The Great Train Robbery - a technical question

[Hedge Fund]

Hi all,

I have been, yet again watching the (very good) 2013 BBC dramatisation film of the Great Train Robbery.

I've watched and read all kinds of stuff about the Train Robbery over the years on it, but one thing that I never understood, and cannot find an explanation for, is this:

I understand the whole train consisted of 12 carriages. The first two behind the loco were the ones that were detached and pulled to Bridego Bridge, leaving 10 behind. I also understand that the rear 10 coaches contained 75-80 post office workers who were sorting mail and packages.

Presumably, when the carriages were disconnected from each other, to split the train, the lighting and electricity (supplied by the loco?) will have gone off throughout the rest of the train carriages containing the Post Office workers?

Why, when all the lights went out, didn't the rear train guard, or any of the other workers, stick their heads out the window, or opening a door to see what on earth was happening?

Any information that I can find, suggests that the guard at the rear of the train simply sat there for an eternity just waiting for the train to set off again, which obviously never came.

Did the electricity go off in the rest of the carriages, or did they have some sort of separate power source that didn't rely on them being connected to the loco?

 

[Spaceflower]

It takes between 2 to 4 minutes to smoke a cigarette. The robbers will have factored that in.

 

[Hedge Fund]

It takes between 2 to 4 minutes to smoke a cigarette. The robbers will have factored that in.

Yes... but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything!

Surely if the power went out, the guard would be straight out there to see if the whole train was dark, and if it was, he would have immediately started marking his way to the loco to speak to the driver as there would obviously be some kind of major fault or problem.

Maybe I'm overthinking it and the guard and 75 staff really did just sit there in the dark like lemons for half an hour, wondering why the lights had gone out?

 

[D6130]

Each carriage would have had one or more batteries, charged by a belt-driven dynamo connect to one of the axles. Once the train was stationary, the lights could have stayed on for an hour or more. However it would soon get cold on the train without the steam heating from the loco's boiler.

 

[SargeNpton]

Hi all,

I have been, yet again watching the (very good) 2013 BBC dramatisation film of the Great Train Robbery.

I've watched and read all kinds of stuff about the Train Robbery over the years on it, but one thing that I never understood, and cannot find an explanation for, is this:

I understand the whole train consisted of 12 carriages. The first two behind the loco were the ones that were detached and pulled to Bridego Bridge, leaving 10 behind. I also understand that the rear 10 coaches contained 75-80 post office workers who were sorting mail and packages.

Presumably, when the carriages were disconnected from each other, to split the train, the lighting and electricity (supplied by the loco?) will have gone off throughout the rest of the train carriages containing the Post Office workers?

Why, when all the lights went out, didn't the rear train guard, or any of the other workers, stick their heads out the window, or opening a door to see what on earth was happening?

Any information that I can find, suggests that the guard at the rear of the train simply sat there for an eternity just waiting for the train to set off again, which obviously never came.

Did the electricity go off in the rest of the carriages, or did they have some sort of separate power source that didn't rely on them being connected to the loco?

At the time, the carriage lighting would be been powered by batteries charged up by dynamos belt-driven from each vehicle's wheels. Assuming that the batteries were in good condition the lights would have stayed on for up to an hour.

 

[Spartacus]

Hi all,

I have been, yet again watching the (very good) 2013 BBC dramatisation film of the Great Train Robbery.

I've watched and read all kinds of stuff about the Train Robbery over the years on it, but one thing that I never understood, and cannot find an explanation for, is this:

I understand the whole train consisted of 12 carriages. The first two behind the loco were the ones that were detached and pulled to Bridego Bridge, leaving 10 behind. I also understand that the rear 10 coaches contained 75-80 post office workers who were sorting mail and packages.

Presumably, when the carriages were disconnected from each other, to split the train, the lighting and electricity (supplied by the loco?) will have gone off throughout the rest of the train carriages containing the Post Office workers?

Why, when all the lights went out, didn't the rear train guard, or any of the other workers, stick their heads out the window, or opening a door to see what on earth was happening?

Any information that I can find, suggests that the guard at the rear of the train simply sat there for an eternity just waiting for the train to set off again, which obviously never came.

Did the electricity go off in the rest of the carriages, or did they have some sort of separate power source that didn't rely on them being connected to the loco?

This was 1963, a good part of the country still couldn't rely on the loco providing ANY electricity, it being a steam loco, and the carriage electrics would be powered from lead acid batteries under the carriages charged from a dynamo

 

[75A]

Who's to say that the Guard was awake?

 

[Deepgreen]

It's a good question. I imagine at night in the wilds of Cheddington, even if the guard at the rear of the twelve coaches had put his head out, he would have seen nothing. I don't know if there was a battery back-up system in place in 1963 for such workings. I also imagine it was not rare for lights to go out unexpectedly in those days and so alarm may not have been caused.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2025 ==

This was 1963, a good part of the country still couldn't rely on the loco providing ANY electricity, it being a steam loco, and the carriage electrics would be powered from lead acid batteries under the carriages charged from a dynamo

I wondered about a battery system, but the loco was a class 40 diesel.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2025 ==

Who's to say that the Guard was awake?

Or any of the sorters...

 

[75A]

Never worked with Sorters, but worked with plenty of Guards on 'nights'

 

[Hedge Fund]

Each carriage would have had one or more batteries, charged by a belt-driven dynamo connect to one of the axles. Once the train was stationary, the lights could have stayed on for an hour or more. However it would soon get cold on the train without the steam heating from the loco's boiler.

Ah ha! That's what I was interested in.

So the power for lighting in the carriages wasn't from the loco. That makes sense now!

Therefore the staff working in the carriages wouldn't have noticed anything when the train was split.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Each carriage would have had one or more batteries, charged by a belt-driven dynamo connect to one of the axles. Once the train was stationary, the lights could have stayed on for an hour or more. However it would soon get cold on the train without the steam heating from the loco's boiler.

In "An Illustrated History of the Travelling Post Office" (Peter Johnson), the author commented that the in-carriage heating was mediocre at the best of times.
LMS (or derived) sorting vans, I believe, had a steam heated pipe at knee height but underneath the letter-sorting frames.
The 1959 Mk1 sorting vans, if I recall, had the steam-heated pipe above head height. My schoolboy physics remembers that heat rises - so I wonder what warmth actually reached those poor Royal Mail staff.

 

[Gloster]

As far as the sorters were concerned it was probably ‘nothing to do with us’. It was nothing unusual for trains to stop out in the country and the sorters would hardly have noticed, other than the rocking of the coaches would have ceased. They would just get on with their job: as it was the end of a bank holiday they might have had more than usual to do and would want to get it done so that they could finish as soon as possible.

As far as the guard was concerned he would find nothing unusual in a stop at a signal, particularly as, presumably, the train slowed down normally. He is not going to jump down instantly and race up the front: he might get left on the ballast if the train gets away quickly once the signal clears. (I don’t think that the driver had to look back to see a light from the guard on a fully braked train.) Only if the stop seems unduly long might he do something, which is, I think what happened. He would probably look out, but unless he saw something suspicious, he would just sit down again. He was, I think, at the rear and even if he saw figures moving, he might think they were PW or handsignalmen telling the driver what is happening.

There have been an awful lot of conspiracy theories about what happened, but most presume that everybody would instantly apply assume the most serious interpretation and fully apply the rules. Railway work was not like that: you didn’t hurriedly b. up everything instantly, you judged the situation on its individual merits and acted accordingly.

 

[RT4038]

In "An Illustrated History of the Travelling Post Office" (Peter Johnson), the author commented that the in-carriage heating was mediocre at the best of times.
LMS (or derived) sorting vans, I believe, had a steam heated pipe at knee height but underneath the letter-sorting frames.
The 1959 Mk1 sorting vans, if I recall, had the steam-heated pipe above head height. My schoolboy physics remembers that heat rises - so I wonder what warmth actually reached those poor Royal Mail staff.

It was August 8th , so perhaps heating wouldn't have been in operation anyway!

 

[D6130]

However I'm a wee bit surprised that the guard wasn't alerted by the sudden complete loss of vacuum when the loco and front two coaches were unhooked.

 

[Harpo]

However I'm a wee bit surprised that the guard wasn't alerted by the sudden complete loss of vacuum when the loco and front two coaches were unhooked.

The vacuum would have been destroyed by the train’s brakes being applied. It wouldn’t have been recreated until the next time the brakes were released.

To the guard, a red light and no vacuum would have been no issue. The length of time at a stand would have been the cause for concern.

 

[norbitonflyer]

I wondered about a battery system, but the loco was a class 40 diesel.

Whether the thing at the front was powered by steam, diesel or electric, lighting on hauled stock was, and i beleiuve in most cases still is, provided by dynamos on each coach, which charge bateries which keep the lights on when the train is stationary (even when no locomotive is coupled).
As for heating - it was August.

 

[RT4038]

To the guard, a red light and no vacuum would have been no issue. The length of time at a stand would have been the cause for concern.

As indeed it was, but only after a period of time. With no communication link between Loco crew and Guard, the guard would not have wanted to get off the train down to the track unless it was absolutely necessary, in case the signal light changed, the brakes came off and the train disappear into the darkness without him! When the guard looked forward he would have only seen a bright red light, which would have obscured the front of the train having been uncoupled and moved some distance down the track. Only when he did get off and walked towards the loco would he have seen these strange and unexpected sights, and then would have no doubt taken some time to speculate on the cause and walk down to the front portion. By which time the robbers, and the cash, were gone.

 

[Falcon1200]

As for heating - it was August.

But it can still get cold during night time, so the steam heating may well have been in use?

 

[John Webb]

But it can still get cold during night time, so the steam heating may well have been in use?

Highly unlikely. The BR publication "General Appendix to Working Timetables and books of Rules and Regulations" (BR29944) in the 1960 edition says that heating is to be applied for express trains while running between 5pm and 10am from 1st September onwards and other passenger trains from 1st October.
Heating was to be discontinued from the 1st of May, except for expresses running between 5pm and 10am and any train running north of Inverness; they could be heated until the 15th June.
The only exception listed is sleeping car trains, when heating was to be available at any time of the year if need be.

 

[SuspectUsual]

But it can still get cold during night time, so the steam heating may well have been in use?

It wouldn’t have been. Remember the sorters were on their feet grafting so they’d not be getting cold on an August night

 

[Gloster]

But it can still get cold during night time, so the steam heating may well have been in use?

I have tried to find out what the temperature was: I thought I had found an answer, but that turned out to be London, Kentucky. The nearest I can get is possibly a bit cooler than normal for early August, but still not cool enough to justify putting the heating on specially.

 

[Rover]

Was there a second man with the driver, if not there would be no one to supervise the boiler?

 

[Sun Chariot]

My grey cells recollect a programme about the great freeze of early 1963; it mentioned summer 1963 was a scorcher.

It's possible those vans might've held latent heat from being stood in the daytime's sun; and their only significant draught en route would be when the bag collection net was in use. A discomfort partly reduced by standing on empty post sacks.

 

[RT4038]

Was there a second man with the driver, if not there would be mo one to supervise the boiler?

There was a second man. David Whitby. When he climbed off the loco to get to the signal post telephone he was accosted by the robbers.

Not really sure what the point of all this heating argument is - is this to somehow suggest that the Guard and the Postal Sorters were in on the robbery because they should have noticed the heating going off immediately on an August night when the front part of the train was uncoupled, and raised the alarm/fought the robbers off???? C'mon, some common sense needed here. I doubt the heating pipes were even connected, let alone the boiler in operation! If anybody even noticed, they would have put it down to boiler failure, a not uncommon occurrence I believe.

 

[Gloster]

Was there a second man with the driver, if not there would be no one to supervise the boiler?

Yes, David Whitby, who died in 1972, aged 34.

 

[RT4038]

Yes, David Whitby, who died in 1972, aged 34.

In 1963 all diesel locomotives (as opposed to DMUs) would have had a 'second man'. At that time, a last minute substitution by a steam locomotive would have been quite possible on that line.

 

[Harpo]

In 1963 all diesel locomotives (as opposed to DMUs) would have had a 'second man'. At that time, a last minute substitution by a steam locomotive would have been quite possible on that line.

And of course the robbers’ insider driver was a steam man who hadn’t been trained on diesels and was initially outsmarted by the train driver.

 

[Gloster]

And of course the robbers’ insider driver was a steam man who hadn’t been trained on diesels and was initially outsmarted by the train driver.

Was he a steam man or was it that he had only been trained on SR shunter, not mainline diesels?

 

[Sun Chariot]

Yes, David Whitby, who died in 1972, aged 34.

David Whitby's early death, was it due to his being (Wikipedia words) "....overpowered by one of the robbers"?
I've not found any clear source of information on Mr Whitby.

 

[Gloster]

David Whitby's early death, was it due to his being (Wikipedia words) "....overpowered by one if the robbers"?.
I've not found a clear source of information on Mr Whitby.

Unclear, but it was a heart attack at an unusually early age for someone who would have had to have had reasonable health to have started his job. There have been reports that he had never quite got over the incident. How reliable those reports are I cannot say and of course myths do grow up, although most seem to be to the robbers‘ glorification.