, I wrote about the advances in lighting technology on stations and on trains, for passenger circulating areas, and for on-board functions.  It was back then when the use of laser-optics was being advanced as the way forward, like this:

The Future is Fibre-Optic

  • A great deal of advancement has been seen recently in the use of fibre-optics for lighting purposes. Unlike conventional lighting, with fibre-optic technology, only the light is transmitted. The principal areas where this technology can be used may be summarised as:

  • Difficult access (lack of height and space)

  • Reduced maintenance (multiple lighting points from one lamp)

  • Where objects may be sensitive to heat and ultra violet rays

  • Regulating light in specific places, with minimum visual intrusion

  • Use of fibre-optic cable in data communications, and indeed for entertainment or decorative purposes is not new, but it is state of the art as far as the specialist railway environment is concerned. In principle, its use is based on light from a single source – probably the most obvious departure from conventional practice – and transmission of light along a group of fibres, with the light emitted in a concentrated beam at the remote end of each fibre. This technology in railway use could lead to the elimination not only of the multiple lamps and luminaires, but also the costs of maintaining illumination at recommended and safe levels – especially on board trains.

  • Applications of this technology for the passenger are perhaps most obvious for such activities as reading. Other uses could benefit the train crews, on the driver’s control desk instrumentation – much like their use in cars today. A major advantage is the fact that no heat is generated at the point of illumination, so perhaps a beneficial application could see its use in areas where light but no heat is needed – fuel tank levels, or similar gauges and indicators in hazardous or hard to reach areas for instance. Alternatively perhaps, a way of providing a light source for CCTV and other monitoring systems regularly used today.

  • Ultimately, the future use of fibre-optics in railway lighting applications looks positive. As the production of second-generation metal halide and micro discharge lamps increases the efficiency of the technology, the future is indeed brighter.

This seemed to be the way forward back at the beginning of the 21st century, and now, approaching ¼ of the century, the use of LED (Light Emitting Diodes), has become the lighting source of choice. In fact, LED tube lighting is an ideal candidate for retrofitting to the good old standard fluorescent tube lighting on trains, with some designs being a simple replacement of the older tubes, using the same fittings. The technology itself is claimed to result in an energy saving of up to 75%, and has been in use with TfL in London for the past couple of years, reducing both energy and maintenance costs.

Shining a light on historical sites too, LED lighting has been installed at Rainhill on Merseyside – so even the location with one of he greatest claims to fame for Victorian ‘new technology’ is now an example in the 21st century – 190 years later. Of course, today everything has to have the adjective “smart” attached to it, and lighting on the railway is no exception, so now we also have ‘smart lighting’ – for which no doubt an ‘app’ will be available – soon?

I started off this little item just thinking about the Class 158 and its new lights, but there is much more to lighting on the rail network today, so we will revisit this story for a more detailed look at the technology shortly. So much for fibre-optic lighting!

Class_158_No_158721_(14802782564)

Class 158 721, awaiting departure from Inverness in “First Scotrail” colours.   Photo: Peter Broster – Class 158 No 158721, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49576344

-oOo-

 

Deltics in Retrospect – Part 2

Standard

The 22 ‘Deltics’ lasted 20 years in high-speed main line service between London and Edinburgh, until they were replaced by the equally successful HSTs. The English Electric Type 5, later Class 55 has achieved as much fame and respect in the eyes of rail and engineering enthusiasts as the equally famous steam locomotives of Class A3 ‘Flying Scotsman’ and Class A4 ‘Mallard’ steam era 4-6-2 pacific locomotives.

D9019 at Bury on ELR

D9019 “Royal Highland Fusilier” at work on the East Lancashire Railway in the 1990s, seen here at Bury in classic two-tone green, but with full height yellow warning panels.                 © Rodger Bradley

Aside from their innovative engine design, and impressive power output, they turned in some quite remarkable performances with heavy trainloads over long distances. One of the most impressive was that of D9008 (55 008) “The Green Howards”, which, in 1978 hauled 10 coaches (343 gross tons) between York and London at an average speed of 97 mph – start to stop! (This is on record by a J. Heaton of the Railway Performance Society).

Thankfully 6 of the class have been preserved and are operating on a number of heritage lines, from the East Lancashire Railway, Great Central, Keighley & Worth Valley, and Severn Valley, amongst others, to numerous rail tours around the country.

Half of the preserved examples are now available for running on the main lines once again, although one of their number D9016 “Gordon Highlander” is undergoing a major overhaul, but back in the late 1990s it was used, along with sister locomotives on charter rail tours and specials, including the Venice Simplon Orient Express.

It is perhaps something of an irony that 16 of the class were scrapped at BREL’s Doncaster Works between January 1980s and August 1983, just as BREL was building the Class 58 freight locomotive, and Doncaster Works itself was finally closed in 2007 – though it had been run down for some years before.

When the class was built at Vulcan Foundry, the railway industry was still home to major engineering concerns – not least of which were the works at Newton-le-Willows, where these 22 locomotives were completed to the order from English Electric. Oddly perhaps, the order was placed through English Electric’s Bradford electrical works, and not from the nearby Dick, Kerr works at Preston, which had a long established relationship with the company, and where the original Deltic was built.   The production version, with the design ‘tweaks’ to the bodysides and appearance, were completed at just under two locomotives per month between March 1961 and April 1962, and were to have an operating life of just 20 years.

D9015 - Tulyar - cropped

D9015 “Tulyar” on a normal express service, at high-speed on the East Coast Main Line, where they were the definitive high-speed train of their day. The locomotive is in full original livery in this view. © RPB/GEC Traction Collection

Build & Operations

The Deltics were all built at the Vulcan Foundry, Newton-Ie-Willows, between March 1961 and April 1962, though the order was placed with English Electric for their construction in 1960. Listed here are the building dates:

DELTIC Running numbers

From new the Deltics were allocated to three depots; Finsbury Park in North London, Gateshead in the North East and Edinburgh Haymarket in Scotland.

The original allocations up to and including 1964 were:

  • 34G Finsbury Park – D9001 /3/7/9/12/18/20;
  • 52A Gateshead – D9002/5/8/11/14/17;
  • 64B Haymarket (Edinburgh) – D9000/4/6/10/13/16/19/21.

The allocations in 1978 were:

  • FP Finsbury Park – 55001/3/7/9/12/15/18/20;
  • GD Gateshead – 55002/58/11/14/17;
  • HA Haymarket (Edinburgh) – 55004/6/10/13/16/19/21/22.

Essentially they remained at these locations until their withdrawals began in 1980.

By June1961 the first six locomotives had commenced regular long distance passenger workings, but rostered in true steam locomotive style, since a Finsbury Park Deltic would work the down ‘Aberdonian’ on Sundays, returning the following day with the up ‘Flying Scotsman’. Similarly, Scottish Region Deltics worked out on the 11.00am Edinburgh to King’s Cross as far as Newcastle, returning with 11.00am ex King’s Cross. Later, their range was extended to work through to London and return on th e ‘Talisman’ and ‘Aberdonian’ services. Working what were traditional steam locomotive diagrams alongside English Electric Type 45, was undoubtedly an under-utilisation of Deltic power.

The first impressions of Deltic capability was displayed with some substantial accelerations of the principal East Coast services in the summer timetables introduced from June 18, 1962. It was widely recognised that the inclusion of a six hour timing between London and Edinburgh was an achievement on a par with the pre-war lightweight, streamlined ‘Coronation’ train – but. the Deltic diagram included no less than six such workings. The trains concerned in the in initial speed up were the ‘Elizabethan’, ‘Flying Scotsman’ and ‘Talisman’, the last two covering the 268.35 miles between King’s Cross and Newcastle in just one minute over four hours; an average speed of 66.8mph. Other named trains included in the accelerations were the ‘ Heart of Midlothian’, ‘Tees Tyne Pullman’, ‘ Yorkshire Pullman’, ‘Car-Sleeper Limited ‘ and the ‘Anglo Scottish Car Carrier’. Of these, the up ‘Tees Tyne Pullman’ was booked to provide the fastest average over the 44.1 miles from Darlington to York of 75.6mph. Of the night runs, some of these provided examples of the most dramatic accelerations, including no less than 77 minutes for the down ‘Car Sleeper Limited’ between London and Edinburgh with Deltic haulage. Deltics were also booked for both the 8.20pm down ‘Mail’ from King’s Cross, and the corresponding 8.20pm up train from Newcastle. With an average rostered load of over 450 tons, these services were accelerated by 40 and 33 minutes respectively.

D9013_The_Black_Watch(8191899366) copy

D9013 “The Black Watch” (later 55 013) in BR two-tone green livery and ½ height yellow warning panel enters Kings Cross in July 1966 with “The Flying Scotsman” from Edinburgh Waverley complete with the then new headboard which was carried for only a few years. By Hugh Llewelyn CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=24383446

The pattern of high speed Deltic hauled services was continued into the winter of 1962 and beyond, their reliability and availability built into a reputation for all round performance a success second to none. Of the pilot scheme diesels, many were dropped, though despite the early unreliability of the medium speed engines with electric transmission, a BR report of 1965 came down firmly in favour of that arrangement. Even so, the Deltics remained, a lone example of the successful mating of a high-speed diesel engine with electric transmission.

Standardisation in 1967 kept these 22 locomotives in the BR fleet as Class 55,and with the emphasis on higher powers, the National Traction Plan listed a basic main line stud to comprise classes; 20, 25, 27, 31, 33, 37, 40, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 52 and 55, to be achieved by 1974. An interesting inclusion was the Class 48, an improved Brush Type 4 that never materialised.

By the time of this particular spate of rationalisation, the Deltics had of course eliminated steam from all the principle East Coast workings, and operated intensive cyclic diagrams, and broke completely from steam traditions in not being allocated to any particular depot or Region, working throughout as required. With the introduction of the Brush Type 4 locos, much secondary work was taken from the Class 40s, the Deltics early stable mates, and occasionally, the Brush types would deputise for Deltics in the relatively rare event of a failure of the latter.

The_'Napier'_Bellow_-_55_009_(14675011249) copy

Class 55 English Electric ‘Deltic’ diesel locomotive No. 55 009 “Alicydon” roars up Holloway Bank out of Kings Cross with an Inter-City express for the North East in the mid 1970s. The green livery has gone, and full height warning panels in use. By Barry Lewis CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=44987568

Mechanically, the Deltics were required to achieve a standard life expectancy of 25 years, even allowing for the fact that they were the most intensively worked of all the BR diesel types. From new this meant that they would become life expired in 1986-7, and al though the rate of deterioration was virtually nil over a period of ten years, between say 1966 and 1976, in the last couple of years of operation withdrawal began to increase steadily. The last were taken out of service in May 1982. It is interesting to note that the first five years of the life of the Deltic engines – the running in period were guaranteed by the makers. With the introduction of the IC 125s, or HSTs on the East Coast main line the Deltics were gradually relegated to lesser duties, including excursions and inter-regional running, being latterly quite frequent visitors to the LMR. On 28th February, 1981, Deltic No 55022 (D9000), Royal Scots Grey, had completed 20 years service, the first of the class to do so, perhaps not surprisingly since it was the first production loco to enter service. In the event the occasion was marked by loco No, 55022 working the 12.20 King’s Cross to York with a special headboard provided by the Deltic Preservation Society, and a photographic exhibition was opened at the National Railway Museum by Deputy Keeper Mr P. W. B. Semmens. One loco is officially preserved at the NRM, 55002 The King’s Own Yorkshire Light Infantry.

Liveries

There were two main liveries carried by the Deltics, with some detail variations. The first schemes carried by these locomotives were what might be termed the standard green livery for diesel types as introduced with the first pilot scheme classes of 1957-8. The first BR schedule covering the painting of diesel locomotives in green livery was issued in 1956, and although some of the details were not really applicable to the Deltics, the basic treatment and processes were the same. It is interesting to note that in that first schedule, the green livery included a black roof (specification 30, item 36), and steam style express passenger lining and transfers – the lining being in orange and black at waist and skirt level on the body sides.

D9000

D9000 (later 55022) – the first of the class in original colours, captured on 17th August 1987 at a TMD open day – possibly Tyseley in Birmingham Photo: By Peter Broster CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31876267

The Deltics were initially painted to the modified specification 30A, and covered by a schedule produced at the time of their introduction in 1961-2. This divided the painting processes into a number of areas, but those of principal interest to the modeller are of course the superstructure (exterior surfaces), roof, bogies, running gear and underframe. Wheels, axles and bogie frames were given one coat of primer to specification30A, item 1, and one coat of black lacquer, to item 40 of the same specification- though not of course to the wheel treads! Brake gear and exterior surfaces of the main framing .was treated to a final coat of general purpose black. Bufferbeams and stocks (with the exception of the short section of fairing covering part of the stocks) were red to Specification30A, item 9, with the colour a close match to BSS 2660-0-005. On top of this was a single coat of varnish. All exterior surfaces of the fuel and water tanks were given a coat of general purpose black whilst the battery boxes were given two coats of Black Acid Resisting Varnish (Specification 30A, item 4l).

Driving cab positions

Cab interior of Deltic in build. © RPB/GEC Traction Collection

Following various preparatory processes, the main livery areas of the body side panels were treated to one coat of primer, one coat of grey undercoat, one of locomotive green sealer/undercoating paint and a final coat of locomotive green enamel. This latter was Specification30A, item 34, and extended over the entire loco bodyside panels from skirt to gutters. A deep skirt or valance on the lower bodyside stopping just short of theca b door entrance sills, was picked out in a lighter colour, known as Sherwood Green. This was carried completely around the locomotive, and following the application of running numbers and crest, a single coat of locomotive exterior varnish was applied.

The roof area between the gutters was grey, and described officially as Diesel Locomotive Roof Paint, Specification 30A item 57. Cab windscreen and side window surrounds were picked out in white, originally with small yellow warning panels applied to each nose end, surrounding the four character train indicator boxes. The colour was to BSS2660-0-003, and most of the class although built without having warning panels had them applied later, only D9020 and D9021 had them painted on from new. Other non-standard details displayed originally included white buffer heads and drawgear on some members of the class; similarly axlebox end covers were picked out in yellow, as were the equalising beams on D9020 Nimbus – for a time. Window surrounds and boiler room air intake grille beadings were bright finished metal.

Block style running numbers were carried under each of the four cab side windows, in white, and below these were affixed crests of the type first introduced in 1956. Nameplates were carried on the bodysides mid-way between the cabs, and were cast in brass, with the lettering raised from a red background. Though before the locomotives received names a large crest was carried on the bodyside in the nameplate position. Soon after the Deltics were introduced, no more than two years to be precise, the first application of standard Rail Blue livery was made to a Brush/Sulzer Type 4 locomotive, and this standard rapidly became established on principal main line types.

Black_&_White_-_55_012_(14467256225) copy

English Electric Deltic class 55 diesel locomotive No. 55 012 “Crepello” arriving at Kings Cross with an express from the North East. 1976 By Barry Lewis – CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=44987576

On the Deltics, the use of Rail Blue to BR Specification 53, item 13, covered the entire body, including the roof areas. It was alleviated only by the yellow nose, which itself was more extensive than the earlier warning panel, over-running the corners for a few inches. The underframes and bogies remained the conventional black. In recent years however, there has been a trend away from the rather dull uniform appearance of BRs blue locos, initiated largely on the Eastern Region, and resulting in a number of Deltics sporting white cab window surrounds again.

During the change over period from green to blue livery in 1968-69, D9005/17/18 had full yellow ends whilst still in green livery: D9010 also in green, had the new double arrow symbol. In the standard form on blue liveried locomotives this was 2 foot 6 inches long, and fixed under the cab side windows at each of the four corners, with the asymmetric running number behind each cab door. The ‘D’ prefix was dropped at this time also, and with the introduction of the ‘TOPS’ re-numbering scheme in 1972, the 6 inch high numbers of Class 55, in white, were positioned behind the cab doors on the driver’s side only.

The last variation on the Deltics livery has been the repainting for preservation of D9002 (55002), King’s Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, in the original standard two-tone green livery. A pleasing comparison with the standard Rail Blue, and perhaps with just a twinge of nostalgia, it doesn’t appear quite as dull as it did in the early 1960s, when steam was still to a great degree, supreme!

Life After Service & Preservation

No less than 6 of this unique class have been preserved, two D9009 and D9019 are operational for main line service, one D9002, is on permanent display at the National Railway Museum, whilst the remaining three (D9000, D9015, D9016) are under restoration or overhaul. Two of the cabs from D9008 “The Green Howards”, and D9021     “Argyll & Sutherland Highlander” are also preserved as static exhibits.

DELTIC preservedAfter withdrawals took place in the 1980s, British Rail banned all privately owned diesels from operating on its network, but the work towards securing and returning to operational service a member of this historic design began. However, despite an occasional run out to open days, and a trip for D9002 to its final resting place at the National Railway Museum in 1982, nothing further was seen of a Deltic in full service mode until after the privatisation of BR in the 1990s.

DP2 on Yorkshire Pullman trial run

The prototype DP2, with its new English Electric 2,700hp 16CSVT engine hauling then Yorkshire Pullman on a trial run. © RPB/GEC traction Collection

Whilst heritage railways had always been a home for these and many ex BR diesel types, it was not until the arrival of open-access train operations in the 1990s, that, for a fee, the owners of these powerful machines could take to main line running again, under Railtrack, and today, Network Rail.

Of course, as we are all aware, there was a spare Deltic body that gave birth to another famous English Electric diesel design – intriguingly at first carrying the number DP2 – later of course becoming the British Rail Class 50, with a new design of 4-stroke, 2,700hp diesel engine from the same maker. These are described in some detail in the post from the link below.

More useful links:

 

 

 

 

 

-oOo-