• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

‘AM’ AC Multiple Units

Status
Not open for further replies.

Revaulx

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2019
Messages
476
Location
Saddleworth
The bodywork of both was identical, and entirely of BR design.
Really? Are you sure?

The early 4-EPBs (up to c1957) were identical in bodywork to the last 4-SUBs, ie the Bulleid design. Thereafter the bodywork changed to the Mark 1 style (different profile and slightly longer) which had been the standard for loco-hauled coaches since the beginning of the 1950s.

The AM7s, along with the Euston and Broad Street stock (501s) were based on the contemporary EPBs (still Bulleid); the later AM2s were based on the contemporary EPBs (Mark 1 by then). The AM4s, 5s and 8s continued with the Mark 1 profile, though with sloping Design Panel front ends.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Really? Are you sure?

The early 4-EPBs (up to c1957) were identical in bodywork to the last 4-SUBs, ie the Bulleid design. Thereafter the bodywork changed to the Mark 1 style (different profile and slightly longer) which had been the standard for loco-hauled coaches since the beginning of the 1950s.

The AM7s, along with the Euston and Broad Street stock (501s) were based on the contemporary EPBs (still Bulleid); the later AM2s were based on the contemporary EPBs (Mark 1 by then). The AM4s, 5s and 8s continued with the Mark 1 profile, though with sloping Design Panel front ends.
Absolutely certain. Every design of slam-door overhead EMU from that era, plus the 501s, was built to BR Mark 1 spec. Only SR third rail units had Bulleid bodywork. See attached photos - the SR 2-EPB is the odd one out to the identical Mark 1 profiles of the 501, 307 and 302. The Bulleid design bodies had to go on recovered SR underframes and weren't suitable for the BR underframes all overhead EMUs were built on.

The Southern only persisted with the Bulleid body design for so long (up to 1960) because of its reuse of (relatively) new underframes from units that previously carried bodies converted from steam stock. This limitation/design consideration didn't exist elsewhere, where units were built completely new, and the Mark 1 design was used throughout. There are absolutely no references to Bulleid designs anywhere for stock built for any region other than the Southern.

BR Mark 1 non-gangwayed suburban loco-hauled coaches first appeared in 1954, the same year the 307s entered service. They definitely had the same bodywork.
 

Attachments

  • 416321_Broad_Street_1985.jpg
    416321_Broad_Street_1985.jpg
    323.6 KB · Views: 29
  • 1200px-Class-501-train-B2-headcode.jpg
    1200px-Class-501-train-B2-headcode.jpg
    197.6 KB · Views: 29
  • 1200px-307-blue_brute_Liv-St-Stn.jpg
    1200px-307-blue_brute_Liv-St-Stn.jpg
    248.2 KB · Views: 28
  • class-302-3-4-car-emu-132-p.jpg
    class-302-3-4-car-emu-132-p.jpg
    163.1 KB · Views: 28
Last edited:

Revaulx

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2019
Messages
476
Location
Saddleworth
Absolutely certain. Every design of slam-door overhead EMU from that era, plus the 501s, was built to BR Mark 1 spec. Only SR third rail units had Bulleid bodywork. See attached photos - the SR 2-EPB is the odd one out to the identical Mark 1 profiles of the 501, 307 and 302. The Bulleid design bodies had to go on recovered SR underframes and weren't suitable for the BR underframes all overhead EMUs were built on.

The Southern only persisted with the Bulleid body design for so long (up to 1960) because of its reuse of (relatively) new underframes from units that previously carried bodies converted from steam stock. This limitation/design consideration didn't exist elsewhere, where units were built completely new, and the Mark 1 design was used throughout. There are absolutely no references to Bulleid designs anywhere for stock built for any region other than the Southern.

BR Mark 1 non-gangwayed suburban loco-hauled coaches first appeared in 1954, the same year the 307s entered service. They definitely had the same bodywork.
Well I’d have sworn that the AM7s (I may well have got confused about the 501s) had the Bulleid profile, ie wider at the top than the bottom. Maybe I was fooled by the bigger windows and headcode panels of the AM2s!
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,533
Well I’d have sworn that the AM7s (I may well have got confused about the 501s) had the Bulleid profile, ie wider at the top than the bottom. Maybe I was fooled by the bigger windows and headcode panels of the AM2s!
No, as seen here (courtesy of a quick check on Google of available pictures)
 

SargeNpton

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2018
Messages
1,308
AM10 at Northampton in the early 1970s, in all over rail blue before it was re-painted in blue/grey.

The curved windows gave the driver good visibility but were expensive to replace if they got broken. Later on they were replaced with flat windows similar to those used for the 312s.
 

Attachments

  • AM10.jpg
    AM10.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 28

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
AM10 at Northampton in the early 1970s, in all over rail blue before it was re-painted in blue/grey.

The curved windows gave the driver good visibility but were expensive to replace if they got broken. Later on they were replaced with flat windows similar to those used for the 312s.
Same thing with the windows on the 309s, 303s, 311s and so forth
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,019
The curved windows gave the driver good visibility but were expensive to replace if they got broken. Later on they were replaced with flat windows similar to those used for the 312s.
Similar experience in the USA when GM decided on an L-shaped windscreen on the GP38-2 loco instead of two separate panes. The cost of non-standard replacement pieces of glass that shape, including all the demisting heating elements etc, made many rebuild the cab corner, and it was more susceptible to being broken by overhanging trees etc in the first place. Whyever GM did it, goodness knows. Here's an original one


There was a story I heard long ago about these. One was broken, and a replacement had to come all the way from the GM La Grange plant, it cost a fortune plus the loco was out of action for days. The Shop Foreman ( = Depot Manager in UK) says that HE is going to handle the replacement work personally given all of this. The rest of the maintenance crew stand alongside, the Foreman lifts up the heavy and unwieldy glass - and drops it, and it is broken too, right in front of the audience. Shortly afterwards shop orders were raised to rebuild the cab corners with two normal panes.
 
Last edited:

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
Similar experience in the USA when GM decided on an L-shaped windscreen on the GP38-2 loco instead of two separate panes. The cost of non-standard replacement pieces of glass that shape, including all the demisting heating elements etc, made many rebuild the cab corner, and it was more susceptible to being broken by overhanging trees etc in the first place. Whyever GM did it, goodness knows. Here's an original one

I don't really see the point with that design curving down round the nose in an 'L'. I can't see it improving visibility and it doesn't do anything for aesthetics either.
 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,121
Location
Cambridge, UK
I don't really see the point with that design curving down round the nose in an 'L'. I can't see it improving visibility and it doesn't do anything for aesthetics either.
It means you don't have a small blind spot where the metal divider is on the two-piece version e.g. the SD-40 version:

512px-EMD_SD40_KCSdeM_3029.jpg


EMD seem to like the 'shaped windscreen' idea though (but GE don't) - modern SD70s also have 'dropped corner' windscreens for improved visibility of people on the ground/standing on the front steps:

512px-UP_4352_Fairbury%2C_NE_7-23-14_%281%29.jpg


(Both photos from From Wikimedia Commons)
 

Alfie1014

Member
Joined
27 Jun 2012
Messages
1,119
Location
Essex
The OPs photograph is a well known publicity shot from Ilford Car Sheds. Wonder what the driver thought of having to move all those units a few yards.

Yes back in the day the LTS had a generous amount of stabling space, including Tilbury Riverside. There were more peak 12 car workings too.

The luggage van units were used on the 03.59 Liverpool St to Shoeburyness and 04.10 Liverpool St to Tilbury Riverside newspaper trains, but then had to be hidden on the lighter loaded peak trains.

The 309s were of course superb trains, but some drivers disliked driving from the cab under the pantograph on the original 2 car units on the main line, relatively less smooth than the other 309 variants. That’s one reason why it was rare (but not unknown) for them to be leading out of Liverpool St once they had been lengthened to 4 car units.
306024 has hit the nail on the head, Tilbury Riverside could berth up to about 12 sets in its heyday. The Mk1 AC EMUs of course needed much more maintainance than more modern stock. For many years in the 1960-80s around 100 units were allocated to EM of which around 80-84 were diagrammed on weekdays. Compare this to the 357s which at one point were being diagrammed for 73 out of 74 units and on good days East Ham could even turn out the 74th unit! Oh andI have fond memories of the 308/2 parcel units, for many years the 17:26 Fenchurch St to Tilbury Riverside was diagrammed for a pair. On normal days this was fine as 6 passenger carrying coaches matched demand, however if there was disruption and there was overcrowding the newspaper tables at the side of the motor coaches became impromptu seats if the doors were unlocked and passengers could gain access to the vehicles!
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
It means you don't have a small blind spot where the metal divider is on the two-piece version e.g. the SD-40 version:

512px-EMD_SD40_KCSdeM_3029.jpg


EMD seem to like the 'shaped windscreen' idea though (but GE don't) - modern SD70s also have 'dropped corner' windscreens for improved visibility of people on the ground/standing on the front steps:

512px-UP_4352_Fairbury%2C_NE_7-23-14_%281%29.jpg


(Both photos from From Wikimedia Commons)
I can see how it helps on the SD70, not so much the other loco
 

GarethW

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2010
Messages
182
Really? Are you sure?

The early 4-EPBs (up to c1957) were identical in bodywork to the last 4-SUBs, ie the Bulleid design. Thereafter the bodywork changed to the Mark 1 style (different profile and slightly longer) which had been the standard for loco-hauled coaches since the beginning of the 1950s.

The AM7s, along with the Euston and Broad Street stock (501s) were based on the contemporary EPBs (still Bulleid); the later AM2s were based on the contemporary EPBs (Mark 1 by then). The AM4s, 5s and 8s continued with the Mark 1 profile, though with sloping Design Panel front ends.
 
Joined
24 Jun 2014
Messages
432
Location
Derby
Class AM1 was given to the ex-LNWR DC lines stock converted for ac OLE power. The Lancaster, Morecambe and Heysham branch was electrified with 6.6kV 25Hz ac. When BR were evaluating moving from their original 1500VDC electrification 'future standard', the self-contained line was chosen as a test bed for the burgeoning practice of powering direct from the national grid 50Hz supply, (mainly by SNCF). So the line was converted to 6.6kV 50Hz (utilising most of the existing OLE and its clearances) and the trains converted with new transformers and then quite new, mercury arc rectifiers. The electrification was successful but the line wasn't (in passenger terms) so it was closed in 1966. Given that the rolling stock originally started life in 1914, it was scrapped.

The LNWR had two types of EMUs for London district services; some with Siemens electrics, the rest with Oerlikon. The Siemens equipped stock was put into store at the beginning of (I think) WW2 when West London Line services were withdrawn as a war measure.

The original MR electric stock was withdrawn in 1951 and replaced by steam push-pull trains, usually worked by Jintys while the electrical system was modified; most of the MR OHE was retained - mainly wooden telegraph poles with metal cross beams! - but there was a section west of the bridge carrying the WCML over the line which had new catenary, including some sections with concrete masts. A new station at Scale Hall was constructed near the WCML bridge in the late 1950s, and had a very short life.

To work it, the Siemens equipped stock was taken out of store, refurbished (I think at Wolverton), and equipped to work from an AC overhead system; these were subsequently classed AM1. Although used in normal passenger service, they were test-beds; one had the first Faiveley "half-pan" to be fitted in the UK, and another was the first in the world to be fitted with a Germanium rectifier.

The trains had open saloons, and comfortable seats; I did say that - COMFORTABLE seats! Internally, they didn't look like 40 year old trains, and were very popular locally.

I lived in Lancaster at that time, and actually saw one sparking along on it's first day out in Lancashire, but I'm sure I've seen a photo of one undergoing some testing in the London area on the line from Bow Junction towards Fenchurch Street which was electrified at 1500v DC. No idea how that worked!

I think you are correct. Only the locomotives were referenced in DC = EM1 and EM2 (think there was a planned EB for banking too) - I think those codes may have come from the LNER too. The AL and AM thing was under BR, and although BR left the "EM" in place they never designated the Hadfield sets until they were 506. Just 8 units at Reddish Depot, I guess they knew what they were without a reference !

There was a range of identification letters for the ex LNER electric locos:

EM1 and EM2 were the MIXED TRAFFIC locos built for the Manchester, Sheffield, Wath scheme of the early 1950s
EF1 were the electric FREIGHT locos built by the NER for the Shildon - Newport scheme
EB1 was the one EF1 converted for use as a BANKER on the MSW scheme; it subsequently became a depot pilot at Ilforq
EE1 was Raven's prototype EXPRESS loco for the NER's planned electrification of the York - Newcastle main line
ES1 were the electric SHUNTING locos built for the Tyne Commission Quay branch in Newcastle, and for shunting at Gosforth Depot; one of these is in the National Collection

Only the EM1s and EM2s were given TOPS numbers (76 and 77 respectively)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top