4-REPs / 73s transition on SWML

[nlogax]

Just seen some great old footage by Soi Buakhao of Bournemouth Central back in 1988. The tape starts with a single 73/1 hauling what was left of a REP plus 4-TC into the up platform. I'd never previously noticed that the REPs were being picked off carriage by carriage in order to supply motors to the 442s.

Was the 3-REP (minus driving car) supplying juice to that combo, or was the whole lot just being hauled by the 73? Looks to me like it still had two of its original four motor bogies including half its shoes in place.

 

[30907]

Yes, the 73 was simply replacing a power car.
A detailed history is here, but you will need to scroll down a long way!
https://www.bloodandcustard.com/BR-3TC-4TC-4REP-Bournemouth-1966.html

 

[Taunton]

Each 4-REP motor coach is basically a Class 73 with the same power, motors, etc, with a carriage body on top.

I seem to recall at the transition there were formations with two Class 73, double heading, at the London end, in lieu of the 4-REP motor coaches, and some TC units cut down from 4-car to 3-car, to give an overall 10 car formation plus the two locos, as that was all that would fit in some platforms. The remaining 4-TC was at the country end so it could be taken on by diesel from Bournemouth to Weymouth. The good old Southern "One MU system fits all" approach allowed this sort of combination. It could be other combinations. Yes, I believe they worked through the formations one at a time to get the motors out and put them in the 442s, which then had to be commissioned before the next one was done.

The Clapham accident train was, if I recall correctly, one of the last REP/TC formations left on the line, booked to be a 442 but substituted on the day. There were 15 REPs, so 30 motor coaches, but only 24 442s were produced so there were six sets of motors left over. Presumably two were lost in the accident.

 

[nlogax]

Yes, the 73 was simply replacing a power car.
A detailed history is here, but you will need to scroll down a long way!
https://www.bloodandcustard.com/BR-3TC-4TC-4REP-Bournemouth-1966.html

Hah, thank you! I was aware of the 6-REPs, but that definitely explains the short formations. During all my years in that part of the world I'd never noticed them - looking back the lack of driving cab should have been a giveaway.

I seem to recall at the transition there were formations with two Class 73, double heading, at the London end, in lieu of the 4-REP motor coaches, and some TC units cut down from 4-car to 3-car, to give an overall 10 car formation plus the two locos, as that was all that would fit in some platforms.

That makes sense. I definitely remember double-headed 73s being the norm for a long time but again, the details of what exactly they were substituted for eluded me. Ta!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I seem to recall at the transition there were formations with two Class 73, double heading, at the London end, in lieu of the 4-REP motor coaches, and some TC units cut down from 4-car to 3-car, to give an overall 10 car formation plus the two locos, as that was all that would fit in some platforms. The remaining 4-TC was at the country end so it could be taken on by diesel from Bournemouth to Weymouth.

You recall correctly. I took 2 weeks off work which pissed my wife off considerably and almost resulted in divorce so I can absolutely paste them for haulage. I added the night trains in to get sleep usually 73/0s as fill ins and also did all the Gatex Diagrams. Double headed 73s were really sweet. I did a few cheats such as Waterloo - Clapham Junction. I misssed just one 73 - 73140.

 

[Helvellyn]

The Clapham accident train was, if I recall correctly, one of the last REP/TC formations left on the line, booked to be a 442 but substituted on the day. There were 15 REPs, so 30 motor coaches, but only 24 442s were produced so there were six sets of motors left over. Presumably two were lost in the accident.

The Clapham accident wrote off one DMSO. It was, however, from one of the three sets that had undergone asbestos removal. This meant only five reformed sets (essentially 4-TC with one DTSO replaced by a REP DMSO) instead of six. These would undergo other reformations before eventual withdrawal after a few years.

NSE supposedly looked at trying to order a further 4-6 442s that would have utilised the motors from the remaining REPs but it never happened.

 

[43096]

The Clapham accident wrote off one DMSO. It was, however, from one of the three sets that had undergone asbestos removal. This meant only five reformed sets (essentially 4-TC with one DTSO replaced by a REP DMSO) instead of six. These would undergo other reformations before eventual withdrawal after a few years.

NSE supposedly looked at trying to order a further 4-6 442s that would have utilised the motors from the remaining REPs but it never happened.

The loss of one DMSO at Clapham lead to a reformation plan that formed up five 6-REP units using one REP motor in each. These would run in pairs as 12-car formations leaving one set as a maintenance spare. The original plan had been three 4-REPs with one spare, so the 6-REP plan mitigated the loss of a REP DMSO.

 

[444045]

Each 4-REP motor coach is basically a Class 73 with the same power, motors, etc, with a carriage body on top.

I seem to recall at the transition there were formations with two Class 73, double heading, at the London end, in lieu of the 4-REP motor coaches, and some TC units cut down from 4-car to 3-car, to give an overall 10 car formation plus the two locos, as that was all that would fit in some platforms. The remaining 4-TC was at the country end so it could be taken on by diesel from Bournemouth to Weymouth. The good old Southern "One MU system fits all" approach allowed this sort of combination. It could be other combinations. Yes, I believe they worked through the formations one at a time to get the motors out and put them in the 442s, which then had to be commissioned before the next one was done.

The Clapham accident train was, if I recall correctly, one of the last REP/TC formations left on the line, booked to be a 442 but substituted on the day. There were 15 REPs, so 30 motor coaches, but only 24 442s were produced so there were six sets of motors left over. Presumably two were lost in the accident.

The reason that 4REP/8TC took the place of 10 442 on that fateful day was the derailment the previous evening of 442411 at
Parkstone station after hitting a concrete mixer which had deliberately been put on the track by vandals
Therefore 2003/8027/8015 were used instead as there weren't enough 442s for traffic service

Hope that helps in some small way