Ash Bridge
Established Member
Yes I did. Although nominally allocated to coal trains in south Wales it occasionally "escaped" to Paddington on relief trains in the summer when a lack of a train heating boiler/ETH wasn't a problem and much of the western main line coaching fleet was air braked (the 53 being train air brake fitted only). Having the same engines as a 52 it sounded the same. I'm told that from a Driver's view it was somewhat "livelier" than either or 47 or 52. It's a pity that mass production was stopped in favour of the 47. The 53's twin engine redundancy equalled a greater chance of getting home after an engine failure plus one could be shut down for light engine moves or on a light train.
What I would like to have heard was one of the Sulzer V engined class 48s.
Many thanks for this, and the baby deltic info, most interesting, I too had the same feelings about the 53 over the 47, but do you think the overall fuel consumption would have been higher with the twin engine machine? also higher maintenance costs for two power units v one etc. Re: the class 48 engines, I'm sure I read that when they were re-engined with the standard Sulzer unit as per 47's the V engines were bought by SNCF as spares for a class of French Co-Co diesel electric they operated (not certain which) that were quite similar to the class 47.