Reliability of hardworked Scotrail 47s

[GrimShady]

I’m struggling the think of any other loco class that have put in the same mileage as the Class 91s, unless you count Class 43 power cars. I know the XC 47s did a lot of miles but they didn’t exactly cover themselves in glory...

ScotRails 47/7s used to do somewhere in the region of 800 miles a day, they were knackered after 10 years.

 

[sjpowermac]

ScotRails 47/7s used to do somewhere in the region of 800 miles a day, they were knackered after 10 years.

Edinburgh to Glasgow is 44 miles, so by your ‘in the region of 800 miles’ that would be 18 trips each of about an hour long. I don’t have the loco diagrams but it seems a bit unlikely. You said it yourself, they only did it for ten years compared with the 30 years of the Class 91.

Don’t get me wrong, I’d prefer a 47 for haulage over a Class 91 but credit where it’s due, I think the 91s are often under rated for the work they have done.

 

[GrimShady]

Edinburgh to Glasgow is 44 miles, so by your ‘in the region of 800 miles’ that would be 18 trips each of about an hour long. I don’t have the loco diagrams but it seems a bit unlikely. You said it yourself, they only did it for ten years compared with the 30 years of the Class 91.

Don’t get me wrong, I’d prefer a 47 for haulage over a Class 91 but credit where it’s due, I think the 91s are often under rated for the work they have done.

I'll look up that source again. Remember they did Aberdeen too.

 

[sjpowermac]

I'll look up that source again. Remember they did Aberdeen too.

I don’t want you to think I’m doing the 47/7s down, they put in sterling work in Scotland

 

[hexagon789]

Edinburgh to Glasgow is 44 miles, so by your ‘in the region of 800 miles’ that would be 18 trips each of about an hour long. I don’t have the loco diagrams but it seems a bit unlikely.

47.25 miles via Falkirk High. Going from the 1988 diagrams some locos did up to 17 return trips - 803.25 miles, in 48 mins with 3 stops. Since 1985 they had been running at 100mph rather than the normal 95 for a 47, that coupled with the start-stop nature of the shuttle must've been pretty arduous for the locos.

 

[sjpowermac]

47.25 miles via Falkirk High. Going from the 1988 diagrams some locos did up to 17 return trips - 803.25 miles, in 48 mins with 3 stops. Since 1985 they had been running at 100mph rather than the normal 95 for a 47, that coupled with the start-stop nature of the shuttle must've been pretty arduous for the locos.

Many thanks for that! Happy to stand corrected

 

[nascar24]

ScotRails 47/7s used to do somewhere in the region of 800 miles a day, they were knackered after 10 years.

Some ended up on The Mule.

 

[hexagon789]

Many thanks for that! Happy to stand corrected

It wasn't that I wanted to correct you as such, rather confirm that they did indeed run 800 miles diagrams.

Some ended up on The Mule.

Indeed, and faired little better than the 50s from what I understand.

 

[sjpowermac]

It wasn't that I wanted to correct you as such, rather confirm that they did indeed run 800 miles diagrams.



Indeed, and faired little better than the 50s from what I understand.

I didn’t take it in a negative way at all
I’ve just read your posts on the 47/7 thread, fascinating to read the diagrams and the technical info behind the operation.

Quite so about the 47/7s on the Waterloo Exeter route!

 

[hexagon789]

I didn’t take it in a negative way at all

Glad to hear it

I’ve just read your posts on the 47/7 thread, fascinating to read the diagrams and the technical info behind the operation.

Thank you, but that knowledge is built up through bothering lots of people with lots of questions!

Quite so about the 47/7s on the Waterloo Exeter route!

I forget which loco, but one ended up with the Field Diverts wired up wrongly causing it to become a bit of a slug.

 

[dubscottie]

As I have posted here before, in the late 80s, the 47/7 had the highest TOPS hours of any BR owned loco (Yeoman 59 was higher but private).

Yes a HST power car might do more miles but TOPS hours were lower.
It is similar to how tractors or motocross bikes are maintained. Hours not miles between servicing.

 

[nascar24]

It wasn't that I wanted to correct you as such, rather confirm that they did indeed run 800 miles diagrams.



Indeed, and faired little better than the 50s from what I understand.

Howe the Laira crew made a Valiant effort to keep those Glorious ageing racehorses going i dont know but being Ajax of all trades helped.

 

[route:oxford]

Remember they did Aberdeen too.

As well as the 07:xx commuter runs starting at Dunblane.

Image (C) Mark Dufton from Railscot:-

https://www.railscot.co.uk/img/21/329/

 

[hexagon789]

Howe the Laira crew made a Valiant effort to keep those Glorious ageing racehorses going i dont know but being Ajax of all trades helped.

I think they did very well to keep the 47s going, as consensus seems to be they were that no better than 50s on terms of general reliablity, though being utterly thrashed on the Golden Triangle likely didn't help.

 

[Cowley]

I had some great runs behind the 47/7s on Waterloo - Exeter services in the 1990s, but it is probably fair to say that they were a little on the 'tired' side.
Availability of the 50s during 1991 was really poor at times too though and 33s had to fill the void frequently.
A few years before though the Scottish 47s (not just the 47/7s but all of them) looked amazing. What were the standard 47/4s based in Scotland like condition wise does anyone know though?
They always seemed to perform quite well whenever they made it this far west.

 

[306024]

47.25 miles via Falkirk High. Going from the 1988 diagrams some locos did up to 17 return trips - 803.25 miles, in 48 mins with 3 stops. Since 1985 they had been running at 100mph rather than the normal 95 for a 47, that coupled with the start-stop nature of the shuttle must've been pretty arduous for the locos.

That is pretty intensive work. Do you know what their maximum fuel range was? We used to plan on 500 miles for a normal 47.

 

[ac6000cw]

Didn't some 47's get extended range fuel tanks later on, using the tank space formerly used for steam heating boiler water?

 

[Cowley]

Didn't some 47's get extended range fuel tanks later on, using the tank space formerly used for steam heating boiler water?

What became the 47/8s had extended range fuel tanks on them.
I believe the 47/7s did as well although I don't know if it was the same arrangement as on the 47/8s had.

 

[hexagon789]

What were the standard 47/4s based in Scotland like condition wise does anyone know though?

Not really sure, but the 47/7s were maintained to a higher standard, being the pride of the fleet and all. Generally locos at the time would have the brake blocks replaced as and when required such as when being refuelled or undergoing a maintenence exam, with the 47/7s if they were "blocked" they'd get an A exam or if they got an A exam they would be blocked at the same time.

All that full service braking from 100mph wore out the blocks in no time I gather, even if the coaches gave more if the braking effort.

I don't think the 47/7s were as such less reliable, just more intensively used and more intensively maintained and therefore seemingly less reliable perhaps.

When they went south though, the dedicated maintenance of one depot went and this coupled with already being thrashed in Scotland took it's toll on their reliability.

That is pretty intensive work. Do you know what their maximum fuel range was? We used to plan on 500 miles for a normal 47.

A standard 47/4 was reckoned do 600 miles on a full tank, reduced to 500 on warm days with an ETS load of 12 coaches. A 47/7 could manage about 1100 miles.

Didn't some 47's get extended range fuel tanks later on, using the tank space formerly used for steam heating boiler water?

I believe so, but I forget how much additional capacity that gave.

What became the 47/8s had extended range fuel tanks on them.
I believe the 47/7s did as well although I don't know if it was the same arrangement as on the 47/8s had.

Exactly the same - 1220 gallons if I remember the figure correctly.

 

[Cowley]

Not really sure, but the 47/7s were maintained to a higher standard, being the pride of the fleet and all. Generally locos at the time would have the brake blocks replaced as and when required such as when being refuelled or undergoing a maintenence exam, with the 47/7s if they were "blocked" they'd get an A exam or if they got an A exam they would be blocked at the same time.

All that full service braking from 100mph wore out the blocks in no time I gather, even if the coaches gave more if the braking effort.

I don't think the 47/7s were as such less reliable, just more intensively used and more intensively maintained and therefore seemingly less reliable perhaps.

When they went south though, the dedicated maintenance of one depot went and this coupled with already being thrashed in Scotland took it's toll on their reliability.



A standard 47/4 was reckoned do 600 miles on a full tank, reduced to 500 on warm days with an ETS load of 12 coaches. A 47/7 could manage about 1100 miles.



I believe so, but I forget how much additional capacity that gave.



Exactly the same - 1220 gallons if I remember the figure correctly.

Interesting stuff Hexagon. Thanks.

 

[hexagon789]

Remember they did Aberdeen too.

In the early 1980s (about 1982), they did the two-hourly Glasgow-Perth and in the summers of 1984 and 1985, they operated a Sundays only Edinburgh-Inverness named "The Jacobite". In both cases the rake was formed with the ex-Edinburgh & Glasgow Mk2z stock with the Mk2f DBSO, this rake often also being used on the morning Edinburgh-Dunblane until that service became part of a normal Edinburgh & Glasgow shuttle diagram.

Quite a surprising variety of routes have been 47/7 push-pull at one point or another it seems.

Interesting stuff Hexagon. Thanks.

You're most welcome.

 

[GusB]

What became the 47/8s had extended range fuel tanks on them.
I believe the 47/7s did as well although I don't know if it was the same arrangement as on the 47/8s had.

Exactly the same - 1220 gallons if I remember the figure correctly.

I had a quick look at an old Ian Allan ABC (1989)
Class 47/4 - 720 gal, extended range 1295 gal (they hadn't been renumbered into the 478xx series at this point, although it was indicated that this may happen)
Class 47/7 - 1295 gal

 

[hexagon789]

I had a quick look at an old Ian Allan ABC (1989)
Class 47/4 - 720 gal, extended range 1295 gal (they hadn't been renumbered into the 478xx series at this point, although it was indicated that this may happen)
Class 47/7 - 1295 gal

I was slightly out then!

I think it was once reckoned on about a mile a gallon with the last 100-ish gallons unusable 'sludge'.

 

[47271]

It was a bit before my time, but my recollection from family members is that 47/7 reliability was absolutely diabolical towards the end, bear in mind they would've been 25 years old with ten hard years on the E&G by then. Although to be fair they were probably well maintained and perky enough for most of the 1980s.

In fact my very earliest proper railway memory is being sent into a siding, which I now know to be the Newbridge loop, on an Edinburgh to Glasgow express probably in 1990, and overtaken many times until we were rescued by a following set and tipped out at Linlithgow.

I have a very clear recollection of the words of explanation drily delivered by the guard. 'This is due to a fault in the locomotive.'

Sadly that's my, possibly unfair, lasting image of the 47/7s.

 

[GusB]

While we're reminiscing - I recall one journey north from Queen Street to Elgin on a push-pull set. My mother tends to be a nervous traveller and hates having to change trains, so when she found out there was a Glasgow - Inverness via Aberdeen run on a Sunday she made sure that was the train we caught on the way back from visiting grandparents. I'm fairly sure it was a blue/grey mk3 push-pull set (I'd been used to Mk2s, and this was something entirely different). The loco was definitely 47706 Strathclyde. I recall the section north of Dundee being quite exhilarating (was this bit 100mph?) with all the wee diddy stations flying past. I spent much of that journey with my head partially out of the window (Hindsight: not cool, don't try this, kids), and while the rest of those memories may have become a bit hazy as the years have progressed, my overwhelming recollection about that journey is of the old dear having a fit because my face was black with clag from the loco.

 

[randyrippley]

Some ended up on The Mule.

Only 700 miles/day there for a 47/7

 

[Taunton]

High mileage locomotives are not unnecessarily unreliable. It depends to a great extent on the maintenance schedule of the various components. Unfortunately there is a perpetual belief among engineers that, although loco costs reduce as the depreciation charge runs out, they will just continue with the same amount of maintenance as ever. It is quite within a mechancial engineer's remit to keep all the components up to the mark, but a don't bother/don't budget for it attitude sets in. The same is true of cleaning - where locos look filthy it is not because they are old; it's because nobody has bothered to clean them properly.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Worth remembering that the 47/7s were all converted from 47/4s, ie they were primarily passenger locos from new and as such had spent many hours/miles being worked hard at decent speeds even before entering the E&G maelstrom. It's actually a great credit to ScR maintenance staff that they performed as well as they did but also no surprise that they were rather tired by the time they were replaced by 158s on the route. Given that background it should have come as no surprise that they began to struggle on the WoE route; those 159s couldn't come soon enough!

 

[Cowley]

Worth remembering that the 47/7s were all converted from 47/4s, ie they were primarily passenger locos from new and as such had spent many hours/miles being worked hard at decent speeds even before entering the E&G maelstrom. It's actually a great credit to ScR maintenance staff that they performed as well as they did but also no surprise that they were rather tired by the time they were replaced by 158s on the route. Given that background it should have come as no surprise that they began to struggle on the WoE route; those 159s couldn't come soon enough!

This is true, although the enthusiast in me missed them when they were gone (even if the public didn't).
As an aside, I remember being in the front coach behind 47497 in about 1987 as it slowly got to grips with a 13 coach train out of Taunton on the run up to Whiteball.
It became 47717 not long after that and remains the only one of the original 47/7s that I had before it was converted.

A question about something though:
What were the extra pipes next to the fuel tanks for on the original push-pull batch?
Were they fuel or braking related?

 

[hexagon789]

It was a bit before my time, but my recollection from family members is that 47/7 reliability was absolutely diabolical towards the end, bear in mind they would've been 25 years old with ten hard years on the E&G by then. Although to be fair they were probably well maintained and perky enough for most of the 1980s.

In fact my very earliest proper railway memory is being sent into a siding, which I now know to be the Newbridge loop, on an Edinburgh to Glasgow express probably in 1990, and overtaken many times until we were rescued by a following set and tipped out at Linlithgow.

I have a very clear recollection of the words of explanation drily delivered by the guard. 'This is due to a fault in the locomotive.'

Sadly that's my, possibly unfair, lasting image of the 47/7s.

Up until about 1988 they were about as reliable as a normal 47/4, after that while they were maintained as well as possible I think it became known they were getting replaced and so there perhaps wasn't the same level of impetus as before.

While we're reminiscing - I recall one journey north from Queen Street to Elgin on a push-pull set. My mother tends to be a nervous traveller and hates having to change trains, so when she found out there was a Glasgow - Inverness via Aberdeen run on a Sunday she made sure that was the train we caught on the way back from visiting grandparents. I'm fairly sure it was a blue/grey mk3 push-pull set (I'd been used to Mk2s, and this was something entirely different). The loco was definitely 47706 Strathclyde. I recall the section north of Dundee being quite exhilarating (was this bit 100mph?) with all the wee diddy stations flying past. I spent much of that journey with my head partially out of the window (Hindsight: not cool, don't try this, kids), and while the rest of those memories may have become a bit hazy as the years have progressed, my overwhelming recollection about that journey is of the old dear having a fit because my face was black with clag from the loco

Certainly in the late 1980s there was a booked Sunday Inverness-Aberdeen-Glasgow formed of a Mk2 air-con push-pull rake but booked for a 47/4. The Mk3 stock was all in ScotRail by 1985.

100mph was only authorised from May 1985 and only at that point on Edinburgh-Glasgow. From May 1986 it applied on Glasgow-Aberdeen as well. Until those dates the 47/7s were still 95mph machines, indeed if a 47/7 missed it 'special maintenance' as it were, it reverted to 95mph.

The 100mph sections in the 1980s are broadly as now, Dundee-Arbroath is mostly HST 100 and 47/7 push-pull sets were allowed to use these differentials at the time.

Worth remembering that the 47/7s were all converted from 47/4s, ie they were primarily passenger locos from new and as such had spent many hours/miles being worked hard at decent speeds even before entering the E&G maelstrom. It's actually a great credit to ScR maintenance staff that they performed as well as they did but also no surprise that they were rather tired by the time they were replaced by 158s on the route. Given that background it should have come as no surprise that they began to struggle on the WoE route; those 159s couldn't come soon enough!

They only managed as they did in Scotland because of the care and attention they were given.

A question about something though:
What were the extra pipes next to the fuel tanks for on the original push-pull batch?
Were they fuel or braking related?

Braking. They are part of the compressor cooling system for the air brakes. Normal 47s' compressors only ran when a key was in the desk, the 47/7s were modified so they would run without a key in, when in propelling mode. The compressors were running for longer and note frequently and thus getting hotter.

They were effectively part of an aftercooler to deal with excessive moisture build up which was causing failures, these were an addition, the first batch of locos didn't have them from conversion, the later batch did.

Nevertheless, it didn't succeed in increasing reliability as I understand it.