Brighton Belle Restoration

[Peter Mugridge]

So do I, at Clapham Yard, being used to shunt (presumably failed) slam-door stock. They were unable to run in service together.

My photo was taken at Surbiton..... I'll try to dig it up.

 

[Deepgreen]

My photo was taken at Surbiton..... I'll try to dig it up.

Sounds interesting.

 

[A0wen]

It won't be the Belle anyhow, I believe it's a bodge up of BEL bodies stuck on CIG underframes with CIG bogies, motors and control gear. It won't look right and it won't sound right either (at least to me).

Given the 5BELs were withdrawn by BR in 1972, you're relying on your memory not having degraded in the subsequent 40 years to assess whether it 'looks or sounds right' - setting aside the insertion of lights which are being done to meet current standards.

Anyone who genuinely remembers the 5BELs are easily in their 60s now.

For the rest of us this rebuild provides a welcome insight into what these units were like to travel on.

 

[D1009]

When the new-design headlights were revealed on the Belle there were a lot of pretty angry comments about how they ruined the whole thing, that it wasn't worth putting it back on the main line if the front end had to be butchered so. Bet those commentators are singing a different tune now those self-same mods are allowing the yellow panels to be dispensed with..

How many non steam locomotives or units have been allowed to run on the main line without yellow warning panels since the 1960s? The only other one I can think of is Sarah Siddons.

 

[contrex]

Given the 5BELs were withdrawn by BR in 1972, you're relying on your memory not having degraded in the subsequent 40 years to assess whether it 'looks or sounds right' - setting aside the insertion of lights which are being done to meet current standards.

Anyone who genuinely remembers the 5BELs are easily in their 60s now.

For the rest of us this rebuild provides a welcome insight into what these units were like to travel on.

I fell in love with electric traction around the age of 7, so someone like that born in 1965 could have heard the BEL in 1972 and be only 50 this year. However, yes, I am in my 60s, and I have a very good memory for sounds, especially machinery. I can remember the sounds of Triumph Tiger Cubs, Austin FX3 and FX4 taxis, also the different sounds of RT and RTL bus engines, their gearboxes, also the motor and other sounds of 1925 type SUBs, the LAVs, BILs, HALs, etc, the PUL, PAN and BEL units, not to mention postwar SUBs (especially the ones that didn't have EE motors), and the 1951, 1957, 1963 and 1966 types. Also Standard, 1938, O, P, Q and R Underground stock. I do take your point that many people who see, hear and ride in the "restored" BEL concoction won't remember what the original sounded like, and I agree that it's fair enough if it gives them an idea of what it was like. But I really was there and I really do remember.

 

[Deepgreen]

How many non steam locomotives or units have been allowed to run on the main line without yellow warning panels since the 1960s? The only other one I can think of is Sarah Siddons.

I'm going to be very cheeky here and include the Waterloo and City line in the category of 'main line' (as opposed to private or preserved lines) in the days when it formed part of British Rail - and therefore propose class 487 (the 1940 stock), and their 1990 stock replacements. I expect the castigation that must surely follow will be swift!

 

[63a]

Given the 5BELs were withdrawn by BR in 1972, you're relying on your memory not having degraded in the subsequent 40 years to assess whether it 'looks or sounds right' - setting aside the insertion of lights which are being done to meet current standards.

Anyone who genuinely remembers the 5BELs are easily in their 60s now.

For the rest of us this rebuild provides a welcome insight into what these units were like to travel on.

I am now 70; I used to travel down from London after a day's trainspotting in London. I saved the money for the Pullman supplement so that I had a table to lean on whilst marking off the cops in my combined volume.
Memories...............

 

[D1009]

I'm going to be very cheeky here and include the Waterloo and City line in the category of 'main line' (as opposed to private or preserved lines) in the days when it formed part of British Rail - and therefore propose class 487 (the 1940 stock), and their 1990 stock replacements. I expect the castigation that must surely follow will be swift!

Don't see the need for castigation, after all it used to be connected to the rest of the network by means of a lift which enabled stock to be taken away for works attention.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Don't see the need for castigation, after all it used to be connected to the rest of the network by means of a lift which enabled stock to be taken away for works attention.

It also enabled a Southern Western M7 kettle to fall down the lift shaft one day when it didn't stop in time

 

[fgwrich]

Nope. Not a fan at all.

Unfortunately I was never keen on this project given the amount of EMUs - 2 VOPs, 2 CIGs and the Derby 4 SUB (and I think another VEP too) it has used to get it to this stage, unfortunately adding Rubbing Plates and LED lights - no room for the SR Jumper Cables or the original crest now either, has for me rather ruined the look either further.

 

[sng7]

Nope. Not a fan at all.

Unfortunately I was never keen on this project given the amount of EMUs it has used to get it to this stage, unfortunately adding Rubbing Plates and LED lights - no room for the SR Jumper Cables or the original crest now either, has for me rather ruined the look either further.

The Good news is due to the new rules on yellow panels it looks like the crest can make be on the front (see here for more info http://www.brightonbelle.com/news)

 

[pdeaves]

Don't see the need for castigation, after all it used to be connected to the rest of the network by means of a lift which enabled stock to be taken away for works attention.

I believe some W&C stock (the older Southern stock) ran to Wimbledon depot on its own at least once. Someone more knowledgeable can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Paul180]

I believe some W&C stock (the older Southern stock) ran to Wimbledon depot on its own at least once. Someone more knowledgeable can correct me if I'm wrong.

I do not know about that but after works attention there use to test the trains between Alton and I think Aldershot before the line was singled (to Farnham) if it was not raining as they had no windscreen wipers.

 

[nlogax]

My photo was taken at Surbiton..... I'll try to dig it up.

Very keen on seeing this one! I'm sure [way back in the late 80s] I saw a 442 hooked up to a CIG or VEP in Wimbledon..a photo like this would go a long way to confirm I've not been imagining it all this time.

 

[markindurham]

Interesting debate here. I'm minded of similarities in the automotive industry, where 'classic' shapes like the VW Beetle and Fiat 500 have been placed over modern mechanicals. (The less said about the Mini, which has developed 'middle-aged spread', the better...).

I actually welcome the initiative to return this unit to the main line. OK, there are necessary modifications to permit it to run in this modern age, but, you know, didn't the Southern do a very similar thing in a previous reincarnation? Upgrading the running gear etc?

 

[D1009]

Nope. Not a fan at all.

Unfortunately I was never keen on this project given the amount of EMUs - 2 VOPs, 2 CIGs and the Derby 4 SUB (and I think another VEP too) it has used to get it to this stage, unfortunately adding Rubbing Plates and LED lights - no room for the SR Jumper Cables or the original crest now either, has for me rather ruined the look either further.

So you'd rather see it stuck in a museum looking totally authentic than see it out on the main line doing almost what it was designed for?

 

[fgwrich]

So you'd rather see it stuck in a museum looking totally authentic than see it out on the main line doing almost what it was designed for?

If it meant that the likes of 1881 and the Derby SUB had remained in Preservation then yes. It is, as a friend of mine described the other day ''A Frankenstein of a Project''. It is now in effect, a Pullmann car on a Mk1 Chassis, which looses a large chunk of it's authenticity - converted to run at 90 MPH. Yes, I understand the history of it, but personally speaking and in my humble opinion I would rather see the humble run of the mill everyday go anywhere across the Southern Region 4 CIG saved and restored back to original condition - as per the original plans for 1881. That doesn't mean to say i'd never have wanted to see an EMU like this be preserved or return to the mainline but, not at such a cost of at least 6 other units. And had the project waited a few more years, there would be plenty more EE EMU Motors and Compressor equipment available from the 442 Fleets or the slightly more modern 455 motors. Then of course it's got to make it's payback by running Pullmann dining trains - which will have to compete against those operated by Bellmond, and even that will be limited as to where it will be allowed to go across the southern.

As for the LED Lights on the front end - Just to avoid the small yellow option? I think i'd rather have either seen the Small Yellow return with original and authentic SR Jumpers, or the GBRF 73/9 option - no Yellow but allowing the SR Jumpers back on. By doing what they've done, I feel that it's certainly had an impact to the front - and one I don't find particually pretty compared to the original - 1881s non BB authentic former SR Rubbing Plates doesn't help it's 'face' either!

It's a little like the NRM & Flying Scotsman - Would I rather see a totally rebuilt Flying Scotsman out and about at a cost of preserving other locos, or see other locos returned to potentially mainline condition or saved for the future.

 

[markindurham]

The thing is, though, that ultimately there will be more public interest generated with the Belle than with SUBs, VEPs, CIGs etc. Unless you have very deep pockets then you are always going to have to rely on 'bums on seats' to generate revenue to keep your stock going, and that applies as much to steam locomotives as anything else. You can argue the merits or otherwise of why "xxx" or "yyy" should be restored by the NRM instead of the likes of Scotsman, but the bottom line is always going to be cold, hard cash. We regularly hear calls for the likes of D200/40122 to be overhauled, but would it generate support from 'normals'? Probably not. Then you have to consider what you would gain from an expensive overhaul, when there are other EE Type 4s in operation.

There's another issue too, which applies to both NRM exhibits and privately owned stock - units can be problematic when it comes to storage, simply because of their size. Storage costs money - where's the money going to come from? As an example, look at what happened to the Class 502 unit. No real demand for its regular use, and it was very much route restricted, both for the 3rd rail aspect and its sheer size - they are very wide. It sadly fell into disrepair and was dropped from the National Collection. (I wish its supporters well, for the record. I travelled many times on those units in my youth...)

 

[yorksrob]

Of course, in the old days, BR used to look after special exhibits such as the 2BIL, which were then available for railtours etc. But alas privatisation and elf 'n' safety put paid to that.

 

[NSEFAN]

Privatisation was probably a bigger spanner in the works than safety rules. Grandfather rights would have probably meant that heritage EMUs would have been able to continue. Why would Connex or Stagecoach on the other hand have agreed to cluttering up their depots with vintage rolling stock for the occasional jolly?

That said, I given BR's attitude to heritage diesels on the mainline then we may not have seen a 5-BEL unit return to the mainline at all!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Very keen on seeing this one! I'm sure [way back in the late 80s] I saw a 442 hooked up to a CIG or VEP in Wimbledon..a photo like this would go a long way to confirm I've not been imagining it all this time.

Going to be at least two weeks I'm afraid - unable to scan at the moment due to my main computer having a ransomware attack. So more accurately I can scan but I wouldn't be able to upload the image before it gets encrypted...

As soon as I get sorted I'll have a look for the picture and get it scanned.

 

[100andthirty]

The authentic vs runnable is a debate in preservation circles, and not just in railway. There is a general view amongst profession curators that a good mixture of both is about right. For this particular project, I would have taken the attitude 'what would BR or Belmond have done if this trakn had continued in operation post 1973?'. I suspect they would have done much what the preservation group actually has done. Decent headlights, AWS, TPWS, radios and on train monitor recorders are requirements these days as is a requirement for electrical safety which was not evident at the time they were built.

They may not sound right (how many people remember what they did sound like?), and they may not require customer to hold their cups and saucers above the table at junctions to avoid spillages (the old bogies were terrible) but the overall experience will remind people that it was once possible to travel from London to Brighton in comparative luxury (unlike today's high backed , rock hard seats).

 

[D1009]

The thing is, though, that ultimately there will be more public interest generated with the Belle than with SUBs, VEPs, CIGs etc. Unless you have very deep pockets then you are always going to have to rely on 'bums on seats' to generate revenue to keep your stock going, and that applies as much to steam locomotives as anything else. You can argue the merits or otherwise of why "xxx" or "yyy" should be restored by the NRM instead of the likes of Scotsman, but the bottom line is always going to be cold, hard cash. We regularly hear calls for the likes of D200/40122 to be overhauled, but would it generate support from 'normals'? Probably not. Then you have to consider what you would gain from an expensive overhaul, when there are other EE Type 4s in operation.

There's another issue too, which applies to both NRM exhibits and privately owned stock - units can be problematic when it comes to storage, simply because of their size. Storage costs money - where's the money going to come from? As an example, look at what happened to the Class 502 unit. No real demand for its regular use, and it was very much route restricted, both for the 3rd rail aspect and its sheer size - they are very wide. It sadly fell into disrepair and was dropped from the National Collection. (I wish its supporters well, for the record. I travelled many times on those units in my youth...)

Totally agree. I was born in Wallasey, and travelled on many class 503s, though we didn't call them that at the time! I even remember the Mersey Railway clerestory stock that preceded them before 1956. I'd love to see the preserved 503 up and running, but we have to remember in today's day and age the costs involved would make it impossible to keep going as there is not sufficient interest. The Brighton Belle has attracted wealthy people to fund it and hopefully to travel on it in similar style to the VSOE. Those that cannot afford that style will still be able to view an iconic train from the last century in its working environment.

 

[markindurham]

Totally agree. I was born in Wallasey, and travelled on many class 503s, though we didn't call them that at the time! I even remember the Mersey Railway clerestory stock that preceded them before 1956. I'd love to see the preserved 503 up and running, but we have to remember in today's day and age the costs involved would make it impossible to keep going as there is not sufficient interest. The Brighton Belle has attracted wealthy people to fund it and hopefully to travel on it in similar style to the VSOE. Those that cannot afford that style will still be able to view an iconic train from the last century in its working environment.

Thank you . I didn't travel much on the 503s, although I was on the first train round the Liverpool Loop, which was, of course, a 503! I used 502 sets a lot in my youth; they were just disappearing when I moved away from the area. The 507s/508s just didn't have the same charisma as the LMS electrics - it's called 'progress'...

 

[Chris125]

If it meant that the likes of 1881 and the Derby SUB had remained in Preservation then yes.

I don't see any reason to think that the 5BEL project has deprived EMU preservation of anything with a sustainable future - what's lacking aren't sufficient vehicles but enough interest, money and sustainable uses away from the juice to secure the future of what we have.

EMUs like the CIGs at the DFR, which the 5BEL project helped with spares, continue to be lost regardless and that looks likely to continue.

as per the original plans for 1881.

The original plans for 1881 weren't going anywhere, that's the sad truth.

As for the LED Lights on the front end - Just to avoid the small yellow option?

No, the new lights were happening anyway - IIRC it lacks grandfather rights for a single headlight so needed to meet the latest standards.

I think i'd rather have either seen the Small Yellow return with original and authentic SR Jumpers, or the GBRF 73/9 option - no Yellow but allowing the SR Jumpers back on.

Personally I'd prefer to see the front-end compromised by mainline running than have it historically correct while rusting away in a siding or someone's garden, or ending up in a scrapyard - there's little alternative for air-braked, electrically heated Pullmans.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

I had an email / news letter from BEL today, it seems that more testing will happen later in the year and passengers services from early next year, something to look forward to.

 

[Chris125]

An update from the website:

Return of the Brighton Belle delayed awhile

Our hopes to see the Brighton Belle returned to the mainline in the same year as the Flying Scotsman were not to be. After a frustrating year be-set by problems with the complex re-wiring of the motor thirds and resource constraints, the Trust reluctantly took the decision to leave its home at Barrow Hill, a process which cost almost six months of productive activity.

The Trust paid fulsome tribute to the ground-breaking work carried out by Rampart Engineering. “They were able to achieve what everyone said was impossible and Paul Ramsden should be proud to have created a national centre of excellence for heritage railway restoration at Barrow Hill. Our problem with hitting our stretching targets has been one of capacity – the ability to work on at least four cars at the same time.”

The new home for the project is at W H Davis at Rotherham, where all of the Belle cars now sit in a vast building akin to an aircraft hangar, with all components and spares sat adjacent to each car in racked out shipping containers. The project has suddenly moved up a gear by virtue of the massive space available, finally allowing the application of lean manufacturing techniques to the project with all the assets to hand instead of being stored at multiple locations throughout the Chesterfield area. A game changer…

The professionalism of the W H Davis management team has allowed an excellent working relationship to be quickly established and the team has access to a large in-house engineering resource to accelerate completion of the project. Problems with the complex wiring systems apart, this final phase is essentially a production line; all of the engineering challenges have been fully resolved and the conditions set by the Rail Regulator are being met.

After re-launching a four car Belle unit, the speed of the completion of final two cars will be a simple product of the rate at which funding can be pulled in. The Trust is crossing its fingers that, with a tail wind, mainline testing might be completed by the end of the year, but getting it right is more important than doing it quickly - we'll keep you posted on progress.

There are a couple of photos on Flickr of them at Shirebrook back in August:


Brighton Belle Car 91 (99291) by Mathew Bailey, on Flickr


Brighton Belle Car 85 (99285) 1 by Mathew Bailey, on Flickr

 

[trainmania100]

Looks to be coming on rahter well
Hopefully nothing happens to it during testing. Unlike Vivarail, this is made of mostly wood?

 

[Chris125]

Unlike Vivarail, this is made of mostly wood?

Quite substantial steel framed construction actually.