Transition from steam heating to electric train heating?

[Beebman]

Which SR units had ETH jumpers other than REPs and TCs?

I think Class 442 (5-WES) have them.

 

[43096]

I think Class 442 (5-WES) have them.

Yes, good point. Though I don’t think the 33s got ETH with them in mind!

 

[pieguyrob]

Were they possibly thinking of a 33 and 442 combination to Weymouth Harbour?

 

[Journeyman]

Which SR units had ETH jumpers other than REPs and TCs?

None, at the time they were introduced.

 

[delt1c]

Were they possibly thinking of a 33 and 442 combination to Weymouth Harbour?

442’s had ETH connections in order that they could be rescued by ETH fitted locos

 

[Taunton]

When the 2x27 "Push-pull" Edinburgh-Glasgow service started in 1971, it used original Mk 2 stock, which was transferred from the electrified WCML. It went through a substantial conversion at St. Rollox works to install air brakes etc, but the ETH, although retained, was no longer used as the locos were steam boilered. There must have been some issue with running the boiler from alternate locos every hour as the train ran back and forth, for a substantial programme was then started to install auxiliary diesel-powered generators, in just one of the two locos powering each set. Class 27/1 were the original push-pull control modification, with steam boilers, and 27/2 were the further change with the auxiliary electric generator. Trains had one of each.

Apart from the locos, the ETH in the coaches had not been used for a couple of years, and when first run again there were a whole series of journeys with burning smells, short circuits, blown fuses, no heat, etc, quite apart from the considerable troubles on the locomotives with the generators. I suspect the cleaning and inspection regime had not been extended to the electric heating elements at first. I wonder how it was handled on other ETH stock at the end of summer when it was first used for some time.

 

[DB]

Class 27/1 were the original push-pull control modification, with steam boilers, and 27/2 were the further change with the auxiliary electric generator. Trains had one of each.

What modification was needed to the ones without generators? I had assumed that they just used blue star multi, and through-wired the coaches?

 

[delt1c]

What modification was needed to the ones without generators? I had assumed that they just used blue star multi, and through-wired the coaches?

They had to have a different firefighting system, also the 27/1's whilst not having the ETH generator had to be able to control the ETH generator.

 

[edwin_m]

What modification was needed to the ones without generators? I had assumed that they just used blue star multi, and through-wired the coaches?

The early Mk2s were indeed through-wired, unlike the later 47 push-pulls which used TDM over the existing lighting cables. I assume the mod to the 27/1s was automatic operation of the fire extinguishing system, which is needed if there is no driver to operate it manually if a fire starts.

 

[Journeyman]

The early Mk2s were indeed through-wired, unlike the later 47 push-pulls which used TDM over the existing lighting cables. I assume the mod to the 27/1s was automatic operation of the fire extinguishing system, which is needed if there is no driver to operate it manually if a fire starts.

According to Wikipedia, the 27/1 sub class covered the addition of air brakes, with half of them subsequently gaining the ETH modification to become 27/2.

 

[edwin_m]

According to Wikipedia, the 27/1 sub class covered the addition of air brakes, with half of them subsequently gaining the ETH modification to become 27/2.

OK, that makes sense as there would have been no real reason for them to have air brakes before that. But I guess they had the fire modification too, unless the need for that is more recent (which I think is unlikely, as DMUs had automatic fire systems well before the push-pulls started).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Two of the unsung achievements of the BR era were the train heating conversion from steam to electric, and the parallel change from vacuum to air braking.
It was all during the lifetime of the production of Mk2 stock (1964-75), after which everything had ETH and air brakes.
I used mostly WCML services which were early in the conversion (starting with Mk1 dual heat stock for electric haulage from about 1960), but it was surprising how long it took to convert the whole network.
Dual heat/dual braked stock (Mk 2c I think) became the most valuable stock on the network with their go-anywhere capability.
It must have led to the premature retirement of some steam heat/vacuum-braked stock, but that was the penalty for not starting the conversions earlier.
I got the impression that Mk2 electrics were not sufficiently robust either, leading to a relatively short life even for that modern stock.
My last memories of Mk2 travel were often in a coach without working lights!

 

[delt1c]

Two of the unsung achievements of the BR era were the train heating conversion from steam to electric, and the parallel change from vacuum to air braking.
It was all during the lifetime of the production of Mk2 stock (1964-75), after which everything had ETH and air brakes.
I used mostly WCML services which were early in the conversion (starting with Mk1 dual heat stock for electric haulage from about 1960), but it was surprising how long it took to convert the whole network.
Dual heat/dual braked stock (Mk 2c I think) became the most valuable stock on the network with their go-anywhere capability.
It must have led to the premature retirement of some steam heat/vacuum-braked stock, but that was the penalty for not starting the conversions earlier.
I got the impression that Mk2 electrics were not sufficiently robust either, leading to a relatively short life even for that modern stock.
My last memories of Mk2 travel were often in a coach without working lights!

It wasnt the Mk2 electrics that was the problem, it was asbestos, corrosion and early AC that was the problem . Also early AC MK2 AC stock swas 62 seat not 64 which also gave problems with advance reservations

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I remember a lot of this vividly. Many locos going through various works and converting to ETH from steam and many then were also air braked making them dual braked. For a while there were quite a few locos that were dual braked and dual heat.

 

[Taunton]

Dual heat/dual braked stock (Mk 2c I think) became the most valuable stock on the network with their go-anywhere capability.

There was dual heat stock right up to the arrival of aircon with Mk 2d, but hardly any dual brake. There were the odd one or two vehicles, but it was vacuum up to the initial Mk 2, and air brake only from Mk 2a onward, which came in 1967. Various vehicles such as Mk 1 restaurant cars and BGs were progressively changed from one to another to suit.

Dual braking of coaches was pretty impractical. For a start, there wasn't the underframe space for two sets of cylinders, and the rigging to the brake blocks from two different systems would be difficult. Getting the brakes off with say a vacuum loco when the train had been brought in by an air loco would be another challenge. So the locos were dual braked, quite a lot of them, but not the stock.

 

[Richard Scott]

There was dual heat stock right up to the arrival of aircon with Mk 2d, but hardly any dual brake. There were the odd one or two vehicles, but it was vacuum up to the initial Mk 2, and air brake only from Mk 2a onward, which came in 1967. Various vehicles such as Mk 1 restaurant cars and BGs were progressively changed from one to another to suit.

Dual braking of coaches was pretty impractical. For a start, there wasn't the underframe space for two sets of cylinders, and the rigging to the brake blocks from two different systems would be difficult. Getting the brakes off with say a vacuum loco when the train had been brought in by an air loco would be another challenge. So the locos were dual braked, quite a lot of them, but not the stock.

There were quite a few dual braked mk 1s, I think a few buffet vehicles, TSOs and BCKs and FKs to name a few, admittedly not many but they did exist. I agree preference generally was one or the other. You can easily release brakes if in air then going to vacuum and vice versa. Strings under frames would do that.

 

[Taunton]

There were quite a few dual braked mk 1s, I think a few buffet vehicles, TSOs and BCKs and FKs to name a few, admittedly not many but they did exist. I agree preference generally was one or the other. You can easily release brakes if in air then going to vacuum and vice versa. Strings under frames would do that.

Did the Mk 2 actually have readily accessible strings ?

I ask this having been very familiar (as a spectator) with the process at Bristol Temple Meads long ago, when trains northbound arrived with a WR loco, which did 25" vacuum, to be replaced by an LMR loco, which did 21" vacuum. Both applied/released the brakes adequately, but if the arriving WR loco had a really good ejector (they did vary) and the LMR loco a poor one, they couldn't get the brakes off until the C&W inspector went along the train pulling the strings.

 

[randyrippley]

The early Mk2s were indeed through-wired, unlike the later 47 push-pulls which used TDM over the existing lighting cables. I assume the mod to the 27/1s was automatic operation of the fire extinguishing system, which is needed if there is no driver to operate it manually if a fire starts.

The need for automatic fire extinguishers was cited in the rail press at the time.
Incidentally it was that change which restricted the push-pulls to class 27, until then any of 24/25/26/37 could be - and were - used in extremis

 

[Taunton]

The need for automatic fire extinguishers was cited in the rail press at the time.
Incidentally it was that change which restricted the push-pulls to class 27, until then any of 24/25/26/37 could be - and were - used in extremis

Well this was always a mystery to me, being a regular user of the push-pull service both before and after the ETH conversion, that there could be an occasional substitution of a 25 or 37 at one end. Now I think about it, all the subs I can think of were at the Glasgow end, which was also the end that the 27/2 was formed at, so possibly they were back to steam heating - or nothing at all in summer. You could always tell when a Glasgow train was in its Platform 14 at Edinburgh, if walking along Waverley Bridge, which the Glasgow end loco would stand under - the noisy little Deutz ETH generator completely drowned out the rumbling tickover of the Sulzer. I wonder if the crew got fed up with it.

The automatic extinguishers provided specifically for the Deutz were one of its unreliabilities, they failed both ways, filling the engine room with their extinguishant unexpectedly for no reason, but also not operating when the unit overheated badly and developed a real fire. I believe that St Rollox had to deal with more than one serious fire damage on the locos from the generators' early days.

7 years ago I wrote this here about the service https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/scotrail-express-in-the-1980s.89374/#post-1574189