Top & Tail

[Condor7]

I notice that most loco hauled passenger trains (although not all) are top & tail, and have always assumed that this was to provide a back up if the leading loco failed for some reason, but is there more to it than that?

The reason I mention it is that for reasons I cannot fully explain I do not like it. I appreciate from a 'spotters' point of view you are getting two loco's for the price of one, but to me it just does not look right. I love seeing (especially at speed) a loco with a rake of carriages passing by, but somehow having another loco at the back looks wrong to me.

Am I the only one who thinks this way?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I notice that most loco hauled passenger trains (although not all) are top & tail, and have always assumed that this was to provide a back up if the leading loco failed for some reason, but is there more to it than that?....

That is one reason, maybe the train has to reverse direction on the route and there is no space or line capacity to 'run round', maybe the loco at the back provides heat/power to the train because the loco at the front can't. There's probably many more reasons.

 

[jopsuk]

in almost all cases the second loco is not running (or at most is providing ETH power) as the carriages generally won't be wired for through running. The second loco is needed because most terminals don't have run around facilities or nearby carriage sidings plus a station pilot- note that oddly enough the sleepers still use the latter arrangement. Such facilities were done away with to provide wider platforms, more platforms or to sell the carriage siding land off for development as it was no longer needed once trains had controls at both ends, be via a driving trailer, two power cars or because they're MUs.

The only operation that did use top and tail "proper locomotives" was when the Edinburgh-Glasgow shuttle used class 27s- which unusually actually replaced Class 126 1st generation DMUs

 

[chubs]

I notice that most loco hauled passenger trains (although not all) are top & tail

Are they though?

Surely they majority of loco hauled stock is all the VTEC and GA rakes, which have a DVT on one end.

 

[D6975]

The only operation that did use top and tail "proper locomotives" was when the Edinburgh-Glasgow shuttle used class 27s- which unusually actually replaced Class 126 1st generation DMUs

The Anglia short rake that goes to Gt Yarmouth and Lowestoft is through wired, both locos are in use all the time.

 

[47802]

I notice that most loco hauled passenger trains (although not all) are top & tail, and have always assumed that this was to provide a back up if the leading loco failed for some reason, but is there more to it than that?

The reason I mention it is that for reasons I cannot fully explain I do not like it. I appreciate from a 'spotters' point of view you are getting two loco's for the price of one, but to me it just does not look right. I love seeing (especially at speed) a loco with a rake of carriages passing by, but somehow having another loco at the back looks wrong to me.

Am I the only one who thinks this way?

I would say it has very little to do with that become more common in recent years due to increasing lack of run round facilities and Loco haulage substituting for units with turn round time which is not long enough to perform a Loco run round.

In many respects its not ideal because your basically dragging an extra 3 coaches around with dead loco unless you have a through wired train like the Anglia set, and hence the move to DBSO's on the Cumbrian coast.

Remember in the old days when a Loco Hauled train got to a terminus you would frequently stick another loco on the front, and when that train went out it would release the loco at the rear of that train for the next working, which is fine when you have plenty
of Loco Hauled trains, now there are few its not very viable to do that, or even where it might still be viable to do that more efficient to use a Driving Trailer.

 

[QueensCurve]

I notice that most loco hauled passenger trains (although not all) are top & tail, and have always assumed that this was to provide a back up if the leading loco failed for some reason, but is there more to it than that?

The reason I mention it is that for reasons I cannot fully explain I do not like it. I appreciate from a 'spotters' point of view you are getting two loco's for the price of one, but to me it just does not look right. I love seeing (especially at speed) a loco with a rake of carriages passing by, but somehow having another loco at the back looks wrong to me.

Am I the only one who thinks this way?

The railway worked out in the mid 1980s that one of the biggest costs was the manpower needed to couple and uncouple locomotives. Add to this lack of run-around facilities etc, etc.

It does look inelegant because it is wasteful. What grates most of all is when you see an "electrically hauled" excursion with a diesel loco bringing up the rear.

 

[edwin_m]

Are they though?

Surely they majority of loco hauled stock is all the VTEC and GA rakes, which have a DVT on one end.

But they are only being hauled half the time...

 

[6Gman]

I would say it has very little to do with that become more common in recent years due to increasing lack of run round facilities and Loco haulage substituting for units with turn round time which is not long enough to perform a Loco run round.

In many respects its not ideal because your basically dragging an extra 3 coaches around with dead loco unless you have a through wired train like the Anglia set, and hence the move to DBSO's on the Cumbrian coast.

Remember in the old days when a Loco Hauled train got to a terminus you would frequently stick another loco on the front, and when that train went out it would release the loco at the rear of that train for the next working, which is fine when you have plenty
of Loco Hauled trains, now there are few its not very viable to do that, or even where it might still be viable to do that more efficient to use a Driving Trailer.

It also added umpteen extra LD/LE moves which would be very difficult at somewhere like Euston nowadays.

 

[221129]

I notice that most loco hauled passenger trains (although not all) are top & tail

I cannot think of one regular Loco hauled passenger service (other than the Gt Yarmouth short set) that runs top and tail?

 

[thetangoman]

I cannot think of one regular Loco hauled passenger service (other than the Gt Yarmouth short set) that runs top and tail?

What about every HST set

 

[455driver]

I cannot think of one regular Loco hauled passenger service (other than the Gt Yarmouth short set) that runs top and tail?

Any HST set!

 

[sprinterguy]

I cannot think of one regular Loco hauled passenger service (other than the Gt Yarmouth short set) that runs top and tail?

Not regular (which was never specified by the OP), but railtours, particularly West Coast Railway operated ones, often operate with a loco front and rear.

I appreciate that railtours certainly aren't regular traffic and you have a point, though.

 

[221129]

What about every HST set

Though are they classed as locos? *Runs for cover*

 

[thetangoman]

Though are they classed as locos? *Runs for cover*

You know they are

 

[Steve14]

Though are they classed as locos? *Runs for cover*

They are classified as power cars not loco hauled. Loco hauled would only mean that the front loco is doing all the work whilst the rear one is providing power supplies for the train. Whereas a HST has two power cars which power the entire train and provide traction from either end.

 

[455driver]

They are classified as power cars not loco hauled. Loco hauled would only mean that the front loco is doing all the work whilst the rear one is providing power supplies for the train. Whereas a HST has two power cars which power the entire train and provide traction from either end.

That is so wrong it is nearly funny.
So you are saying that the 27s used on the Edinburger to Glasgow Queen Street trains were not top and tailing the train! :roll:

Top and Tail means that both locos are powering just like the 27s did and the HSTs do.

If the rear isnt powering then it is DoR (dead on rear), a loco on the back would either be powering or switched off, it wont just be running to provide ETS to the train.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

They are classified as power cars not loco hauled. Loco hauled would only mean that the front loco is doing all the work whilst the rear one is providing power supplies for the train. Whereas a HST has two power cars which power the entire train and provide traction from either end.

That is so wrong it is nearly funny.
So you are saying that the 27s used on the Edinburger to Glasgow Queen Street trains were not top and tailing the train! :roll:

Top and Tail means that both locos are powering just like the 27s did and the HSTs do.

If the rear isnt powering then it is DoR (dead on rear), a loco on the back would either be powering or switched off, it wont just be running to provide ETS to the train.

That's the danger of trying to find logic on the railway: given how many enthusiasts seem to be on the autistic spectrum (guilty as charged!) or have some form of OCD it's understandable that we try to pigeonhole everything... But outside of things covered by safety regulations there's as many exceptions as there are rules!

For the record, HST power cars are classified as locomotives so would technically qualify as loco-hauled... But then there's HST variables with regard to linespeeds, so the truth is who knows!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....If the rear isnt powering then it is DoR (dead on rear), a loco on the back would either be powering or switched off, it wont just be running to provide ETS to the train.

Even if the lead loco is not capable of providing ETS?

What classification would you give to the early 91/HST hybrid sets on the ECML?

....But then there's HST variables with regard to linespeeds, so the truth is who knows!

I don't think you can use line speed differentials to classify. Last I heard:

HST covers IC 225s, classes 158, 159, 168, 170, 171, 172, 175, 180, 220, 221, 222, 253, 254 and 373.

SP covers classes 150, 153, 155, 156, 158, 159, 165, 166, 168, 170, 171 and 172.

MU and DMU do not cover class 185.

MU and EMU do not cover class 390.

Class 253 and 254 trains formed with less than three coaches between the power cars are not permitted to run at MU or DMU speeds.

 

[jopsuk]

The prototype HST power cars were classified as Class 41 locos, then reclassified as carriages in a Class 252 DMU in the 43xxx series. The production power cars were given 43xxx cariage numbers as part of class 253 and 254, but later for some purposes regarded as Class 43 locomotives (though as noted, for some other purposes class 253 and 254 still appear in official documents.

As others have said, they are not pigeonholed easily. The HST is the wave-particle duality of the british railway world.

 

[dk1]

This should keep you happy

 

[Steve14]

That's the danger of trying to find logic on the railway: given how many enthusiasts seem to be on the autistic spectrum (guilty as charged!) or have some form of OCD it's understandable that we try to pigeonhole everything... But outside of things covered by safety regulations there's as many exceptions as there are rules!

For the record, HST power cars are classified as locomotives so would technically qualify as loco-hauled... But then there's HST variables with regard to linespeeds, so the truth is who knows!

Ok then your closing statement can suggest your opening statement is not valid right?

This should keep you happy

Now this is spectacular! Do you reckon 125 group may loan a spare power car if they can and get it wrapped in the same livery to make it a mini HST?

 

[richieb1971]

i've seen many steam charters with diesels on the back screaming their engine up hill.

If I were a steam paying customer I don't like the diesel on the back. For all you know the steam engine on the front is doing nothing except looking cool at the front whilst the diesel does most of the donkey work.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

i've seen many steam charters with diesels on the back screaming their engine up hill.

If I were a steam paying customer I don't like the diesel on the back. For all you know the steam engine on the front is doing nothing except looking cool at the front whilst the diesel does most of the donkey work.

That's because kettles are rubbish! (Only kidding! Where's my tin helmet?!)

 

[455driver]

Even if the lead loco is not capable of providing ETS?

I was talking about normal service trains, on kettle expresses it would be classed as top and tail because the rear loco would occasionally be providing some/most of the power.

What classification would you give to the early 91/HST hybrid sets on the ECML?

Top and tail because both were providing traction power (I will ignore the first 4 months of ETS only from the HST PC ).

 

[Condor7]

This should keep you happy

Your right it does, it looks so much better.

Funnily enough I went to photograph this at Penrith station on Friday morning just after 9am. It was due to come through platform 1, so I got myself positioned on platform 2 ready to take my shot, when a Pendolino pulled into platform 2 just as the class 37 came through completely blocking my view. :roll:

 

[dk1]

Now this is spectacular! Do you reckon 125 group may loan a spare power car if they can and get it wrapped in the same livery to make it a mini HST?

 

[Trainfan344]

The Anglia short rake that goes to Gt Yarmouth and Lowestoft is through wired, both locos are in use all the time.

Except for when 37 422 is on it and it becomes a loco and a DVT

 

[TheEdge]

Except for when 37 422 is on it and it becomes a loco and a DVT

No, then it becomes a failure

 

[Steve14]

That would be the icing on the cake. Original headlights with a Paxman Valenta engine