• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Missing Diesel Classes ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bright Boy

Member
Joined
3 Mar 2014
Messages
217
Location
Sale
Here's a question (I've got loads), here's one that's probably cropped up on here before but I cannot find a thread of such so far.

Going through the TOPS Classes as allocated in 1967, many years ago I had noticed several apparently 'missing' no.s. I have been trying to identify such ever since (on and off)

Given that BR used all the no's in sequence for each type (e.g. Type 2 = Classes 21-31, Type 4 = Classes 40-53), it appears some are missing or possibly not identified (by me that is!)

This is the original list of Classification (as what I have read of) :-

Class no.s 01-07 were for Shunters of 150-300hp
Class no.s 08-13 were for Shunters of 350-400hp
Class no.s 15-20 for Type 1 Locos 800-1000hp
Class no.s 21-31 for Type 2 Locos 1001-1499hp
Class no.s 33-37 for Type 3 locos 1500-1999hp
Class no.s 40-53 for Type 4 Locos 2000-2999hp
Class no.s 55-up for Type 5 Locos 3000+hp


It seems that BR were trying to keep to a Type/number system i.e. 0-09 for shunters, 10-19 for Type 1, 20-29 for Type 2, 30-39 for Type 3, 40-49 for Type 4 and 50-59 for Type 5, but because in some Types there were more loco classes than they had the 10 numbers for, it ended up going awry.

But just from this list immediately I see some no.s missing !! Classes 14, 32, 38 & 39 and Class 54

Class 14 is easy - an oddity (shunter or Type 1 loco ?) as a Trip Loco which were put in the D9500 no. series in the 1955 numbering system (I don't think BR could decide if it was a Shunter or a Type 1 Loco ?)

Class 32 ? Does anyone know if there was Class 32 allocated to any locos ?

Just going by the no. I believe it could be for a Type 2 or 3 loco, and my guess is it was allocated to a Type 2 loco which was still in use in 1967, the NBL prototype 10800 which had been in service since 1950 and was re-engined by Brush in 1962. My guess is it was this loco that was given the Class 32 but as it was withdrawn in 1968 (just 1 year after the Classifications were allocated) it has since been forgotten, does anyone have any ideas or argument for/against this suggestion ?

I believe Classes 38 & 39 were not allocated as there just wasn't enough Type 3 locos to fill the numbering system up, however I have since discovered that there was a Loco designed in the 1980's based on Class 58, but with less power that was allocated Class 38, but not built.

Class 54 ? was this a Type 4 or Type 5 no. ?, maybe it would have been saved for a future Type 4 ? or could it possibly been allocated as a Type 5 to HS4000 Kestrel ? although this loco was never put it capital stock, being on loan from Brush, and it was not introduced until January 1968. However it was being built in 1967, maybe BR gave it a classification on the distinct possibility that this prototype being built could manifest into a class of loco's in service ? any arguments/suggestions ?

And what of the no.s within the numbering system (above) that have apparently not been allocated to any class of loco ?

Classes 18 & 19 ? I have no idea about this, maybe BR just did not have enough Type 1 Loco's to fill that section ? but if that is the case why were the EE Type 1's (future Class 20's) allocated Class 20, skipping 18 & 19 ??

Class 30 is another easy one which I discovered a long time ago are what 31's were before being re-engined.

Class 34 ? No loco class for this no. ? I read somewhere recently (I can't remember where or in what publication ?) that the prototypes 10000 & 10001 were allocated Class 34 ? why 10000 I don't know as this was withdrawn in 1963, however 10001 was still in service until March 1966 ! as neither were not yet scrapped maybe they were given the allocation just in case, they were in the same power range ?

Class 36 ? Could this have possibly been allocated to the Brush Type 2's (future class 31) D5545 & D5655-D5670 which were uprated to 1600hp ?

Class 48 was allocated to Brush Type 4's D1702-D1706, but these were re-engine to the same as the other Brush Type 4's before Tops numbering.

Class 49 ? the only suggestion I have for this would be DP2 ? which was in service (as a prototype) until it was damaged in an accident in 1967.
It was in the Type 4 range and led onto what became the Class 50's, what do you think ?

Class 53 was D1200 (D0280 as a prototype)

Have I missed any ?


How about the electric Classes also ? I know that Class 70 were 20001-20003, Class 72 was allocated to what were the JA's E6001-E6006 and Class 80 was E2001, what about 78-79 ?

Replies are most eagerly anticipated !!
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bright Boy

Member
Joined
3 Mar 2014
Messages
217
Location
Sale
61-65 are unused, as is 69.

You are quite correct, I did not bring them into the discussion as they are much later, and from what I have heard, not used as they would conflict with dmu/emu unit no.s in modern (computer based) thinking.

But if you have any ideas if there were any locos suggested or designed but never built that were allocated those Class no.s I would be most welcome to hear about them.

I did hear a rumour somewhere that a Class 65 was allocated to a loco design that never got off the ground ? but I am not sure if that is true ?

Maybe Class 69 is for a future loco, however it does beg to be understood why the General Electric Type 5's were given Class 70 and not 68 or 69 ? Do those classes conflict with EMU unit no.s ? I don't have much info about EMU's so I have not checked the no's used by them.

in a modern update of the Tops Class numbering system Type 5 Diesels are now allocated No.s into the 70's, instead of the DC Electric Loco's. I did have a downloaded document about this new Loco Classification system but I seem to have deleted it ?
I have found it ! New Classification system in 2011, Diesel Loco's are to be Classified 10-79
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Class 18 was a proposed new type 1 but it was never built

You may be right, I did not mention it at first, but I heard something about that also, possibly around the Class 58's in the 1980's, apparently they were suggesting Type 1 (18), Type 3 (38), and Electric (88) locos all based on the same design as what became the Class 58's ?

Maybe someone will have more info to that they may pass onto us ?
 
Last edited:

MK Tom

Established Member
Joined
31 Aug 2011
Messages
2,458
Location
Milton Keynes
66s were originally going to be 61s I believe.

Interesting that you didn't mention class 51, which was a proposed but never built Deltic derivative.
 

Bright Boy

Member
Joined
3 Mar 2014
Messages
217
Location
Sale
66s were originally going to be 61s I believe.

Interesting that you didn't mention class 51, which was a proposed but never built Deltic derivative.

I believe you are right about the 66's, EMU unit no. clashes I'm led to believe ?

Yes I did not mention Class 51 missed that one!!, (I was waiting for someone to spot that one, as Capt. Mainwaring would have said:roll:) I'm glad someone is reading my post in detail ]:roll:

I don't have any idea about any loco allocated Class 51, what you have said I have never heard about before, I did consider that for a prototype such as DP2, but that didn't seem to fit, and I have not found any loco that might fit ?

Do you have any more info about the Deltic derivative ?
 
Last edited:

Ash Bridge

Established Member
Joined
17 Mar 2014
Messages
4,214
Location
Stockport
But if you have any ideas if there were any locos suggested or designed but never built that were allocated those Class no.s I would be most welcome to hear about them.

I did hear a rumour somewhere that a Class 65 was allocated to a loco design that never got off the ground ? but I am not sure if that is true ?

I believe did BR did have a proposal to introduce a class 65 locomotive, it was intended to be based on the 60 but with a 4500hp Mirrlees power unit installed and a top speed of 75mph making it more suitable for Freightliner type work than the 60mph class 60 loco's.
 

Bright Boy

Member
Joined
3 Mar 2014
Messages
217
Location
Sale
I believe did BR did have a proposal to introduce a class 65 locomotive, it was intended to be based on the 60 but with a 4500hp Mirrlees power unit installed and a top speed of 75mph making it more suitable for Freightliner type work than the 60mph class 60 loco's.

Interesting

Shame they never built that !!

I have found another list of classification, and it states that Type 2 locos were allocated Classes 21-32, so my idea about it being a Type 2 rather than a Type 3 could be correct and it being 10800 has more credence possibly ?

and it also states there was a Class 34 (for Type 3 locos), it was allocated to locos what became sub-class 33/1, so my assumption that it may have been for 10001 is failing, but I have no other info to back this up about the 33/1 sub-class

I did not mention about Class 93, an electric loco that was proposed but also did not get off the ground, however they might yet use that Class no. ?
 
Last edited:

tjlrailblue

Member
Joined
20 Sep 2013
Messages
120
What dmu numbers are missing?

Someone with knowledge can perhaps just list class 100 to 185 and highlight any missing numbers!

Tim
 

MK Tom

Established Member
Joined
31 Aug 2011
Messages
2,458
Location
Milton Keynes
I think there were 130s as well, parcels units?
I heard 152 would've been a single car 156 but that could be crap!

Let's do EMUs:

300/301?
316 was a prototype I believe
324
326-331
335-349 (Crossrail units in there somewhere)
351-356
358/9
361-364
366-369
371/2
381-386
388/9
391-4 and 96-98

We really didn't need to invent the 700 series did we!
 
Last edited:

GrimsbyPacer

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2014
Messages
2,254
Location
Grimsby
Don't forget that the class numbers can be reused, if there's a need in the future some locos will become heritage class and the old number can be used for a new Loco. Class 43 for example was the "Warships" (Corrected) and now it's HSTs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,350
Location
Yorkshire
The 156-152 idea was a thing, but I don't think it got any further than the drawing board. Looking at the inner ends of 156 cars it's easy to see why, as new cabs would be even more cramped than the ones on 153s. Also the 156s worked pretty much out-of-the-box whereas the 155s had a lot of issues that needed rectifying anyway.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
though the HST "Class 43" wasn't originally a locomotive, "43xxx" was the carriage number range for the power cars of the Class 253/Class 254 DMUs
 

Ash Bridge

Established Member
Joined
17 Mar 2014
Messages
4,214
Location
Stockport
I've just been in the loft to dig out some of my old Ian Allan Combine's and after blowing off several decades of dust, I was in for a mighty surprise!

On perusing the 1975 edition there were 1st generation DMU's of class 142 Derby Works DTC, Class 143 Gloucester RC&W DTC, Class 144 Metro Cam DTC

There were also 1st gen versions of classes 165/166/168/171/172/175/180/185. plus lots more too numerous to list here, was totally unaware of these classes until now.
 

D6975

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2009
Messages
3,049
Location
Bristol
I've just been in the loft to dig out some of my old Ian Allan Combine's and after blowing off several decades of dust, I was in for a mighty surprise!

On perusing the 1975 edition there were 1st generation DMU's of class 142 Derby Works DTC, Class 143 Gloucester RC&W DTC, Class 144 Metro Cam DTC

There were also 1st gen versions of classes 165/166/168/171/172/175/180/185. plus lots more too numerous to list here, was totally unaware of these classes until now.

It's because originally the trailer cars had their own separate class numbers. Later on the power and trailer cars of one type were all given the same class number.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The 156-152 idea was a thing, but I don't think it got any further than the drawing board. Looking at the inner ends of 156 cars it's easy to see why, as new cabs would be even more cramped than the ones on 153s. Also the 156s worked pretty much out-of-the-box whereas the 155s had a lot of issues that needed rectifying anyway.

The proposed single car version of the 156 was to be new build, not conversions IIRC, so this would not have been an issue.
 

Ash Bridge

Established Member
Joined
17 Mar 2014
Messages
4,214
Location
Stockport
It's because originally the trailer cars had their own separate class numbers. Later on the power and trailer cars of one type were all given the same class number.

Ah yes, just reading a bit more now, all the powered vehicles seem to have the class numbers that we more familiarly recognise the units by eg. 100/101 etc. never realised that, probably because back then I didn't have a great interest in units, was always a loco person,

Thanks!
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,350
Location
Yorkshire
It's because originally the trailer cars had their own separate class numbers. Later on the power and trailer cars of one type were all given the same class number.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The proposed single car version of the 156 was to be new build, not conversions IIRC, so this would not have been an issue.

In that case, what a shame it didn't happen!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top