BR Type 3s - Regional Preferences

Discussion in 'Railway History & Nostalgia' started by alexl92, 4 Mar 2018.

  1. AndrewE

    AndrewE Established Member

    Messages:
    1,752
    Joined:
    9 Nov 2015
    I think the WCML electric locos had ETH power switches too, but not on the power controller. I supposed it was needed to avoid making or breaking a connection that had a huge current flowing: Some l/h sets were marked "1000Amp wiring" as the mk3 kitchens had a higher demand than the previous Mk 1 and 2 stock.
     
  2. jimm

    jimm Established Member

    Messages:
    3,922
    Joined:
    6 Apr 2012
    Though the trio of early 31/4s allocated to Leeds (409, 410 and 417) had regular turns on portion workings of Kings Cross services in West Yorkshire, to Bradford, Halifax and Huddersfield, probably Harrogate too - someone may know - in the 1970s until the arrival of HSTs on the ECML.
     
  3. kermit

    kermit Member

    Messages:
    305
    Joined:
    2 May 2011
    The OP has prompted me to think - compared with the other Regions, the London Midland barely seemed to have any use for Type 3s in the 60s and 70s. You could travel from Crewe to North wales, Liverpool, Manchester or Carlisle and rarely see one (or a Type 1 for that matter).
     
  4. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,865
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    It's true that the LMR didn't go for the type 3 power range. They were either Cl 24/25, or Cl 40/44/45/47 (and later Cl 50).
    Given the extra mass of the Cl 40, I don't know if they performed much better on passenger workings than the 37s, which were nominally 12.5% less powerful. I don't think either class was actually well-suited to 90 mph passenger trains, actually. The 40 would have been better on Cl 9 freights, however, with greater brake force.

    There might not have been many type 1s between Crewe, Manchester and N Wales, but go anywhere in the Leicester-Derby-Nottingham-Sheffield 'diamond' and you would be falling over them.
     
  5. edwin_m

    edwin_m Veteran Member

    Messages:
    12,838
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2013
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Sounds like the Midland's small engine policy living on 40 years or so after that company's extinction.
     
  6. ac6000cw

    ac6000cw Established Member

    Messages:
    1,516
    Joined:
    10 May 2014
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Yes - and you might say the Midland won the 'Derby vs Crewe' battle eventually ;) (when was the last new build of rolling stock at Crewe?)
     
  7. D5645

    D5645 Member

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    1 Oct 2016
    Location:
    Ripley, Derbyshire
    It is proportional loss.

    As a 31 is only a Type 2 in the first place then turning the ETS off temporarily to get a bit more horsepower to the rail for climbing hills was a regular driving technique.

    'You can have heat or speed but not both'.
     
  8. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,865
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    I dunno. There was probably a lot of work for the Class 20s working single n the early 60s. A lot of light trip workings to the collieries. Didn't need more power. Or more weight. There were a bunch of Cl 20s originally at Willesden. And at York. And on the Scottish region. If anything, for many years - I'd say from 1959-66 or so, the GE was a follower of 'small engine' policy - they had lots of type 1s (even lower power than the Cl 20s), Type 2 (30/31s) and Type 3 (37s) without any Type 4s for quite some time - until they got some 47s. (OK, they had a few Cl 40s in the early days.)
    The Cl 20s were probably vying with the 37s for the most successful DE locomotve on BR.
     
  9. Bevan Price

    Bevan Price Established Member

    Messages:
    3,416
    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
    On the heavy loads on WCML passenger services in the 1960s, you would be lucky to get much faster than the high 70s (mph) unless you were going downhill - and 25 mph up Shap was typical. A good condition Pacific with a willing crew could outrun a 40. However, in later years of the steam era, getting a good quality Pacific (& willing crew) was unusual, and the 40s were more consistent.

    Of the loco designs available when the first 40s were built, the extra 300 hp from Class 44 might have been a better choice for WCML.
     
  10. Shaw S Hunter

    Shaw S Hunter Established Member

    Messages:
    1,574
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Sunny South Lancs
    Ironic statement since that's exactly where the 44s were allocated when brand new!

    http://www.derbysulzers.com/class44.html
     
  11. Bevan Price

    Bevan Price Established Member

    Messages:
    3,416
    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
    I remember that, but I could never understand why the LMR preferred the Class 40s.
     
  12. Shaw S Hunter

    Shaw S Hunter Established Member

    Messages:
    1,574
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Sunny South Lancs
    It's a good question! My guess is that someone had to have them and once the GE had said "thanks but no thanks", and with WCML electrification on the horizon the LMR(W) was as good a home for them as any. To an extent it goes back, once again, to BR ordering series production of locos before the Pilot Scheme examples had even been evaluated. So it ended up with a sub-optimal fleet. I would like to know why the Type 3s only seemed to happen as an after-thought: they seemed to have been about the most versatile locos that BR had.
     
  13. Taunton

    Taunton Established Member

    Messages:
    3,019
    Joined:
    1 Aug 2013
    O S Nock got a good hard footplate run on a Duchess from Crewe to Carlisle very late in their career; it's described in the June 1964 Railway Magazine. It beat the Class 40 timings.

    Regarding single Class 20s, I guess this was no problem as long as steam locos were about - long nose forward they still provided a better view. Once steam was gone however someone seems to have decided it was unsafe. I wonder why. US diesels long had the cab at about the 3/4 position, and most were driven "short nose forward". However a couple of their major railways, like the Southern, ran them the other way round, cab controls turned round, as "long nose forward", just like a steam loco. Apparently done to give the crew greater protection in any level crossing accident. That opposite view seems to have been done for safety, as well.
     
  14. AndrewE

    AndrewE Established Member

    Messages:
    1,752
    Joined:
    9 Nov 2015
    BR was moving towards single-manning footplates where the duties allowed it (no train-heat boiler, ability to get "comfort" breaks, length of turn) and it's as clear as the nose on your face - or the bonnet of a cl 20 - that signal sighting etc past said bonnet is appalling.
     
  15. Western Lord

    Western Lord Member

    Messages:
    338
    Joined:
    17 Mar 2014
    The LMR had most of the "Peaks", but they mostly stayed in Midland Railway territory. Even at that late stage maybe old company rivalries were still at play and the LNWR faction regarded the Peaks as NIH (Not Invented Here). While the EE type 4s were not built at Crewe, they came from just down the road at Newton-le-Willows!
     
  16. AndrewE

    AndrewE Established Member

    Messages:
    1,752
    Joined:
    9 Nov 2015
    I haven't got many abc books, but a 1988 copy shows a total of 19 class 45s all allocated to Tinsley. Maybe the survivors were concentrated there? I remember them (or maybe 44s or 46s?) on NE-SW services from Bristol in the mid-1970s, but have no idea where they were allocated then.
     
  17. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,865
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    I don't know about 1988 - the HSTs had largely taken over MML duties by then, and probably what became XC too. You would not have seen Cl 44s on passenger turns - or at least very, very unlikely, after 1962. They moved to Toton in, I think, late 62 or early 63, they were designated freight locos, with boilers removed. As I remember, the 46s were initially on the GN, Newcastle-Liverpools and Bristol trains. The 45s were put on MML St Pancras - Manchester/Sheffields and also Thames Clyde and other stuff over the S&C, plus parcels/freight/mineral traffic, of course. The 45s were probably also on the Bristols early on too, but I'm not sure about that.
     
  18. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,865
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    Have you got any evidence for this assertion? My impression is that the LNW at the time were very pleased to get hold of D1 - D10 in 1959-1960, when they mainly took over Class 7 and 8 turns.

    It's also my impression - I stress impression, based on the fact that I believe I've read the Cl 44s were 'on-loan' to the WCML at the time - that the 44s were originally intended to be on the Midland, but were lent to the WCML because of difficulties in finding maintenance staff (for steam) at the time. But this could all be supposition in the past on my part that has since morphed into 'fact' - but I try to avoid this happening, hence my bringing it up.
     
  19. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    4,595
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    Without wanting to stray too far off topic I seem to remember that yes the last remaining Peaks were allocated to Tinsley for the last couple of years of operation. Before that (pre 1986ish?) they were all allocated to Toton. The 45/1s having finished on trans-Pennine services were then allocated to the parcels sector but still turned up on passenger services at times - especially on summer Saturdays.
     
  20. Taunton

    Taunton Established Member

    Messages:
    3,019
    Joined:
    1 Aug 2013
    Many of the 46s were progressively moved to the Western Region, where although they monopolised the NE-SW services through to the West, they also became maids of all work from Bristol and Plymouth depots, working freight, ballast trains, etc. If I recall correctly the main reason for this was that the 46s had been refitted with the old GWR pattern ATC, whereas the 45s were not and only had the BR ATC, thus were kept north of Bristol on old Midland territory. This had always been one of the reasons why NE-SW services previously changed locos at Bristol from Diesel-Electrics to Hydraulics. The GW ATC track installations were changed over in the mid-1970s, in preparation for the HST coming along.
     
  21. randyrippley

    randyrippley Established Member

    Messages:
    1,396
    Joined:
    21 Feb 2016
    45s were certainly working west of Exeter by 1972, as observed by a week on Dawlish sea wall. Couldn't have been any later as a couple of Warships were still in action that week. Around 40 Peaks in a week, 45 and 46, from both Midland and NE sheds.
     
  22. Shaw S Hunter

    Shaw S Hunter Established Member

    Messages:
    1,574
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Sunny South Lancs
    Given that 45s most certainly did work west to Paignton and Plymouth I wonder if this was allowable subject to being double-manned?
     
  23. Bevan Price

    Bevan Price Established Member

    Messages:
    3,416
    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
    I think that many Type 1 & 2 locos were intended to replace steam on some of the lighter freight workings, including trip workings & branch line freights -- the sort of trains that were mostly doomed by the Marples-Beeching changes and closures. Previously, many would have been worked by 0-6-0s or the smaller designs of 2-6-0.

    In retrospect, far too many Types 1 & 2 were built and even some of the better designs (e.g. Class 24) had relatively short lives.

    With WCML electrification rendering diesels spare, the LMR had no need for Type 3 (Class 37s) in the 1960s & early 1970s. Displaced Class 40 & 47 could deal with most of the heavier freight duties on the former Western Division of the LMR, whilst Classes 25 & 24 could work the less arduous turns. Class 37 generally appeared in the area only on a few through services (mostly freight) from the Eastern Region.
    .
     
  24. Shaw S Hunter

    Shaw S Hunter Established Member

    Messages:
    1,574
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Sunny South Lancs
    An interesting contrast with the GE Division of the Eastern Region. 40s were rejected as no better than a Brit yet ended up with 37s as prime power for express services. Once container services from Felixstowe became established as an important flow doubled 37s eventually became the preferred power, presumably due to better adhesion on the Felixstowe branch itself. Perhaps the ability to have a semi-standardised fleet (31s and 37s) was the key for the Eastern, at least as far the GE was concerned. As I recall it was the late 1970s before 47s began to appear on the GE in any numbers.
     
  25. randyrippley

    randyrippley Established Member

    Messages:
    1,396
    Joined:
    21 Feb 2016
    The GE not having type 4 power is no surprise: there were no hills to need it! What type 4 locos that were available were better sent elsewhere.
    As to why the WCML getting class 40s and not Peaks, my guess is that they had little choice. The BR workshops couldn't keep up with a decent rate of production while EE could - so EE got more orders even though the product was inferior, and someone had to use them once they were built. The LNWR got the short straw
     
  26. hexagon789

    hexagon789 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,408
    Joined:
    2 Sep 2016
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
    Noisy and very unreliable I'm given to understand

    37 mins, 39 was with the Falkirk High stop. The new electrics, when they eventually appear, will be slower than trains from 46 years ago - so much for progress.

    I've been wondering that too for a while.
     
  27. jimm

    jimm Established Member

    Messages:
    3,922
    Joined:
    6 Apr 2012
    But probably a sight more reliable than the 27s. And in the 1970s there were rather fewer train services out there than now - opportunities to thrash trains all the way on the limit are rather harder to find in 2018.
     
  28. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,865
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    To be fair, WCML expresses in the early 60s were HEAVY - I mean, 14-15 carriages were normal - and were not timed for anything much faster than 75 max, I should think. Does anyone have logs of Cl 40s on the ECML of the time, I wonder - I suspect with 10-11 carriages, which was more like the average load out of KX by then, you would get higher speeds out of a 40.
    Actually, this is so far off topic - I'm gonna start a new thread.
     
  29. hexagon789

    hexagon789 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,408
    Joined:
    2 Sep 2016
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
    I suppose there's no denying the frequency is far better, but I still know which generation of stock I'd rather have on that route (not 27s 47/7s!).
     
  30. 70014IronDuke

    70014IronDuke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,865
    Joined:
    13 Jun 2015
    The type 2s did a wide variety of 'replacing', as I'm sure you know. On the LNW the early 24s replaced Cl 5s and Standard 4s on Euston - Bletchley - Northampton - Brum locals - but also, I suspect, LNW 0-8-0s and 0-6-0 4Fs on goods traffic.

    On the Midland, the 24s, 25s and 27s replaced a lot of 4Fs, but also, in tandem ( 2 x 25) they replaced 9Fs and 8Fs on heavy mineral traffic for awhile. I thought the 25s in two-tone green looked quite smart when new out of shops.
     

Share This Page