Night Ferry route

[30907]

But somewhere up thread it was stated that the NF with steam loaded to 400t, and that a MN was used alone, at least at times.

The pre WW2 load was 400t, which was well within the design capability of a Nelson IIRC.

By summer 1957 the booked load (in the Carriage Working Notice) was 2 Fourgons 7 Sleepers 4 SR, which I would guess at 560-570t net. With 10 sleepers and 3 Fourgons that would be close to 750t - a rare occurrence, but that would explain the maximum permitted load.

 

[Gloster]

A few odd details. From May 1975 the seated passengers were transferred to EMUs and dining facilities withdrawn. The gangway adaptors from the RUO (which were withdrawn) were transferred to BCK S21270 and S21273. The two RB were transferred to the Western Region.

In the May 1980 South Western Division Carriage Working booklet, on Saturday mornings there was an 07.55 Victoria ecs with one BCK that arrived at Clapham Junction at 08.12 and an 09.00 to Victoria that also had only one BCK. I presume that, with very little BR loco-hauled stock on the Central Division, it was probably easier to maintain just two vehicles alongside the SWD’s fleet. The Night Ferry vehicles were another thing altogether.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

By summer 1957 the booked load (in the Carriage Working Notice) was 2 Fourgons 7 Sleepers 4 SR, which I would guess at 560-570t net. With 10 sleepers and 3 Fourgons that would be close to 750t - a rare occurrence, but that would explain the maximum permitted load.

Referring again to the 1974 Passenger Train Marshalling Book, 750 t is quoted as the maximum unassisted load out of Victoria and actually quotes a maximum load of 850t - the latter of course would have to be assisted out of Victoria!
Quite how 850t could ever actually be achieved sounds unlikely to say the least - 12 sleepers, 3 fourgons, the RB RUO combination and BCK for the Guard comes to 826.5 which I suppose is close enough but it does seem almost inconceivable it would ever run with 12 sleepers although 25 were built initially plus a further 6 to replace war losses, and the book 'Night Ferry' quotes in Appendix 1 the normal load in 1960 as seven sleepers which could be strengthened to a maximum of ten sleepers, but it does not state what seated coaches or fourgons were conveyed in that year (or at least not without reading the relevant chapters to find any such reference), and I'd need to dig deeper to find more info on 1957 when, pre electrification a lesser load is likely to have applied.

 

[6Gman]

But somewhere up thread it was stated that the NF with steam loaded to 400t, and that a MN was used alone, at least at times.

We all know that the light pacifics slipped like billy-oh, and I assume the original MNs weren't much better (I never saw them, consciously, in unrebuilt form). I just think it would have been interesting to try a Brit. Yes, as pacifics they would slip more easily than, say, a Nelson, but I suspect they were easier to handle than an original MN/BB/WC when starting. Having said that, of course, as mere 2-cylinder machines, the variation in force at the wheel-rail interface would likely be greater than with a 3-cylinder machine.

Still, it's all in the rather dim and distant past now.

Incidentally, the Class 71s having to take up to 750t is VERY impressive - and one wonders how prone they were to slipping with such loads - I mean, as Bo-Bo locos with a weight of just 78t, that's not a huge amount of adhesion available for the tractve effort needed to shift that kind of load. Even climbing the bank out of Victoria must have been a challenge.


That's a real treasure!

Xpress Publishing's "The District Controller's View:No.9 The Kent Coast" (written by people involved in operating the service) describe the arrangements around 1954/55 as follows:

The 2 Britannias were for the Golden Arrow. This can only have been a prestige thing - sending Brits to a region with 140 Pacifics when the LM had only 50 native Pacifics can have no other explanation.
Two morning boat trains (the 0900 & 1000 from Victoria) were heavy trains and required Merchant Navy power and Stewarts Lane had 3 allocated (35014/26/28 in 1955).
The Night Ferry was "too heavy even for a Merchant Navy and was diagrammed for the incongruity of a Light Pacific paired with an L1 4-4-0". It was also worked by Dover-based loco diagrams, so the use of a Britannia or a MN would have required either a change of depot or the allocation of a new class to 74C.

 

[Taunton]

Gerry Fiennes wrote that the first Britannias were allocated 15 to "his" Great Eastern (70000-14), and 15 to the Western (70015-29). Having prepared diagrams for 15 locos, two were then taken from him, to his annoyance, to be put on the "Arrow". I think it was the Harwich to Liverpool through train, Britannia as far as Sheffield, that lost out.

If he had been in charge of the Southern, I suspect he would have told Dick Hardy, shedmaster at Stewarts Lane at the time, to put one of the Brits on both up and down Arrow, and the up and down Ferry. The timings work well for two round trips a day. And to have it well polished for each duty.

Two later prominent railway authors would have made an interesting team.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Gerry Fiennes wrote that the first Britannias were allocated 15 to "his" Great Eastern (70000-14), and 15 to the Western (70015-29). Having prepared diagrams for 15 locos, two were then taken from him, to his annoyance, to be put on the "Arrow". I think it was the Harwich to Liverpool through train, Britannia as far as Sheffield, that lost out.

That's most interesting, I didn't know that. And it makes it even more certain that the person who selected the two locos to go to Stewarts Lane was most certainly "having a larf" by choosing 70014 as the standby loco. I wonder if he had any worries he might not get away with it! I'm sure Private Eye, had it been around, would have loved that one as a short feature.

It's also logical that if a diagram had to suffer, it would be the Harwich train - as it would, presumably, leave the Norwich services intact, ie to be all standard timings with the new class 7 power. IT must have been pretty revolutionary for the GE line at the time.

If he had been in charge of the Southern, I suspect he would have told Dick Hardy, shedmaster at Stewarts Lane at the time, to put one of the Brits on both up and down Arrow, and the up and down Ferry. The timings work well for two round trips a day. And to have it well polished for each duty.

Two later prominent railway authors would have made an interesting team.

Indeed - ifs and buts of history!

 

[6Gman]

Gerry Fiennes wrote that the first Britannias were allocated 15 to "his" Great Eastern (70000-14), and 15 to the Western (70015-29). Having prepared diagrams for 15 locos, two were then taken from him, to his annoyance, to be put on the "Arrow". I think it was the Harwich to Liverpool through train, Britannia as far as Sheffield, that lost out.

If he had been in charge of the Southern, I suspect he would have told Dick Hardy, shedmaster at Stewarts Lane at the time, to put one of the Brits on both up and down Arrow, and the up and down Ferry. The timings work well for two round trips a day. And to have it well polished for each duty.

Two later prominent railway authors would have made an interesting team.

The Night Ferry was a Dover job. (The Light Pacific working two round trips; the L1 spending a rather unproductive 8 hours at Stewarts Lane.)

 

[30907]

The Night Ferry was a Dover job. (The Light Pacific working two round trips; the L1 spending a rather unproductive 8 hours at Stewarts Lane.)

But no doubt Mr Fiennes would have persuaded the Dover LDC with the promise of a new timetable on the Tonbridge route and more turns

BTW the idea wouldn't have worked when the Arrow left London in the morning...

 

[70014IronDuke]

But no doubt Mr Fiennes would have persuaded the Dover LDC with the promise of a new timetable on the Tonbridge route and more turns

BTW the idea wouldn't have worked when the Arrow left London in the morning...

But surely the logic would have been the Brit off the up Night Ferry would have escaped to Stewarts Lane c 08.30, been turned, coaled and backed up back onto the morning down Golden Arrow?

 

[Taunton]

But surely the logic would have been the Brit off the up Night Ferry would have escaped to Stewarts Lane c 08.30, been turned, coaled and backed up back onto the morning down Golden Arrow?

You tell us ... you were there. Good that you are enthusiastic about doing it

 

[Gloster]

There is always the problem of bad weather on the channel knocking the timetable to bits. Using one loco, which was not so easy then as now, could lead to embarrassments with Stewarts Lane having to rustle up something at a late stage. Ordinary passengers may just have to make do,”...but this, Sir, is the Golden Arrow.”

 

[StephenHunter]

Backdated Train Sim have just released a carriage pack for this, so you can have a go at driving it on the Chatham Main Line route. I set up a consist that broadly resembles the 1969 formation (BCK-RB-2 TSO-RB-RUO-6 WL-3 Fourgon) and you have real problems hauling it with a 73. Was double-heading common in the electric days or were the 71s up to the job solo?

 

[contrex]

Was double-heading common in the electric days or were the 71s up to the job solo?

I would say so. Class 71s were beasts. 2552 HP (1 hour) 2300 HP (continuous), compared to class 73 1600 HP & 1420 HP. A solo class 71 was quite enough.

 

[Taunton]

Here, courtesy of the Cooks Continental Timetable on the Timetable World website, is the timetable for the Dover-Dunkerque ships in summer 1974. There were actually four such crossings a day, only one taking the Night Ferry, the others combinations of road vehicles and freight wagons. Apparently a significant number of road vehicles on this route were export new cars, known to BR as "trade cars", driven on and off by railway staff.

The four trips each way used two vessels, passing en route. No more ships could be used because there was only one rail-connected ferry dock at each end. Presumably if a sailing was cancelled for any reason, the opposite sailing would have to be cancelled as well. The original 1930s train ferries were all retired by this time, I believe the two used were the SNCF Saint Germain and the BR Vortigern.

 

[30907]

But surely the logic would have been the Brit off the up Night Ferry would have escaped to Stewarts Lane c 08.30, been turned, coaled and backed up back onto the morning down Golden Arrow?

At 08.30 it was still somewhere round Sole St, 9.10 into Vic, hence the problem when the Arrow was at 10am most of the year.