It has dawned on me that within the rail enthusiast community there is a severe popularity for trains hauled by independent locomotives and carriages as opposed to fixed multiple unit trains with distributed traction. I want to discover the reasons for both this popularity and hatred.
From my personal experiences - and I'm not going to stereotype - it is seemly the older generations of enthusiasts of whom carry this grudge more heavily than the younger generation, the youngers too are are just as interested in chasing loco hauled trains as their elders but are also tolerant and positive towards a passing interest in multiple units. If a loco hauled train is scheduled to replace a multiple unit train (57s vice 175s with ATW, 90s vice 390s with VXC) there is a rush and cheer to travel on it ASAP but in the reverse when multiple units have replaced loco hauled trains (87s vice 390s on the WCML, 220/1s vice HSTs on VXC) there has been lots of squabbling and blue language...
I've gathered some of my experiences and thoughts and want to try and solve the mystery:
- multiple unit operation has historically evolved from traditional loco hauled trains of which the older enthusiasts were acquainted back in the day, therefore when this alien multiple unit concept arrived and killed off all the locos they took for granted a dislike was formed. I doubt this is the case because I have noticed 1st generation multiple units in preservation receive attention far more than the second generation multiple units still in use on the mainline today.
- multiple units have operational advantages for high density, intense, suburban and regional trains and are therefore designed to a much less glamorous quality, whilst loco hauled trains are more suitable for premier intercity trains and are designed with a superior level of comfort and luxury that multiple unit trains lack?
- loco hauled trains are more interesting because all the power is located in a single, beefy, self contained vehicle and creates more noise and subsequently causes more attention, rather than the pathetic small engines distributed across the carriages of a multiple unit? This reason could be a potential suspect because I would be surprised if anyone reading this post has never ever seen a loco hauled train in the UK and not noticed that enthusiasts jostle and fight for the droplight windows closest to the loco.
From my point of view, the differences between loco hauled train and a multiple unit train are minimal A multiple unit is merely just a rake of passenger carriages being propelled without a locomotive - instead that locomotive is amalgamated in to the carriages. Multiple units can (and are!) be just as exciting and interesting as loco hauled trains - just last week I traveling in a 321 on the GEML on the 100mph section between Colchester and Chelmsford and I was sitting in the motor carriage with the power handle wide open approaching warp speed - the sound of the Brush traction motors made the experience fantastic. I couldn't of got this experience if I was in sitting a Mk3 carriage being hauled by a class 90 that operate on the same route, I was in standard class and would of been separated from the loco by a buffet car and first class carriages - instead the traction was directly, inches underneath my feet.
The popularity of the class 37 diesel loco and the hatred for the Voyager multiple units is all too evident, therefore if I took a class 37 diesel loco and a class 220 Voyager DEMU, cut the English Electric engine out of the 37 and sliced it in to four pieces, placed one engine piece underneath each Voyager carriage (replacing the existing Cummings QSK engines) - would this make Voyagers and thus multiple units as a whole any more glamorous to the average spotter?
John
From my personal experiences - and I'm not going to stereotype - it is seemly the older generations of enthusiasts of whom carry this grudge more heavily than the younger generation, the youngers too are are just as interested in chasing loco hauled trains as their elders but are also tolerant and positive towards a passing interest in multiple units. If a loco hauled train is scheduled to replace a multiple unit train (57s vice 175s with ATW, 90s vice 390s with VXC) there is a rush and cheer to travel on it ASAP but in the reverse when multiple units have replaced loco hauled trains (87s vice 390s on the WCML, 220/1s vice HSTs on VXC) there has been lots of squabbling and blue language...
I've gathered some of my experiences and thoughts and want to try and solve the mystery:
- multiple unit operation has historically evolved from traditional loco hauled trains of which the older enthusiasts were acquainted back in the day, therefore when this alien multiple unit concept arrived and killed off all the locos they took for granted a dislike was formed. I doubt this is the case because I have noticed 1st generation multiple units in preservation receive attention far more than the second generation multiple units still in use on the mainline today.
- multiple units have operational advantages for high density, intense, suburban and regional trains and are therefore designed to a much less glamorous quality, whilst loco hauled trains are more suitable for premier intercity trains and are designed with a superior level of comfort and luxury that multiple unit trains lack?
- loco hauled trains are more interesting because all the power is located in a single, beefy, self contained vehicle and creates more noise and subsequently causes more attention, rather than the pathetic small engines distributed across the carriages of a multiple unit? This reason could be a potential suspect because I would be surprised if anyone reading this post has never ever seen a loco hauled train in the UK and not noticed that enthusiasts jostle and fight for the droplight windows closest to the loco.
From my point of view, the differences between loco hauled train and a multiple unit train are minimal A multiple unit is merely just a rake of passenger carriages being propelled without a locomotive - instead that locomotive is amalgamated in to the carriages. Multiple units can (and are!) be just as exciting and interesting as loco hauled trains - just last week I traveling in a 321 on the GEML on the 100mph section between Colchester and Chelmsford and I was sitting in the motor carriage with the power handle wide open approaching warp speed - the sound of the Brush traction motors made the experience fantastic. I couldn't of got this experience if I was in sitting a Mk3 carriage being hauled by a class 90 that operate on the same route, I was in standard class and would of been separated from the loco by a buffet car and first class carriages - instead the traction was directly, inches underneath my feet.
The popularity of the class 37 diesel loco and the hatred for the Voyager multiple units is all too evident, therefore if I took a class 37 diesel loco and a class 220 Voyager DEMU, cut the English Electric engine out of the 37 and sliced it in to four pieces, placed one engine piece underneath each Voyager carriage (replacing the existing Cummings QSK engines) - would this make Voyagers and thus multiple units as a whole any more glamorous to the average spotter?
John