455/8 Puzzle - replaced DTSO? Way back when......

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
2 May 2011
Messages
287
Location
Nowhere
Having last commuted regularly from Waterloo in the early 1990s my memory is slightly faded - that plus the many beers consumed in those days as a young single man!

I seem to recall that one 455/8 had it's DTSO replaced (either permanently or for a short period) with that from a donor 317 or even a 210. I could be wrong but I'm fairly sure back in the 1980s/90s I saw a mismatched unit at Waterloo as I recalled remarking that the windows didn't have the usual "hopper" design. It was in the original BR blue and grey colours, although in fairnesss I couldnt say if the regular colour scheme had changed to NSE at that time.

A bit vague I know, but the usual google search hasnt brought anything obvious up. Can anyone shed light on this and reassure me that I didn't just imagine it?!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
4,310
Location
In the cab with the paper
There is a TSO coach from a Cl210 still in the fleet which would probably have had mismatched hopper vents for a time (it's in unit 5912). However, I don't think it's that because the trailer had come from the former Cl457 Networker prototype to replace one that had been scrapped following a trail installation of plug doors and it would have been in NSE colours.

I would be very surprised if a driving trailer from another class had ever found it's way into the fleet. For one thing the DTSO from a Cl210 or Cl317 wouldn't have shoegear and the couplers would not have been compatible.

O L Leigh
 

Peter Mugridge

Established Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
10,984
Location
Epsom
It is indeed the TSO ( 67400 ) in 5912; when first put into the rake it still had the small metal vents above the windows although it was subsequently rebuilt to match the rest of the fleet.



For a while, though, 5856 had a DTSO swapped in from a 59xx or 57xx unit as a means of creating one good unit out of two bad units - I have a photo of it somewhere. So if you saw a 58xx with a different shape front end, that's why.
 
Joined
2 May 2011
Messages
287
Location
Nowhere
Thanks gents, much appreciated.

Probably not the answer I was hoping for, but not unexpected! The mind does play tricks after such a period of time so it looks like I was mistaken - but this was way before the age of digital cameras and camera phones so the opporunity to capture it wasn't available. I'm better prepared nowadays!

Peter, if you get the chance to find that photo, feel free to share it, accepting it may well not be in the correct format.

Cheers
 

Peter Mugridge

Established Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
10,984
Location
Epsom
I'll have to look for it first! Format is no problem - it's a film print, but then again so are all the other pictures I have posted on this forum ( I'm not digital ). Finding it is the problem... I have 64 albums each containing 300 photos; thankfully they are at least all in chronological order but until such time that I can spend the weeks necessary to create a database of them, it's a manual search through of roughly the correct era!

I can remember that the picture is at Wimbledon, early morning, with everyone being turfed off the then 05.19 from Stoneleigh to Waterloo considerably late because the unit somehow managed to lock itself into slow speed control...:roll:
 

Matt Taylor

Established Member
Joined
31 Aug 2008
Messages
2,299
Location
Portsmouth
What is the situation with 5916? I was working it last night and noticed one set of doors that had a different window layout-just like doors from a 210?
 

Peter Mugridge

Established Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
10,984
Location
Epsom
One unit did have prototype Networker doors fitted to one carriage for a while although they were all converted back years ago; I think in the case of 5916 it probably is a set of class 210 doors.
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
What is the situation with 5916? I was working it last night and noticed one set of doors that had a different window layout-just like doors from a 210?
I havent noticed anything different with 5916, are you sure it wasnt-
5912 which has 67400 in it which has the door windows mounted lower than the other coaches (they line up with the bottom of the saloon windows instead of the top) or
5918, that has deeper vestibule door windows, or
5920 which has deeper windows in all the doors.
On both of these the above mentioned door windows line up with both the top AND bottom of the saloon windows rather than just the top.

Interestingly the 317s are mostly fitted with the deeper windows but there are a couple which have the shallower door windows, as fitted to 455s, what a coincidence. ;)
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
1,526
I havent noticed anything different with 5916, are you sure it wasnt-
5912 which has 67400 in it which has the door windows mounted lower than the other coaches (they line up with the bottom of the saloon windows instead of the top) or
5918, that has deeper vestibule door windows, or
5920 which has deeper windows in all the doors.
On both of these the above mentioned door windows line up with both the top AND bottom of the saloon windows rather than just the top.

Interestingly the 317s are mostly fitted with the deeper windows but there are a couple which have the shallower door windows, as fitted to 455s, what a coincidence. ;)
Wouldn't be a suggestion that York got some of its parts mixed up during Class 455/9 and 317/2 construction at all would it? ;)
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,324
Given they're basically AC and DC versions of the same design, why weren't the parts even more standardised between the 455 and 317? Surely it would have been a lot easier if things such as doors, windows, vents etc were actually identical?

Certainly shows a lack of quality control! I suppose this was before the advent and adoption of proper "Quality" systems.
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
1,526
Given they're basically AC and DC versions of the same design, why weren't the parts even more standardised between the 455 and 317? Surely it would have been a lot easier if things such as doors, windows, vents etc were actually identical?

Certainly shows a lack of quality control! I suppose this was before the advent and adoption of proper "Quality" systems.
I think it's more a case of York having one production line. If I recall the units were built in this order: -

Class 317/1 (317301-317348)
Class 455/8 (5801-5874)
Class 455/7 (5701-5743 - No TSO as they used a surplus Class 508 TSO)
Class 455/9 (5901-5920)
Class 317/2 (317349-317368)
Class 318/2 (318250-318269)
Class 317/2 (317369-317372)
Class 318/2 (318270)

As O L Leigh says, the a.c. units were built as outer suburban trains, whilst the d.c. units were built as inner suburban trains (hence the low-back seating as used on the Class 313/314/315/507/508 units)

If you look at the order in which the units were built, then improvements actually came with each "batch", e.g. Class 455/8s had a more standard hopper ventilator compared to Class 317/1s; Class 455/7s had an improved front end over Class 455/8s; Class 455/9s had convection heating compared to pressure ventilation in Class 455/7s, plus a changed design of hopper ventilator and luggage racks (interior details). Thus design changes/improvements came with each batch.

This continued with the Class 319 units (greatly improved front end design, and increased seating in Driving Trailer due to new cab design with no separate cab vestibule) and then the Class 320/321/322 units that had no end doors. The interiors were also improved again here (i.e. much simpler ceiling/lighting design and the use of Ashbourne seating in Standard Class).

Now I believe that Class 317/2s were the first units to have the door windows the same height as the saloon windows, but that some of the doors for the first Class 317/2 units ended up on a couple of late build Class 455/9 units, either to trial them or in error. Parts would have been at York for both types of units, as they would have been on the continuous production line (i.e. 317/2s after 455/9s).

So it's nothing to do with quality control, but rather improving and updating a design. For example, the Airbus A320-200 has been in production for over 20 years now, but a 1990 built A320 will have a number of differences to a 2010 built A320, even though both are A320-200s! (Improved engines, newer interiors, improved avionics and electronics, etc). It still happens with trains today - SWT's original Class 450 units (450101-450110) were built with a different disabled toilet to that used in their second batch units, 450111-450127. Nothing to do with quality control, rather the phase two units have the same toilet as used in the Class 444 units, which is actually fully compliant with DDA regulations (something to do with sink not being reachable whilst sat on the toilet in the batch 1 units if I recall!).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top