First Generation DMU Fires!

[Chrius56000]

. . ..A bit of a morbid one I confess but I'm interested to know from a technical point of view!

. . .What classes of First Generation DMU were the most prone to underfloor, engine or mechanical fires and what were the usual technical causes?

. . One item mentioned in the H.M.S.O.
. Annual Summary Accident Reports that often cropped up was "contra–rotation" of engines and gearboxes that often resulted in fires, can anyone tell me what this meant?

Chris Williams

.

 

[Western 52]

I think the Cravens classes 112 and 113 were prone to fires, but I'm unsure of any details.

 

[Elecman]

. . ..A bit of a morbid one I confess but I'm interested to know from a technical point of view!

. . .What classes of First Generation DMU were the most prone to underfloor, engine or mechanical fires and what were the usual technical causes?

. . One item mentioned in the H.M.S.O.
. Annual Summary Accident Reports that often cropped up was "contra–rotation" of engines and gearboxes that often resulted in fires, can anyone tell me what this meant?

Chris Williams

.

Where the gearbox of one power car was in reverse when the train was going forward

 

[Taunton]

The fire issues were, in truth, very few and far between, given the size of the fleet and the number of decades it operated. There were just a few outliers. One was indeed a (later) Cravens design, where a mechanical failure of the transmission would puncture the fuel tank too readily. These 100 cars were an oddball design where, instead of one car having two medium engines with everything balanced between both ends, and the other being a driving trailer, both cars had just one larger engine, and the designer had somehow had to arrange the other components to try and get a balance. The imbalance affected everything - vibration, suspension, all. These newer cars seemed to have a life of only about 10 years before they were all withdrawn.

The cars with the greatest percentage loss by fire were, I am afraid to say, the old GWR streamlined railcars, which lost quite a number of their (only 38) total to this.

 

[Western 52]

I heard there were some units where a throttle could stick open with the unit stationary, which could cause overheating. I saw this happen on a class 117 on a preserved line, and a crew member had to go underneath to free it. I'm not sure how common this was in BR days.

 

[Trackman]

I was at Barrow-in-Furness station, 1982ish on an Area 22 rover and a first gen unit set on fire.
The thing was it happened so quick before it was in flames that the driver hadn't a clue and the man on the tannoy was shouting to get the drivers attention. Here is the exact quote:

Bill! Bill! Your train is on fire!!'

I haven't a clue what happened. We were just glad we got off it.
I cannot remember which type 1st gen DMU it was.
It was a very hot day as we bought some bottles of Cider in Barrow, if that helps in any way- temperature wise.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

The cars with the greatest percentage loss by fire were, I am afraid to say, the old GWR streamlined railcars, which lost quite a number of their (only 38) total to this.

To be fair, they were made of wood!

In fact weren’t 3 of the 4 single-ended cars lost to fire? I know one of the standard double-ended cars was rebuilt to replace a fire-destroyed single-ended vehicle.

 

[43096]

Where the gearbox of one power car was in reverse when the train was going forward

Which apparently was the cause of this spectacular incident involving a Class 108 near Totnes in 1991.

Class 108 DMU at Totnes

The history of Diesel Multiple Units (DMUs / railcars) in Britain.

www.railcar.co.uk

 

[Revaulx]

I never experienced a fire, but the Cravens units, which I particularly associate with the Sheffield area, always used to stink of exhaust fumes.

Standards of maintenance varied significantly from depot to depot. The small fleet of 3-car 104s based at Longsight and solely used on the ex-LNW Buxton services were always immaculately turned out. The larger fleet based at Newton Heath appeared very down at heel in comparison.

I think the 104s’ more powerful siblings, the Calder Valley 110s, were prone to self-immolation; certainly in their early days.

 

[Rescars]

The recent news about the trialling of GWR's fast charging battery electric on the Greenford branch reminds me that BR's battery electric multiple unit used on the Ballater branch (converted from a Craven's lightweight unit) suffered a number of fires after its batteries were changed in the early 1960s. It was restored to traffic though and is still with us, having become the Gemini (Laboratory 16) test train before being preserved.

 

[Taunton]

The GWR railcars were like other carriages (and buses) of the 1930s-40s era, steel sheet on the outside over a wooden (commonly Ash) frame, with heavyweight steel chassis.

Next along for fire loss must be the earlier Class 81-86 electric locos. Quite why electric vehicles, with no flammable fuel on board, should be so susceptible is a puzzle. I understand that a couple of generations ago, in cities that had both diesel buses and trolleybuses, of the same body construction, the latter were also more commonly lost to fire.

 

[norbitonflyer]

BR's battery electric multiple unit used on the Ballater branch (converted from a Craven's lightweight unit)

Actually built new by BR's Derby Works, using the same design of body as the early Derby Lightweights. Nos 79998 and 79999.
You may be confusing it with the Cravens parcels units (later class 129) Nos 59997-59999, one of which was also later adopted by he Resaerch unit as their test unit "Hydra"

Next along for fire loss must be the earlier Class 81-86 electric locos. Quite why electric vehicles, with no flammable fuel on board, should be so susceptible is a puzzle.

Transformer fires, and even expliosions, were common in early ac locos and units. (The Glasgow Blue trains were hastiuly withdrwan shortly after enetering service). As I understand it, the explosions were caused by backfires in the mercury arc rectifiers causing mercury vapour to result in a short circuit in the windings.

 

[Chrius56000]

. . .Newton Heath provided 104s (all–over rail blue with white stripe) on the Manchester – Blackpool Services, ghastly things with stinking heaters, windows with the loudest rattles you ever heard, very poor incandescent filament bulb coach lighting and yes, they had incidendiary tendencies as well but I never heard what the cause was!

The white with rail–blue broad stripe (108s I believe) which had been modernised with interior fluorescent saloon lights used on Lancaster/Morecambe services were far, far better and I don't recall a breakdown on one, except one frosty morning on a Morecambe to Leeds stopper where the engines stalled at every station!

Chris Williams

 

[MadMac]

Railcar has a full listing of known accidents and incidents including fires.

 

[norbitonflyer]

The small fleet of 3-car 104s based at Longsight and solely used on the ex-LNW Buxton services were always immaculately turned out. The larger fleet based at Newton Heath appeared very down at heel in comparison.

Buxton had its own allocation, mainly of 104s. I didn't think Longsight had a DMU allocation.

 

[magpiespy]

. . .Newton Heath provided 104s (all–over rail blue with white stripe) on the Manchester – Blackpool Services, ghastly things with stinking heaters, windows with the loudest rattles you ever heard, very poor incandescent filament bulb coach lighting and yes, they had incidendiary tendencies as well but I never heard what the cause was!

This accords with my memories of 104s on this line. I have read a few posts on this forum singing their praises - I can only assume that those posters travelled on 104s in the earlier days or on other lines. Among my fellow enthusiasts they were regarded with disdain - anything else was preferable. Noisy, dirty, ratty horrible things, known by us as crap-bangers, and quite rightly so.

When the Sprinters arrived on Manchester - Blackpool we welcomed them with open arms.

 

[LowLevel]

Actually built new by BR's Derby Works, using the same design of body as the early Derby Lightweights. Nos 79998 and 79999.
You may be confusing it with the Cravens parcels units (later class 129) Nos 59997-59999, one of which was also later adopted by he Resaerch unit as their test unit "Hydra"


Transformer fires, and even expliosions, were common in early ac locos and units. (The Glasgow Blue trains were hastiuly withdrwan shortly after enetering service). As I understand it, the explosions were caused by backfires in the mercury arc rectifiers causing mercury vapour to result in a short circuit in the windings.

Even up to the end of the "final fling" of the early AC EMUs in the late 90s I know exploding guard's vans were an issue - I think one fairly narrow escape at Leeds (?) on a 308 which blew the doors clean off the van saw the guards working from the back cab hence forth.

 

[LT02 NVV]

I looked up the site that MadMac mentioned here.

Railcar has a full listing of known accidents and incidents including fires.

And I found this page with a few images of a Class 101 fire near Mossend Yard in 1999.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Which apparently was the cause of this spectacular incident involving a Class 108 near Totnes in 1991.

Class 108 DMU at Totnes

The history of Diesel Multiple Units (DMUs / railcars) in Britain.

www.railcar.co.uk

Its final indignity was the breakdown crane falling on top of it. I witnessed it,it was both very serious and yet amusing. Thankfully nobody was hurt.

 

[norbitonflyer]

This accords with my memories of 104s on this line. I have read a few posts on this forum singing their praises - I can only assume that those posters travelled on 104s in the earlier days or on other lines. Among my fellow enthusiasts they were regarded with disdain - anything else was preferable. Noisy, dirty, ratty horrible things, known by us as crap-bangers, and quite rightly so.

When the Sprinters arrived on Manchester - Blackpool we welcomed them with open arms.

We had them on the Lincoln- Derby line, and yes, they sounded as if they were shaking to pieces even when idling. Great view of the line ahead though. Replaced with 120s when the service was extended to Crewe (100 miles in 4 hours, a bit of an endurance test), which were much more comfaortable but with a more restricted view.

 

[Revaulx]

Buxton had its own allocation, mainly of 104s. I didn't think Longsight had a DMU allocation.

Oh I didn’t realise that.

There were always plenty of DMUs in the north-facing shed at Longsight, and South Manchester’s were generally better turned out than those operating in the North; see the posts regarding the Blackpool 104s.

I had always assumed that the Buxton 104s were a type of depot pet.

 

[Sun Chariot]

I had always assumed that the Buxton 104s were a type of depot pet.

Buxton had a healthy allocation of 104s and 108s during the 1980s. Set numbers BX nnn. The "white roof" embellishment was added to members of both classes.

 

[Falcon1200]

And I found this page with a few images of a Class 101 fire near Mossend Yard in 1999.

I cane into the early turn in Glasgow Control with that incident on the go! The fire was so severe that the overheads were damaged, and for a while freightliners to and from Coatbridge Terminal had to divert via Polmadie, running round there.

 

[Strathclyder]

I looked up the site that MadMac mentioned here.

And I found this page with a few images of a Class 101 fire near Mossend Yard in 1999.

101688. The last 1st-gen DMU lost to a fire I think. A miracle it happened while the unit was running ECS from Mossend back to Whifflet when it went up. Caused all manner of chaos though, given where it went up and how severe the fire was!

 

[Falcon1200]

Caused all manner of chaos though, given where it went up and how severe the fire was!

Indeed, it certainly made for an interesting shift!

 

[Strathclyder]

I cane into the early turn in Glasgow Control with that incident on the go! The fire was so severe that the overheads were damaged, and for a while freightliners to and from Coatbridge Terminal had to divert via Polmadie, running round there.

Trying to work out the logistics of this diversion in my head so just bear with me here lol

The only other direct route between the two would be via Carmyle, and that line obviously wasn't wired in 1999. Based off that, I assume the freightliners were piloted by diesels between Polmadie & Coatbridge Terminal for as long as the diversion was in place?

 

[Ashley Hill]

I cane into the early turn in Glasgow Control with that incident on the go! The fire was so severe that the overheads were damaged, and for a while freightliners to and from Coatbridge Terminal had to divert via Polmadie, running round there.

No need to send that one to Vic Berry`s crematorium!

 

[Strathclyder]

Even up to the end of the "final fling" of the early AC EMUs in the late 90s I know exploding guard's vans were an issue - I think one fairly narrow escape at Leeds (?) on a 308 which blew the doors clean off the van saw the guards working from the back cab hence forth.

Would this be what you're thinking of? Apologies to @D6130 for quoting him verbatim:

Unfortunately, in the late 1990s, a much more serious fault which had afflicted the units a few years earlier on the London, Tilbury & Southend line re-emerged in Yorkshire. One morning, shortly after 308 155 had arrived in platform 2 at Leeds, there was a loud explosion in the motor coach, which blew off one of the brake van doors and catapulted the guard's seat out onto the platform. Luckily the guard had just vacated the van and was shocked, but unhurt. About a week later, the same thing happened with 308 138 in the same platform, thankfully again with no injuries. Both units were taken out of service and sent to Neville Hill immediately after the incidents and several diagrams were replaced by diesel units for a few weeks while the rest of the fleet were checked and it transpired that the problem was caused by overheating of the cooling oil bath surrounding the right-angled joint in the 25 Kv power cable leading from the pantograph main circuit breaker to the transformer.

 

[Taunton]

I'm surprised the explosions from overheating various oil baths were happening at this late stage. The initial ones when new which impacted both Liverpool Street and Glasgow services were an issue with the 6.25kV/25kV changeover, where a fault with the changeover switching applied 25kV to the 6.25kV equipment, which had been insufficiently safeguarded against this, leading to vaporisation of the oil. It impacted the products of just one equipment manufacturer. Glasgow's were all the same but the Liverpool Street trains, although looking all the same, had equipment from multiple designers/makers. By the time the trains went to Leeds 6.25kV had disappeared, and it was all just one system.

 

[Strathclyder]

Indeed, it certainly made for an interesting shift!

Interesting is certainly one way of putting it!