Locos who passed before their time

[NJTom]

Just curious, aside from the obvious getting dropped during delivery situation, are there any locos that had a very short service due to fire or damage?

 

[142]

just curious, aside from the obvious getting dropped during delivery situation, are there any locos that had a very short service due to fire or damage?

66521

 

[LE Greys]

There was a Railway Magazine article on this very subject a few years ago.

One of the most famous was probably the A4 4469 Sir Ralph Wedgwood, hit by a German bomb dropped on York shed early on the 29th of April, 1942. There is now a plaque on the spot. I believe there were also some 8Fs lost at sea when their ship was sunk by a U-boat. It might also be worth mentioning 46202 Princess Anne, which spent two months in service after being rebuild from a steam turbine engine only to be written off in the Harrow and Wealdstone disaster.

 

[60163]

70012...?

 

[FLHH East Anglia]

70012...?

Think that was mentioned by OP

 

[YorkshireBear]

There was a Railway Magazine article on this very subject a few years ago.

One of the most famous was probably the A4 4469 Sir Ralph Wedgwood, hit by a German bomb dropped on York shed early on the 29th of April, 1942. There is now a plaque on the spot. I believe there were also some 8Fs lost at sea when their ship was sunk by a U-boat. It might also be worth mentioning 46202 Princess Anne, which spent two months in service after being rebuild from a steam turbine engine only to be written off in the Harrow and Wealdstone disaster.

The 8F's, that shipwreck is a tourist trip now a days isnt it?

 

[mumrar]

DP2 and countless other locos involved in serious collisions or accidents. I'd guess it could easily be over 100.

 

[colpepper]

The 9Fs had at least another decade of life. Built 1954-1960, withdrawals began 1964. All gone by '68, some having just a few years in service. The damage was at head office.

 

[Oracle]

What about the Class 30s? The Mirrlees engines proved problematic and were replaced, adding the 30s into the Class 31 series.

The Teddy Bear Class 14s had a short career did they not? Also Class 17 Claytons.

 

[Rugd1022]

Four Brush Type 4s / 47s were retired early on due to collision damage. One of them was D1671 'Thor' which was only a few months old when it collided with a 37 in South Wales. It was written off and it's nameplates transferred to D1677 (47 091).

Some of the Hymeks lasted little more than six years in BR service, while the 14s lasted about four years before being sold into industrial use.

 

[Bedpan]

There were the Bulleid "Leaders" (36001 - 5), they were scrapped before 4 of the 5 had finished being built! Also, GT3 didn't last long, it was returned to the manufacturers after a year althougn not scrapped for another 3 or 4 years after that.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Those weren't accident damage though were they?

However, I do seem to recall that a 37 was written off very early on, as was a 40?

 

[60163]

Think that was mentioned by OP

Just noticed, soz

 

[43167]

Those weren't accident damage though were they?

However, I do seem to recall that a 37 was written off very early on, as was a 40?

Your right on both. a 37 had bad accident with a 47 in which both were written off after only afew months in traffic.

D322 was the 40 that was an early loss, which is why D200 took the No 40122.

 

[12CSVT]

Many of the class 58s, 60s and EWS/DBS 90s were withdrawn long before they were anywhere near life expired. Same applies to Western Region diesel hydraulics, many of which were withdrawn for no other reason than being considered 'non-standard'.

 

[FLHH East Anglia]

Just noticed, soz

No prob

 

[LE Greys]

Many of the class 58s, 60s and EWS/DBS 90s were withdrawn long before they were anywhere near life expired. Same applies to Western Region diesel hydraulics, many of which were withdrawn for no other reason than being considered 'non-standard'.

And the Deltics, for that matter. Partly, I would imagine that the HSTs rendered most express diesel locomotives redundant overnight. The 50s were probably an exception, and I've often thought they should have taken over what became XC (although the original plan was for a 1+4 HST set - preempting the Voyagers by twenty years). Still, what do you do with a Deltic when all the long 100mph sections of main line are operated by HSTs or electrics? There doesn't seem to be a real answer to this.

 

[NJTom]

Thanks for all the replies guys, interesting thought about the Deltics ... what else could they have been efficiently used for?

 

[ainsworth74]

what else could they have been efficiently used for?

Nothing, hence they weren't. But seriously the Deltics were good at running at high speed for long periods of time, by the 1980s they had been replaced on long distance high speed services by HSTs (ECML and GWML) or by electric locomotives (WCML and GEML). The only other main routes were the XC routes but there isn't much high speed running on those routes (certainly not at the start of the 80s) or mainlines in the South East but they were all electrified anyway or the Midland Main Line which was itself going over to HST operation fairly shortly anyway.

There really wasn't anything else for them to do after they had been replaced on the ECML, hence they were withdrawn.

 

[YorkshireBear]

so were they poor accelerators then? what was it about their performance cahracteristics made them unsuitable? was there no was to cheaply alter them? gearing?

sorry know very little about deltics except i like the noise they make.

 

[ainsworth74]

so were they poor accelerators then? what was it about their performance cahracteristics made them unsuitable?

I'm not sure that they were poor accelerators it's just there were other locos capable of doing stop start work already around and no need for the 100mph Deltics to do it. Also don't forget they were a completely non-standard class of 22 locos using a unique engine design. I would imagine that they were not the easiest of locos to maintain and also not particularly cheap either. Especially when compared to the hundreds of class 37s or 47s that BR had available to it. Could BR have carried on using them, yes. But why would it when there is a simpler, cheaper and more widespread option available?

i like the noise they make.

They do make quite a nice noise

 

[LE Greys]

I'm not sure that they were poor accelerators it's just there were other locos capable of doing stop start work already around and no need for the 100mph Deltics to do it. Also don't forget they were a completely non-standard class of 22 locos using a unique engine design. I would imagine that they were not the easiest of locos to maintain and also not particularly cheap either. Especially when compared to the hundreds of class 37s or 47s that BR had available to it. Could BR have carried on using them, yes. But why would it when there is a simpler, cheaper and more widespread option available?

AFAIK, having two engines was very useful, and there were a number of spares. If one failed, or just needed maintenance, the loco would go off to English Electric - under half power sometimes - the old power unit would be swapped out and a newly-overhauled one put in. This goes for generators and bogies as well. I'm not sure if any Navy engines ended up in BR Deltics, but I think they were a different version anyway.

Deltics weren't exactly fast out of King's Cross. Cravens DMUs used to beat them to New Southgate regularly, and 313 drivers often used to race them from Hatfield to Welwyn - and win. The thing I can't understand is why, when 50s have decent acceleration, they decided to use exclusively 47s on the inter-regionals. 47s aren't exactly fast out of the blocks either, and the 313s used to show them a clean pair of heels.

They do make quite a nice noise

Hear! Hear!

 

[Oswyntail]

...The thing I can't understand is why, when 50s have decent acceleration, they decided to use exclusively 47s on the inter-regionals. 47s aren't exactly fast out of the blocks either, and the 313s used to show them a clean pair of heels....

In a word, standardisation. Keeping the 50s within a fairly limited set of routes meant that a limited number of depots needed to keep up on their maintenance. 47s could go anywhere and be looked after anywhere.
And the 313s were nippy little blighters. I loved commuting on them briefly in the late 70s.

 

[colpepper]

What about the Class 30s? The Mirrlees engines proved problematic and were replaced, adding the 30s into the Class 31 series.

The Teddy Bear Class 14s had a short career did they not? Also Class 17 Claytons.

The Class 14 and 17 both had issues IIRC. I was thinking of very successful types that met the cutter's torch in spite of their usefulness.

 

[E&W Lucas]

The APT.

Apart that is, from the entire 999 BR Standard steam locos, plus all the other steam types built after 1948, mostly far more reliable than some of the early diesel classes mentioned above!

 

[colpepper]

... mostly far more reliable than some of the early diesel classes mentioned above!

Indeed. An object lesson in what happens to logic when governments get the bit between their teeth.

 

[chris89]

APT if it was given anywere near the same funding as Concorde would have worked (Same as if TSR2 was)

Also have to say a lot of the BR Standards especially the 9f's. Include the Western hydrulics as well.

Chris

 

[jopsuk]

There's certainly part of me wishes we'd hung on a bit lobger with steam and gone for mass electrification rather than the dieselisation programme.

 

[Juniper Driver]

07's?

Although recently I was quite surprised to see 07007 at Eastleigh.

 

[The Decapod]

One class 47, D1562, had its engine uprated to produce more power, as an experiment.
The engine exploded, wrecking the loco, in 1971 near Ipswich.