DMU basic questions

[Andy873]

Firstly, I want to say thank you to all of you who contributed to my WTT query topic, it was very much appreciated!

The 1963 passenger WTT I was talking about threw up some very interesting facts, but I now realise there is a very big gap in my knowledge about DMUs. I travelled on them many times but really didn't pay too much attention to them more the train rides themselves.

So here are my very basic questions:

The car that the driver sits in - is this called the end car?
BR seems to use the word car now instead of carriage?
Could you just have a one car (end car) running on its own?
If there was a middle car, did this also have an engine under it?
How would multiple car engines be controlled, e.g. by electric circuit?

Jonathan posted a link to d1, d2, d3 etc timings, it mentions:

Motor cars, are these the "end cars" where the driver sits?
It also mentions "Trailers", are these the cars in between the "end cars"?
Trail traffic is also mentioned, what does that mean?

I know these are very basic questions but it would be nice to get a little help on these please.

Thanks,
Andy.

 

[Harpers Tate]

1: Typically, all cars (coaches) with cabs were referred to as "Driving....." something. Like DMS (Driving Motor Second); DMBS (Driving Motor Brake Second); DTBC (Driving Trailer Brake Composite). Personally I don't recall any specific term used for whichever vehicle happened to be at the front - except, perhaps "Front Coach".
2: In this context, I'd consider these terms interchangeable. "This train is formed of four coaches" is a phrase we see today.
3: I'm sure one could technically (but, clearly, only in one direction). There were a handful of single car/coach DMUs - "bubble cars" - which had a driving end at both ends. A couple of these remained in use until quite recently (Cardiff Bay and Bedford/Bletchley come to mind).
4: Typically no. But some classes (eg class 124) did have such provision. Many 2-car sets in their original formation had engines under only one of the two, the other being a Driving Trailer.
5: That, I don't know for sure.

 

[AndyW33]

Firstly, I want to say thank you to all of you who contributed to my WTT query topic, it was very much appreciated!

The 1963 passenger WTT I was talking about threw up some very interesting facts, but I now realise there is a very big gap in my knowledge about DMUs. I travelled on them many times but really didn't pay too much attention to them more the train rides themselves.

So here are my very basic questions:

The car that the driver sits in - is this called the end car?
BR seems to use the word car now instead of carriage?
Could you just have a one car (end car) running on its own?
If there was a middle car, did this also have an engine under it?
How would multiple car engines be controlled, e.g. by electric circuit?

Jonathan posted a link to d1, d2, d3 etc timings, it mentions:

Motor cars, are these the "end cars" where the driver sits?
It also mentions "Trailers", are these the cars in between the "end cars"?
Trail traffic is also mentioned, what does that mean?

I know these are very basic questions but it would be nice to get a little help on these please.

Thanks,
Andy.

In response to your questions about Jonathan's post:
Motor Cars are the ones with motors (!) that is, they have diesel engines onboard. As explained in the previous post, there can be driving cars with no engines (Driving Trailers), or intermediate cars with engines but no cabs.
In DMU-speak, trailers are cars with no engines, they might be fitted with driving cabs, or cabless and marshalled in between two Driving Motor vehicles.
You've got confused between Trailers (which are part of the DMU fleet) and Tail Traffic. The latter is where a DMU pulls a parcels or goods van (and very occasionally some other sort of goods vehicle). This goes right back to the 1930s when horseboxes might also be pulled. The key thing is that the vehicle being pulled must have the same braking system as the DMU! There were specially built Diesel Parcels Units (still classed as DMUs and capable of being worked in multiple with passenger units) which did some of the pulling, but passenger units did it too - just necessary to make sure there was enough power available to handle the load, so single units, two car units with both cars powered, or three car units with a power car each end would be used.

 

[jfollows]

My post ( #19 ) talks of "motor coach" and "trailer" (in the table I originally found at https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/140252-wtt-timing-load-d1-d2-d3-etc/) and the difference is that the former has engines under it whereas the latter has none. To a non-interested observer there's no difference other than perhaps greater noise when riding in a motor coach! A motor coach can be at the end of a DMU, in which case it will have a driving cab, or it can be in the middle of a DMU, in which case it won't.
The same post refers to "tail traffic" and D1(T) classification in which a further coach could be attached to the back of a DMU.
I hope I've not confused things because others have posted similar explanations.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2021 ==

Your other question refers to control systems, and I point you at https://www.railcar.co.uk/technology/controls/coupling-codes/ for this. There were different electrical control systems for multiple units, and the sectional appendix indirectly notes that the drivers were provided with indications for the operation of all the motor coaches under their control, in that only some driving cabs provided indications for six motor coaches, and different standards existed: red triangle, yellow diamond, white circle, orange star and blue square. As long as two DMUs had the same coupling code they could be joined and operated as a single unit.
For example: (https://www.railcar.co.uk/technology/electrical-control-system/yellow-diamond/)

The principle differences between the Yellow Diamond and the later Blue Square control system:

• no relays for communication with other vehicles.
• circuits had a common + rather than common -
• the throttle control cicuits
• there was no dedicated engine stop for the full train, a throttle circuit was used
• in the cab there was an individual start button for each engine on a train, the blue square system had just two, one for all left the left side engines and one for all the right one

also (https://www.railcar.co.uk/technology/electrical-control-system/)

The electrical system not only controlled the equipment on the same vehicle, but on other vehicles in the formation.

The technology evolved quickly in the early years when the vehicles were being built leading to several different systems, which we now identify by the coupling codes, these were introduced to show which DMUs could be coupled together.

In the early Red Triangle and Yellow Diamond systems relays were not used in the communication between vehicles, and the battery power in the leading vehicle was being directly used to operate equipment on all power cars in a formation, which led to power issues and slow response times at the rear of a longer train.

For the White Circle system relays were introduced, meaning the leading power car only sent a signal to all the power cars in the formation, the relay connected the battery on that power car to operate the item in question. Another change that is believed to have happened at this time was a change from common positive to common negative circuits.

The Yellow Diamond and (79xxx series) White Circle vehicles shared the same cab controls (AEC type), a 'cowhorn' type throttle handle and a gear controller which could rotate 360 degrees. The throttle motor (which controlled the speed of the engine) was of a complicated design.

The Blue Square system introduced a new set of cab controls ('Sharps' type) and a simplified throttle motor, with associated changes in wiring.

The throttle on the Orange Star was based on a variable air pressure rather than electrics, a system common on locomotives, and an extra air pipe was fitted throughout the train to control the engine speed. That reduced the electrical circuits needed, and there were no need for gear circuits as these were hydraulic, so only one jumper was needed rather than two on each bufferbeam (although it was slighly larger).

Here's a blue square "Derby Lightweight" (later class 108) end picture: (https://www.svr-dmu.org.uk)

Finally, I should just say that I'm no expert on DMUs, it's simply that I also remember them from my earlier days, and I've found it interesting to dig around to find the answers to your questions, the information was only something I "kind of knew" so it was good to remind myself better.
Really finally, here are the original set formations for the Class 108 DMUs (there is an error with the last line in the original - or at least a lack of clarity - which I think I have fixed): (https://www.railcar.co.uk/type/class-108/numbering) in which you can see the "M" motor coaches, "T" trailer coaches and "D" driving coaches with the latter at the ends of the formations of course. I have added the D1/D2/D3 specification to each formation type myself.

Power/trailers (total 106) (D1)
1958 - DMBS E50599 - 50619 DTC E56190 - 56210
DMBS M50625 - 50629 DTC M56211 - 56215
1959 - DMBS M50938 - 50987 DTC M56221 - 56270
1960 - DMBS M51416 - 51424 DTC M56271 - 56279
DMBS M51901 - 51921 DTC M56484 - 56504
Power twins (total 41) (D3)
1959 DMBS M50924 - 50935 DMC M51561 - 51572
1960 DMBS M51922 - 51950 DMC M52037 - 52065
3-car sets (total 5) (D2)
1958 DMBS E50620 - 50624 TSL E59386 - 59390 DMC E50642 - 50646
4-car sets (total 6) (D1)
1958 2xDMC E50630 - 50641 TBS E59245 - 59250 TSL E59380 - 59385
In later years, 4-car sets were reformed into 3-car units by removing the TS vehicle, the TS was then available to be inserted in a power twin. This was done during the 1980s producing 3-car sets for LMR depots such as Buxton (BX) and Chester (CH).

"S" second
"C" composite
"L" lavatory
”B” brake
Each coach number is preceded by its "owning" region letter - M for London Midland or E for Eastern

 

[30907]

A couple of supplementary comments (all the rest have I think been answered):
"Car" is an Americanism imported by the District Railway but now universal (internally/enthusiasts, but less so in public announcements).
"Motor" is what appears in the official designation (MBS etc) but for DMUs my impression that "power car" is normal usage.

 

[jupiter]

How would multiple car engines be controlled, e.g. by electric circuit?

There are five throttle positions, idle, 1, 2, 3 and 4. Moving the throttle control to 1 energises "Throttle 1" wire all the way down the train from one end to the other via the jumper cables. (Ditto for 2, 3 & 4 except they also activate the previous position as well, ie position 2 energises Throttle 2 & Throttle 1 wires, position 3 energises Throttle 3 & Throttle 2 wires.) I understand this is so the previous position is already active when you come back down off the throttle, and if, let's say motor 4 fails to operate for some reason, then you would at least get position 3 rather than drop that engine back to idle.

In each driving car there are EP (electropneumatic) valves, one for each throttle position 1, 2, 3 & 4, that respond to the energised wire. The electrical signal (eg Throttle 1) opens the relevant EP valve to let air pressure past and operate the 'motor' ('motor' - imagine a tube connected to a syringe and then blowing in the tube, the part of the syringe that moves would be the 'motor'). This movement physically opens the throttle the appropriate amount.

The physical movement of the throttle connection on each engine therefore is by 'motors' powered by air pressure, referred to as "control air". This is generated by a compressor on each engine, is pressure-regulated and accumulated/stored in cylinders under the sole bar.

 

[matchmaker]

Trail traffic - should be Tail traffic. On some routes (specified in Sectional Appendices) DMUs were permitted to haul other vehicles up to a maximum weight - either 15 or 30 tons. There were other restrictions, depending on the route and type of unit. I'm not sure what vehicles would be hauled, but I'd suspect vans or milk tanks. Maybe someone else knows?

 

[delt1c]

Interesting post. Travelled on many 1st gen DMU’s on main line , some hauling CCT or fish vans. This has got me wondering have there ever been instances of a Mk1 being attached to the rear in passenger service ?

 

[Ken H]

Trail traffic - should be Tail traffic. On some routes (specified in Sectional Appendices) DMUs were permitted to haul other vehicles up to a maximum weight - either 15 or 30 tons. There were other restrictions, depending on the route and type of unit. I'm not sure what vehicles would be hauled, but I'd suspect vans or milk tanks. Maybe someone else knows?

the one time I remember this happening on a service I was on (between Donny and Scunny) it was something like this.

 

[randyrippley]

Interesting post. Travelled on many 1st gen DMU’s on main line , some hauling CCT or fish vans. This has got me wondering have there ever been instances of a Mk1 being attached to the rear in passenger service ?

probably not a mk1, but back in the 1960's the WR cross-country sets on Weymouth services used to sometimes haul one or two non-corridor coaches. Some of these were through Taunton-Weymouth weekend excursion portions, being joined/split at Pen Mill. Sometimes reserved coaches e.g. Montacute Baptist Chapel annual day out - on the last day of running on Yeovil-Taunton

DMUs also hauled single four wheeled vans carrying milk churns on the Bridport line. I don't know where these went, but there were three creameries on the Taunton-Weymouth route, so they may have got to Yeovil behind a DMU as well

 

[davetheguard]

"Car" is an Americanism imported by the District Railway but now universal (internally/enthusiasts, but less so in public announcements).

It's rather odd that the public don't generally use "car" except in the context of "restaurant car", "sleeping car", & "buffet car" when they do. I wonder if the American "car" is a shortening of "carriage."

I remember a couple of examples of DMUs hauling postal vans. In the 80s there was an 00.14 Reading to Birmingham New Street train that was all stations to Oxford, I think. I also remember travelling on a very early morning Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth train that conveyed a van off the York to Shrewsbury T.P.O.

 

[jfollows]

I remember a couple of examples of DMUs hauling postal vans. In the 80s there was an 00.14 Reading to Birmingham New Street train that was all stations to Oxford, I think. I also remember travelling on a Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth train that conveyed a van off the York to Shrewsbury T.P.O.

Interesting: timetable for 1M18 attached from the 1984/5 WTT (that's the 00:14 Reading to Birmingham service, all stations Reading-Oxford as recalled)

 

[MichaelAMW]

1: Typically, all cars (coaches) with cabs were referred to as "Driving....." something. Like DMS (Driving Motor Second); DMBS (Driving Motor Brake Second); DTBC (Driving Trailer Brake Composite). Personally I don't recall any specific term used for whichever vehicle happened to be at the front - except, perhaps "Front Coach".
2: In this context, I'd consider these terms interchangeable. "This train is formed of four coaches" is a phrase we see today.
3: I'm sure one could technically (but, clearly, only in one direction). There were a handful of single car/coach DMUs - "bubble cars" - which had a driving end at both ends. A couple of these remained in use until quite recently (Cardiff Bay and Bedford/Bletchley come to mind).
4: Typically no. But some classes (eg class 124) did have such provision. Many 2-car sets in their original formation had engines under only one of the two, the other being a Driving Trailer.
5: That, I don't know for sure.

Perhaps it would be useful to summarise the possibilities, for a coach with just second-class seats:

With a driving cab:
Driving Motor Second
Driving Trailer Second

Without a driving cab:
Trailer Second
Non-Driving Motor Second

I don't think the last one actually existed, but the designation would have been that. Some sources would just call the first of these four a Motor Second and the last a Motor Second (non driving).

 

[Ken H]

It's rather odd that the public don't generally use "car" except in the context of "restaurant car", "sleeping car", & "buffet car" when they do. I wonder if the American "car" a shortening of "carriage."

I remember a couple of examples of DMUs hauling postal vans. In the 80s there was an 00.14 Reading to Birmingham New Street train that was all stations to Oxford, I think. I also remember travelling on a Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth train that conveyed a van off the York to Shrewsbury T.P.O.

The Tube started to use 'car' because they were taken over and unified* by Charles Tyson Yerkes, and he brought the American 'Car' to the lexicon. But as MU's became common in the UK the idea that MU vehicles were 'cars' while hauled stock were 'carraiges' became common.

But 'car' meant any vehicle in the UK. Buses especially, as in 'Road car' in the names of many bus companies. Seems to have been a Tilling thing.

* All except the Central London and the Metropolitan. They were unified later.

 

[43096]

Perhaps it would be useful to summarise the possibilities, for a coach with just second-class seats:

With a driving cab:
Driving Motor Second
Driving Trailer Second

Without a driving cab:
Trailer Second
Non-Driving Motor Second

I don't think the last one actually existed, but the designation would have been that. Some sources would just call the first of these four a Motor Second and the last a Motor Second (non driving).

I think a motor car without a driving cab would be just a "motor second": if there is no "driving" prefix then it is by definition a non-driving car.

 

[davetheguard]

Interesting: timetable for 1M18 attached from the 1984/5 WTT (that's the 00:14 Reading to Birmingham service, all stations Reading-Oxford as recalled)

That's the one. It gave a connection out of what was the then last HST from London of the day. There was also a Birmingham New St. to Reading DMU which also conveyed a van; I think the two of them perhaps will have passed each other somewhere en route.

 

[Taunton]

Perhaps it would be useful to summarise the possibilities, for a coach with just second-class seats:

With a driving cab:
Driving Motor Second
Driving Trailer Second

Without a driving cab:
Trailer Second
Non-Driving Motor Second

I don't think the last one actually existed, but the designation would have been that. Some sources would just call the first of these four a Motor Second and the last a Motor Second (non driving).

The Scottish Region pioneer Swindon-built Inter-City 6-car sets had these, they were termed an Intermediate Motor Second. Although they had a small one-third driving cab these were not used as such, and were formed inside the unit. Appearing to be two three car units, they were actually run with Leading Motor Brake Seconds (another different designation) at the outer ends, with their full-width driving cabs, the Intermediate Motor seconds behind them, and the two trailers, one a part-buffet, in the middle of the train. They were regarded as loose vehicles rather than fixed formation trains, and were shunted around at Leith depot daily, for which a diesel shunter was kept on hand.

The Western Region is the only one I'm aware of to run with strengthening normal carriages (no control wires needed) behind, on their Cross-Country units in earlier years, they rather sapped the performance so it seems commonly to have been just one coach behing a 6-car set. Hawksworth-era corridor seconds were normally used; being of composite construction they were a few tons lighter than all-steel BR Mk 1s. They were a nuisance at termini as they had to be shunted around to be at the back of the train. The Western had pioneered this form of operation with their original GWR railcars, the first ones had no buffers at all, but the later ones had full drawgear and commonly pulled either a coach or a van. Shunting at the terminus was a lot easier with a single car, which could fit in loco run-rounds, rather than getting a coach from one end to the other of a 6-car set.

 

[Gloster]

Just about the first example of diesel-units hauling a tail-load was GWR railcar 18, which was built in 1937 and originally intended for the Newbury-Lambourn branch. It could haul up to three horse-boxes, a frequent traffic on that line, although there are photos of it hauling a single coach.

 

[Ken H]

We know SR EMUs often re-used loco hauled stock as EMU vehicles, but did this ever happen with DMU's (Thats if you dot count loco hauled MK3's ending up in HST's)?

 

[hexagon789]

I don't think the last one actually existed, but the designation would have been that. Some sources would just call the first of these four a Motor Second and the last a Motor Second (non driving).

The 124 Trans-Pennine had the only non-driving motor cars of all the First Gen units.

As introduced and until the buffet cars were removed the units were formed:

DMC
MBSK
TSL
TFKRB
MBSK
DMC

This gave 1,840hp from eight 230bhp Leyland Albion engines for the demanding gradients of the Liverpool-Hull route. In later years the units were progressively reduced to 4-car and often mixed with 123 vehicles on transfer. Some of the MBSK having the engines removed.

The Scottish Region pioneer Swindon-built Inter-City 6-car sets had these, they were termed an Intermediate Motor Second. Although they had a small one-third driving cab these were not used as such, and were formed inside the unit. Appearing to be two three car units, they were actually run with Leading Motor Brake Seconds (another different designation) at the outer ends, with their full-width driving cabs, the Intermediate Motor seconds behind them, and the two trailers, one a part-buffet, in the middle of the train. They were regarded as loose vehicles rather than fixed formation trains, and were shunted around at Leith depot daily, for which a diesel shunter was kept on hand.

They were originally on the ScR formed as effectively two 3-car sets with the intermediate Driving Motors in the middle coupled cab-to-cab. However there was little need to separate units in normal service, as they pretty much always worked as a 6-car formation on the E&G service, and it was decided it was more logical and practical to form the trailers in the middle with all the first class together and the power cars to the outside. This also gave the advantage that if a leading motor car developed a control air defect, it could be removed and it would reveal a usable driving cab on the next vehicle in. I have seen a photo of a set with two intermediate motors leading.

The 79xxx sets actually started out on the WR and they formed their sets as two divisible 9-car formations.

These being formed:

DMBSL-TFK-DMBSL*/DMBSL*-TFKRB-DMBSL*/DMBSL*-TFK-DMBSL

(* denotes intermediate driving motor)

The Class 126 which were based directly on the 79xxx cars were always formed as 3-car units in the conventional manner with two motors sandwiching a trailer. As continues today on Strathclyde, 6-car sets would be formed at peak times and split into 3-car units for off-peak working. Though certainly in earlier years the 126s sometimes worked as 9-car formations at particularly busy times.

 

[jfollows]

That's the one. It gave a connection out of what was the then last HST from London of the day. There was also a Birmingham New St. to Reading DMU which also conveyed a van; I think the two of them perhaps will have passed each other somewhere en route.

1V38 23:33 FSX Birmingham to Reading. The two services crossed a bit N of Oxford.
My 1980-81 academic year in Oxford probably saw me catching too many trains at the expense of studying (I failed my year-end exams and relocated in 1981) but I'm glad to say I didn't end up on either of these trains at any point, I certainly remember the option for the last train home from London was to change at Didcot into 1M18 to be rattled thence to Oxford after a good snooze on the HST first.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2021 ==

The 124 Trans-Pennine had the only non-driving motor cars of all the First Gen units.

As introduced and until the buffet cars were removed the units were formed:

DMC
MBSK
TSL
TFKRB
MBSK
DMC

This gave 1,840hp from eight 230bhp Leyland Albion engines for the demanding gradients of the Liverpool-Hull route. In later years the units were progressively reduced to 4-car and often mixed with 123 vehicles on transfer. Some of the MBSK having the engines removed.

Further abbreviations for DMU coaches to add to the list earlier:
"K" corridor [because C "composite" had already been used]
"RB" restaurant/buffet
"F" first

39 minutes Liverpool-Manchester Exchange, D5, in my 1966 timetable with stops at St. Helens Junction & Earlestown, that doesn't sound bad. 9E07 Liverpool-Newcastle tomorrow is 35 minutes [not 25 as I originally typed!] (to Manchester Victoria of course) with one stop at Newton-le-Willows. Progress?

 

[hexagon789]

1V38 23:33 FSX Birmingham to Reading. The two services crossed a bit N of Oxford.
My 1980-81 academic year in Oxford probably saw me catching too many trains at the expense of studying (I failed my year-end exams and relocated in 1981) but I'm glad to say I didn't end up on either of these trains at any point, I certainly remember the option for the last train home from London was to change at Didcot into 1M18 to be rattled thence to Oxford after a good snooze on the HST first.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2021 ==


39 minutes Liverpool-Manchester Exchange, D5, in my 1966 timetable with stops at St. Helens Junction & Earlestown, that doesn't sound bad. 9E07 Liverpool-Newcastle tomorrow is 35 minutes [not 25 as I originally typed!] (to Manchester Victoria of course) with one stop at Newton-le-Willows. Progress?

I understand they cut an average of 45 mins from the steam schedules - the fastest run on their initial timetable was one run in 2h48 Liverpool-Hull with 6 stops, the fastest back were 2 services at 2h54 both with 6 stops.

There were 2 mile-a-minute bookings - Brough to Selby (20.5mi in 20 mins) and Selby to Hull (31mi in 31 mins); not bad for 70mph units. Even Leeds to Hull nom-stop in 57 mins for the 51.7mi (54.4mph) is quite respectable.

Definitely progress back then

 

[Andy873]

Thanks everyone, there's a lot here so it's going to take some time to read through it all.

What about MPD's (engine sheds), did BR have dedicated new sheds for the diesels / DMU's or were existing ones (for steam) being equipped to cope with DMU's? or a mixture of both?

I notice at Rose Grove MPD, a spotter notes 55 locos there 9/9/1967, but only 5 were diesels...

In my 1963 passenger WTT I note there were three trial trips per day SX and ran when required for DMUs / EMUs going from Crumpsall to Bury Loco junction and back.

It also mentions Bury car shop? my knowledge of Greater Manchester is not too good, but it does keep listing Bury? and what was at Crumpsall?

Thanks,
Andy.

 

[jp4712]

Thanks everyone, there's a lot here so it's going to take some time to read through it all.

What about MPD's (engine sheds), did BR have dedicated new sheds for the diesels / DMU's or were existing ones (for steam) being equipped to cope with DMU's? or a mixture of both?

I notice at Rose Grove MPD, a spotter notes 55 locos there 9/9/1967, but only 5 were diesels...

In my 1963 passenger WTT I note there were three trial trips per day SX and ran when required for DMUs / EMUs going from Crumpsall to Bury Loco junction and back.

It also mentions Bury car shop? my knowledge of Greater Manchester is not too good, but it does keep listing Bury? and what was at Crumpsall?

Thanks,
Andy.

Bury was an interesting MPD in that it had steam, DMU (for the East Lancs up to Bacup) and EMU (class 504) allocations. The 504s were unique to the Manchester - Bury line so they were maintained at Bury (heavier work went at different periods to Wolverton or Horwich). The only significance of Crumpsall was the availability of a crossover and sidings (in case of a need for inspection) a decent distance from the depot, but short of congested Manchester.

 

[RT4038]

The Tube started to use 'car' because they were taken over and unified* by Charles Tyson Yerkes, and he brought the American 'Car' to the lexicon. But as MU's became common in the UK the idea that MU vehicles were 'cars' while hauled stock were 'carraiges' became common.

But 'car' meant any vehicle in the UK. Buses especially, as in 'Road car' in the names of many bus companies. Seems to have been a Tilling thing.

* All except the Central London and the Metropolitan. They were unified later.

Even more to the point - Tram Car, a motored carriage. Buses were a 'road car' , a motored carriage. DMU - a Rail Car - a motored carriage. However, it is also correct that in North American parlance any passenger rail vehicle is a 'car', and this has been translated to here, hence our Pullman, Sleeping and Restaurant cars.

 

[30907]

Thanks everyone, there's a lot here so it's going to take some time to read through it all.

What about MPD's (engine sheds), did BR have dedicated new sheds for the diesels / DMU's or were existing ones (for steam) being equipped to cope with DMU's? or a mixture of both?

A mixture. A lot of steam sheds, especially those marked for closure, never acquired facilities for diesels, including I suspect....

Rose Grove

 

[Ken H]

Even more to the point - Tram Car, a motored carriage. Buses were a 'road car' , a motored carriage. DMU - a Rail Car - a motored carriage. However, it is also correct that in North American parlance any passenger rail vehicle is a 'car', and this has been translated to here, hence our Pullman, Sleeping and Restaurant cars.

Pullman was an American company. So no surprised it brought 'Car' for sleeping car, to Europe.

 

[Andy873]

Interesting.

I've just learnt that the MPD at Accrington closed to steam early 1960s but continued for diesels.

Rose Grove MPD didn't cater for diesels much, it was one of the three final steam MPDs to close on the final day of steam early August 1968, the others being Lostock Hall & Carnforth.

 

[ac6000cw]

It's rather odd that the public don't generally use "car" except in the context of "restaurant car", "sleeping car", & "buffet car" when they do. I wonder if the American "car" is a shortening of "carriage."

Yes, AFAIK 'car' is an abbreviation of 'carriage', and in general use is probably now the dominant form of the term.

As others have said it got imported into the UK railway lexicon from North America where most rail vehicles that carry things are 'cars' of one sort or another - passenger car, MU car, freight car (box car/flat car/well car/tank car/lumber car/hopper car - 'gondola' is the odd one out, their name for an open box vehicle). They used to have rail 'motor cars' which were basically motorised maintenance trolleys, like our 'Wickham trolleys' of old - now essentially extinct, replaced with road-rail vehicles.

What about MPD's (engine sheds), did BR have dedicated new sheds for the diesels / DMU's or were existing ones (for steam) being equipped to cope with DMU's? or a mixture of both?

At the end of stream, the majority of steam shed locations either closed completely, or became just stabling sidings and/or staff 'signing-on' points. Some got converted for diesel maintenance, either re-using existing buildings or in new ones on the same site. I think some new DMU depots had originally been carriage servicing depots.

As examples from my local area, Cambridge steam shed closed (the station car park is on the site of it) and a newly built DMU depot and diesel fueling point opened about 1/2 mile north of it, whereas March steam shed converted into a diesel loco MPD, using I think a mixture of new and old buildings.

 

[Ken H]

Yes, AFAIK 'car' is an abbreviation of 'carriage', and in general use is probably now the dominant form of the term.

As others have said it got imported into the UK railway lexicon from North America where most rail vehicles that carry things are 'cars' of one sort or another - passenger car, MU car, freight car (box car/flat car/well car/tank car/lumber car/hopper car - 'gondola' is the odd one out, their name for an open box vehicle). They used to have rail 'motor cars' which were basically motorised maintenance trolleys, like our 'Wickham trolleys' of old - now essentially extinct, replaced with road-rail vehicles.


At the end of stream, the majority of steam shed locations either closed completely, or became just stabling sidings and/or staff 'signing-on' points. Some got converted for diesel maintenance, either re-using existing buildings or in new ones on the same site. I think some new DMU depots had originally been carriage servicing depots.

As examples from my local area, Cambridge steam shed closed (the station car park is on the site of it) and a newly built DMU depot and diesel fueling point opened about 1/2 mile north of it, whereas March steam shed converted into a diesel loco MPD, using I think a mixture of new and old buildings.

Wasn't one of the problems with Diesels being maintained in steam sheds was the amount of dirt in the old buildings causing issues with delicate diesel parts. Only later did they discover that maintaining diesels in a clean environment increased reliability.