What class of 'Peak' is this?

[D1537]

were there detail differences between the Crewe and Derby 45s?

No. Unlike the Crewe and Loughborough 47s, which had minor differences (very minor, but enough to tell them apart).

 

[Richard Scott]

A friend, was a diesel shed fitter, retired 12 years ago, reckons Crompton Parkinson was the more reliable electrical equipment than the other makers.

I think that is generally assumed to be the case. 26s were arguably the best type 2, nothing to compare the 33s with but they certainly were reliable performers and 45s were superior to 46s.

 

[norbitonflyer]

A quirk of the Peaks, concerns multiple working, at new build , the 44 D1 to D10 had disc headcode and corridor end-doors on the cabnose, then the first few members of the class 45 from D11 onwards had split-headcode boxes and corridor end-doors, there was little call for multiple working, the end doors were soon abandoned, I'm not sure of the quantity of the latter, but around 8

Headcode panels on Peaks. As built the 44s had discs. The 45s were a mixture - early ones D11-30 (Derby), and D68-107 (Crewe) had split boxes spaced apart, (some still with gangway doors) whilst later ones D31- 50 (Derby) 51-67 (Crewe, order diverted from Derby and built after 68-107) and , D108-137 had them brought together in the middle, but still with a split between them.

However, because of the two production lines (Derby and Crewe) running at different rates and changing from one style to the other at different times, there are some higher numbered examples with split boxes (such as D100 above) and some with the central arrangment (such as D65 above). The 46s had single piece headcode panels.

class 44 class 45 class 46 details

Repairs to accident damage occasionally meant that a loco could have differemt styles at each end!

 

[Ken H]

re @norbitonflyer 's post
Did these gangways get used at all, or were they just a maintenance liability until they were welded up?

 

[Richard Scott]

Repairs to accident damage occasionally meant that a loco could have differemt styles at each end!

45149 being an example of this after an accident in the late 1960s. It's preserved in this guise.

 

[Strathclyder]

Repairs to accident damage occasionally meant that a loco could have differemt styles at each end!

45149 being an example of this after an accident in the late 1960s. It's preserved in this guise.

44009 Snowdon also being an example of this, as a result of accident damage repairs in 1969, gaining a one-piece 4-character headcode box at the damaged end (linked photo copyright of Flickr's John Sydney-Han).

44009 SNOWDON. 0710 Toton - Whitemoor goods.

Peak diesel no. 44009 (Without its "SNOWDON" nameplates) is passing the signal box at Netherfield at the head of the 0710 Toton - Whitemoor freight on the 19th of July 1977. This was a regular duty for class 44 at the time. The loco was new to the LMR Western Lines at the start of 1960 but...

www.flickr.com

 

[Richard Scott]

44009 Snowdon also being an example of this, as a result of accident damage repairs in 1969, gaining a one-piece 4-character headcode box at the damaged end (linked photo copyright of Flickr's John Sydney-Han).

44009 SNOWDON. 0710 Toton - Whitemoor goods.

Peak diesel no. 44009 (Without its "SNOWDON" nameplates) is passing the signal box at Netherfield at the head of the 0710 Toton - Whitemoor freight on the 19th of July 1977. This was a regular duty for class 44 at the time. The loco was new to the LMR Western Lines at the start of 1960 but...

www.flickr.com

Interestingly also looks like a class 45 bogie fitted as has an air cock for air braking, which 44s weren't fitted with. Also why did it gave different grill covers?

 

[Neptune]

D9 and D10 had the different grilles. I think it was experimental but cannot remember the reason why. Obviously not successful as the production run reverted to the type of grille on D1 - D8.

 

[Strathclyder]

D9 and D10 had the different grilles. I think it was experimental but cannot remember the reason why. Obviously not successful as the production run reverted to the type of grille on D1 - D8.

The Derby Sulzers site doesn't mention, not on the Class 44 page at least unless I unwittingly skimmed past it, why D9/10 had those grille covers. Seems to me to be a unsuccessful expriement of some description.

 

[randyrippley]

D9 and D10 had the different grilles. I think it was experimental but cannot remember the reason why. Obviously not successful as the production run reverted to the type of grille on D1 - D8.

I'm guessing here, but allegedly there were union/labour problems at the time which delayed delivery. I suspect that resulted in the louvres being used instead of grilles as it effectively downskilled the job

 

[Sulzer:1999]

I'm guessing here, but allegedly there were union/labour problems at the time which delayed delivery. I suspect that resulted in the louvres being used instead of grilles as it effectively downskilled the job

I believe the radiator & engine compartment grills on these locos were the same design used just below cant rail level on American GM ‘E & F’ series diesel electrics, purely experimental.

 

[HOOVER29]

The last 20 Class 46s were cancelled and their electrical equipment used on the first 20 Class 47s (D1500-D1519), which is why that batch were non-standard to the other 492 that were built.

Everyday is a school day on here

 

[Ken H]

The last 20 Class 46s were cancelled and their electrical equipment used on the first 20 Class 47s (D1500-D1519), which is why that batch were non-standard to the other 492 that were built.

Were those the ones with dynamos rather than alternators. Teferred to as the 'Generators I think.

 

[D1537]

Were those the ones with dynamos rather than alternators. Teferred to as the 'Generators I think.

They had an ETH generator separate from the main generator, as opposed to the later machines that had an alternator, yes. There were a few other differences (braking systems, cooling fans) to the later machines as well.

 

[12LDA28C]

They had an ETH generator separate from the main generator, as opposed to the later machines that had an alternator, yes. There were a few other differences (braking systems, cooling fans) to the later machines as well.

There were separate driver's manuals for D1500-1519 and many drivers who signed the later built locomotives would not drive a 'generator' unless they had had the relevant training on them.

 

[Wyrleybart]

The ETH connector basically confirms it as a 45/1.

If that wasn't present, there are two ways of telling 45s apart from 46s, but where they would be are not visible in that photo!

I believe there is an extra roof hatch on the class 46s but you would need to see the roof to establish that !!

 

[Strathclyder]

The ETH connector basically confirms it as a 45/1.

If that wasn't present, there are two ways of telling 45s apart from 46s, but where they would be are not visible in that photo!

I believe there is an extra roof hatch on the class 46s but you would need to see the roof to establish that !!

I believe these two Martin Loader Peak images confirm this to be the case. I can clearly spot a extra hatch near the cooling fan on the image of 46026 when comparing it to the same spot on 45056's roof.

45056 South Marston 16 June 1984

46026 Micheldever 17 June 1984

 

[Wyrleybart]

I believe these two Martin Loader Peak images confirm this to be the case. I can clearly spot a extra hatch near the cooling fan on the image of 46026 when comparing it to the same spot on 45056's roof.

45056 South Marston 16 June 1984

46026 Micheldever 17 June 1984

Yes. That is the one. Possibly relating to the intercooler maybe.

 

[Richard Scott]

Yes. That is the one. Possibly relating to the intercooler maybe.

Would guess it's more to do with hydrostatic fan drive. Intercoolers at the exhaust end and 45s also intercooled.

 

[Taunton]

re @norbitonflyer 's post
Did these gangways get used at all, or were they just a maintenance liability until they were welded up?

It's not apparent why the crews might even be thought to need to access the second loco behind. Was there some issue like the train heat boiler could only be used on the rear loco, nearest the train? Were any fault indications from the rear loco shown in the leading cab?

In the USA the first of the classic streamliner units, the FT, which appeared in the late 1930s, commonly as multi-unit sets, up to four, had manual radiator shutters, as automatic shutters had not yet been devised. As power was varied the fireman had to go back through all the units and adjust the shutters, at least having the benefit that full size carriage-type gangways were provided between the units. As the engine rooms were also very much open to the elements blowing in through the large grilles, and this was being done at speed across the winter Prairies with temperatures down to maybe -30C, not a job for the faint-hearted going back and forth.

 

[D1537]

It's not apparent why the crews might even be thought to need to access the second loco behind. Was there some issue like the train heat boiler could only be used on the rear loco, nearest the train? Were any fault indications from the rear loco shown in the leading cab?

Well, of course with the original diesel pair of 10000/10001, the gangways were also built to access the train, with the idea of changing crews in long non-stop runs.

However, yes, dealing with the train heat boiler was the main reason for their existence (and using the water scoops for the rear loco on those machines fitted with them).

It was quickly realised that this was unlikely to be used very much (and was an issue as regards draughts in the cab) which is why everything built after the early 60s did not have them.

 

[Cowley]

Well, of course with the original diesel pair of 10000/10001, the gangways were also built to access the train, with the idea of changing crews in long non-stop runs.

However, yes, dealing with the train heat boiler was the main reason for their existence (and using the water scoops for the rear loco on those machines fitted with them).

It was quickly realised that this was unlikely to be used very much (and was an issue as regards draughts in the cab) which is why everything built after the early 60s did not have them.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the connecting gangways had a tendency to pop apart on longer locomotives when negotiating sharper curves and points as well?

 

[Taunton]

Why could the boiler not be used on the lead loco, with the steam just passing through the one behind like through the coaches, and not needing crew attention? Did the pipework initially not allow this? I presume this worked fine on the Highland Main Line, long run with multiple class 24/26, and one part of the network where you really needed steam heat in winter.

Notably on the USA streamliner diesels the cab and nose were the one part of the multi-unit combination (or 'lash-up' in USA-speak) that did not have the connecting gangways, they were only at the flat rear of the cab units, and at both ends of the 'B' units.

 

[D1537]

Why could the boiler not be used on the lead loco, with the steam just passing through the one behind like through the coaches, and not needing crew attention? Did the pipework initially not allow this? I presume this worked fine on the Highland Main Line, long run with multiple class 24/26, and one part of the network where you really needed steam heat in winter.

Notably on the USA streamliner diesels the cab and nose were the one part of the multi-unit combination (or 'lash-up' in USA-speak) that did not have the connecting gangways, they were only at the flat rear of the cab units, and at both ends of the 'B' units.

Very few diesels were fitted with through steam pipes. Class 20 were the only one I can think of that survived past the early 70s (and not all of those were, and most were later removed). Indeed, Eastfield refitted 20045 and 20085 for use on the Fort William portion of the sleeper so they could be tucked inside the steam heat 37 when railhead conditions were bad.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Very few diesels were fitted with through steam pipes. Class 20 were the only one I can think of that survived past the early 70s (and not all of those were, and most were later removed). Indeed, Eastfield refitted 20045 and 20085 for use on the Fort William portion of the sleeper so they could be tucked inside the steam heat 37 when railhead conditions were bad.

I am not so sure about that. Pretty sure the bulk of diesel locos delivered in the very early 1960s were delivered with steam heat pipes on the buffer beams even though they weren't fitted with steam generators. The later series of class 25 are a good example and possible also what became class 47/3 which also weren't built with boilers. I am assuming that there was a steel pipe built into the loco to get the steam from one end to the other - otherwise, it would be pretty pointless fitting the steam "bags" on each end.

 

[45076]

Would guess it's more to do with hydrostatic fan drive. Intercoolers at the exhaust end and 45s also intercooled.

spot on and its a git to work on

 

[randyrippley]

I am not so sure about that. Pretty sure the bulk of diesel locos delivered in the very early 1960s were delivered with steam heat pipes on the buffer beams even though they weren't fitted with steam generators. The later series of class 25 are a good example and possible also what became class 47/3 which also weren't built with boilers. I am assuming that there was a steel pipe built into the loco to get the steam from one end to the other - otherwise, it would be pretty pointless fitting the steam "bags" on each end.

As I understood it the 25 and 47 were built so that adding a boiler later was just a simple plug-in, with the piping already in place.
No idea if that plumbing would work as a through pipe, but intuitively it seems unlikely

 

[Strathclyder]

Would guess it's more to do with hydrostatic fan drive. Intercoolers at the exhaust end and 45s also intercooled.

spot on and its a git to work on

Cheers for clearing this matter up gents. I did think it was connected to the fans/cooling systems given it's proximity to the roof fan, nice to have it confirmed.

 

[D1537]

As I understood it the 25 and 47 were built so that adding a boiler later was just a simple plug-in, with the piping already in place.
No idea if that plumbing would work as a through pipe, but intuitively it seems unlikely

Yes, this is how I also understood it. Steam pipes != through pipes. I have never seen a picture of a 47/3 (D1782-D1836, D1875-D1900) being steamed through, or even just tucked inside a steam-heat loco. I would be intrigued to see one.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Yes, this is how I also understood it. Steam pipes != through pipes. I have never seen a picture of a 47/3 (D1782-D1836, D1875-D1900) being steamed through, or even just tucked inside a steam-heat loco. I would be intrigued to see one.

I haven't either but I think they were all built with a through steam pipe and steam "bags" on the buffer beams.