Did BR Miss a Trick With Steam Locos

[eldomtom2]

What about the arrival of 50 very powerful Co-Co D400s, meanwhile?

Definitely more plausible.

 

[L+Y]

I'm afraid your grasp of basic economics leaves a lot to be desired.

TBH, I can't believe you have any experience of business. Still waiting on your detailed business case.

Is the tone really necessary?

 

[D6130]

What about the arrival of 50 very powerful Co-Co D400s, meanwhile?

Definitely more plausible.

Absolutely! (see post #82)

Is the tone really necessary?

Absolutely not! Let's all calm down before someone ends up on moderation!

 

[Clarence Yard]

The final end of steam on LMR was hastened by the transfer of diesel locos from other regions and other parts of the LMR, not so much by new deliveries.

I’m still struggling how an organisation like BR could make much money out keeping steam to run a few specials. Surely they got right in allowing the private sector and museums to take on the financial risk with their own locos whilst BR made their money hiring them the stock.

In the period when steam finished and immediately afterwards, BR was under so much pressure to deliver its basic services that side activities with dubious returns would not have been tolerated.

 

[Cricketer8for9]

Exactly. With one very notable exception heritage railways survive on donations, legacies and grants plus a huge amount of free (volunteer) labour. The fare box revenues barely cover the direct operating costs let alone make any contribution towards the overhead costs and depreciation (repairs and renewals).

What’s the exception? Not into preserved railways, so apologies if this is well known.

 

[Eyersey468]

What would 15 guineas equate to in modern money allowing for inflation?

 

[Gloster]

What would 15 guineas equate to in modern money allowing for inflation?

According to the Bank of England, £218.34 (last month).

Sorry, I forgot it was guineas, so £229.26.

 

[simonw]

Is the tone really necessary?

Yes. Next question.

This is a forum, people are supposed to engage in debate, not ignore 3 pages of comments that add insight and facts, nor just repeat their opening post and refuses to come up with anything supporting their position. The latter is normally called trolling.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jul 2023 ==

What’s the exception? Not into preserved railways, so apologies if this is well known.

Dart Valley and a few others are pure commercial operations.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jul 2023 ==

The final end of steam on LMR was hastened by the transfer of diesel locos from other regions and other parts of the LMR, not so much by new deliveries.

I’m still struggling how an organisation like BR could make much money out keeping steam to run a few specials. Surely they got right in allowing the private sector and museums to take on the financial risk with their own locos whilst BR made their money hiring them the stock.

In the period when steam finished and immediately afterwards, BR was under so much pressure to deliver its basic services that side activities with dubious returns would not have been tolerated.

This very well summarises the reality.

 

[D6130]

Dart Valley and a few others are pure commercial operations.

Presumably you are referring to the Torbay & Dartmouth Railway rather the the South Devon Railway....which was formerly known as the Dart Valley Railway.

 

[simonw]

Presumably you are referring to the Torbay & Dartmouth Railway rather the the South Devon Railway....which was formerly known as the Dart Valley Railway.

Yes the Torbay railway is owed by the Dart Valley Railway ltd. The South Devon Railway, isnt.



Edit ltd, not plc

 

[Trackman]

People only paid 15 guineas because it was the last steam train on BR.

I believe it didn't even sell out

 

[randyrippley]

Yes the Torbay railway is owed by the Dart Valley Railway ltd. The South Devon Railway, isnt.



Edit ltd, not plc

But it used to be, as far as I can remember.

 

[Eyersey468]

According to the Bank of England, £218.34 (last month).

Sorry, I forgot it was guineas, so £229.26.

Thanks

 

[eldomtom2]

The final end of steam on LMR was hastened by the transfer of diesel locos from other regions and other parts of the LMR, not so much by new deliveries.

Of course that raises the question of what allowed the transfer of those locos.

 

[randyrippley]

Of course that raises the question of what allowed the transfer of those locos.

Possibly just overall better maintenance.
Don't forget the problems of classes 45/46/47 meant that in the mid-1960s you could have 100+ Sulzer type 4s stopped awaiting electrical parts, or waiting for an engine lift. Cure that collection of problems and the pressure goes away.

Presumably the run down of Paddington-Birmingham-Birkenhead freed up class 47s enabling a cascade elsewhere - e.g. where did the Great Eastern 40s go? Similarly the Bournemouth electrification freed up six or more 47s. The transfer of 20s from trip workings to coal MGR would have released more type 4s

But you have similar puzzles elsewhere. Later, what freed up the 46s to move from the NE to the GW?

 

[Peter Sarf]

Possibly just overall better maintenance.
Don't forget the problems of classes 45/46/47 meant that in the mid-1960s you could have 100+ Sulzer type 4s stopped awaiting electrical parts, or waiting for an engine lift. Cure that collection of problems and the pressure goes away.

Presumably the run down of Paddington-Birmingham-Birkenhead freed up class 47s enabling a cascade elsewhere - e.g. where did the Great Eastern 40s go? Similarly the Bournemouth electrification freed up six or more 47s. The transfer of 20s from trip workings to coal MGR would have released more type 4s

But you have similar puzzles elsewhere. Later, what freed up the 46s to move from the NE to the GW?

My money is on the decline of wagon load freight freeing up smaller locos to do bigger jobs double headed. For instance how often did class 20s run singly when built and then as time went by ?. In the end it was rare to see 20s other than in pairs.

 

[simonw]

But it used to be, as far as I can remember.

Sold in 2010, so 13 years ago.

 

[Magdalia]

What about the arrival of 50 very powerful Co-Co D400s, meanwhile?

The 1965 National Traction Plan identified a shortfall of Type 4s hence this order.

The final end of steam on LMR was hastened by the transfer of diesel locos from other regions and other parts of the LMR, not so much by new deliveries.

This was a significant part of the 1965 National Traction Plan too, with the BRB squeezing the regions to use motive power more efficiently.

where did the Great Eastern 40s go?

For example the Eastern Region gave up its 10 EE Type 4s, plus the BR Type 2s at Finsbury Park and Ipswich (25 and 14 locos respectively). All of these were reallocated to the LMR or ScR to contribute towards elimination of steam.

Presumably the run down of Paddington-Birmingham-Birkenhead freed up class 47s enabling a cascade elsewhere

This is indirectly a consequence of WCML electrification, see also fewer through trains between St Pancras and Manchester.

For instance how often did class 20s run singly when built and then as time went by ?. In the end it was rare to see 20s other than in pairs.

This bit wasn't part of the original National Traction Plan, but the Beeching closures eliminated a lot of Type 1 work, especially pick up freights on branch lines. Putting two class 20s noses together in a pair created a surrogate Type 4 with lots of brake force. This was ideal for heavy unfitted freight trains, the sort of work previously done by 9Fs and 8Fs, and started in the final days of steam.

 

[randyrippley]

Sold in 2010, so 13 years ago.

as I remember it the plan was for the supposed moneymaking holidaymakers Torbay line to subsidise the enthusiasts Dart Valley line and pay for all the rolling stock engineering
I guess instead someone kept the money

 

[Clarence Yard]

The general reduction in traffic allowed BR to diagram more efficiently as well as directly leading to spare locos so you got a double benefit. A similar exercise was specifically done in 1971 when BR found itself in financial difficulties.

Take this example. WR had 194 cl.47 and 180 cl.37 new and they finished with steam in early 1966. Between then and the end of steam on BR, 75 cl.47 and 99 cl.37 (net) were transferred away to help replace steam in other regions. That’s huge. Similarly the ER, who finished with steam in 1966, transferred some of their locos away, notably their entire cl.24 fleet.

 

[randyrippley]

The general reduction in traffic allowed BR to diagram more efficiently as well as directly leading to spare locos so you got a double benefit. A similar exercise was specifically done in 1971 when BR found itself in financial difficulties.

Take this example. WR had 194 cl.47 and 180 cl.37 new and they finished with steam in early 1966. Between then and the end of steam on BR, 75 cl.47 and 99 cl.37 (net) were transferred away to help replace steam in other regions. That’s huge. Similarly the ER, who finished with steam in 1966, transferred some of their locos away, notably their entire cl.24 fleet.

And I wonder to what extent solving the cl47 Sulzer problems was part of that transfer away. When did they get downrated?

 

[D6130]

In the end it was rare to see 20s other than in pairs.

Except in Scotland....where it was more usual to see them singly than in pairs on trip freight workings.

 

[mike57]

I actually think the heritage sector were/are better placed to retain and operate steam locomotives and in most cases made a better job of it than BR would have done. If BR had retained a heritage fleet it would have been a small department in a large monolithic organisation which would always have been at risk of political interferance. The heritage sector is not perfect, but 55 years after steam finished on BR for day to day operations there are plenty of opportunities to experience steam in various settings, and the success of projects such as Tornado indicates that for the right projects the money can be raised.

Yes there have been some failures, but overall the heritage sector has navigated various challenges over the years, with Covid being the most recent. Had BR retained steam and continued to run steam specials I am not sure that the current situation would be any better than it is now, and possibly worse.

With regard to the rush to get rid of steam, there were reasons why that was seen as the right way forwards, but it meant for example there were untried diesel classes, the worst of which were a complete waste of money. I think its unlikely that steam for normal services would have survived the first round of miners stikes in 1972 and 1974

My own view, was getting rid of classes such the 9Fs some of which were less than 10 years old, and by all accounts were a success a good idea, probably not, but scrapping or replacing a lot of the older stuff, probably yes. In an ideal parallel universe steam would have carried on a bit longer in areas close to coal production, and diesel introduction would have been a bit slower to allow the bad designs to be limited to protoypes. I am not sure how much difference this would have made in the long term however.

 

[randyrippley]

My own view, was getting rid of classes such the 9Fs some of which were less than 10 years old, and by all accounts were a success a good idea, probably not, but scrapping or replacing a lot of the older stuff, probably yes. In an ideal parallel universe steam would have carried on a bit longer in areas close to coal production, and diesel introduction would have been a bit slower to allow the bad designs to be limited to protoypes. I am not sure how much difference this would have made in the long term however.

As I said earlier, I think a chance was missed with the 9Fs of converting them to gas turbine locos, geared for max 40mph. Using the technology from GT3
At continuous low speeds they would have been a lot more economic than stop-start express passenger work like GT3 was trialled on. Would have given us a type 5 heavy haul fleet years before the cl56 was even thought of

 

[70014IronDuke]

And I wonder to what extent solving the cl47 Sulzer problems was part of that transfer away.

Do you mean by downrating them, their availability went up - so the WR didn't need so many?

... see also fewer through trains between St Pancras and Manchester.

I don't think you can get away with this one. Yes, the St Pancras - Manchester services were severely cut back - but at the same time services were vastly improved to Sheffield. There were 5 trains per 2 hours on the Midland then, and I suspect there was more Cl 1 running after April 1966 out of St Pancras with 45s than when they worked the principal trains to Manchester Central.

OF course, two Blue Pullman sets were transferred to BR(W) - that might have saved another couple of Cl 47s over there.

I actually think the heritage sector were/are better placed to retain and operate steam locomotives and in most cases made a better job of it than BR would have done.

Agreed.

If BR had retained a heritage fleet it would have been a small department in a large monolithic organisation which would always have been at risk of political interferance. The heritage sector is not perfect, but 55 years after steam finished on BR for day to day operations there are plenty of opportunities to experience steam in various settings, and the success of projects such as Tornado indicates that for the right projects the money can be raised.

For the right projects, with the right project management.

Yes there have been some failures, but overall the heritage sector has navigated various challenges over the years, with Covid being the most recent. Had BR retained steam and continued to run steam specials I am not sure that the current situation would be any better than it is now, and possibly worse.

I think there was absolutely zero, zero chance of BR ever retaining a 'fleet' of steam locos for specials - maybe, just maybe, 2-3, on one depot, but it would have been for PR purposes as much as anything.

The only possible chance for continued steam operation along the lines of the OP would have been a small depot allocation, operating along the lines of Wolstyn. Carnforth, and the Cumbrian coast up to Whitehaven or possibliy Skipton, being the obvious choice as steam was wound down. But no chance with the BRB and economics of the day.

With regard to the rush to get rid of steam, there were reasons why that was seen as the right way forwards, but it meant for example there were untried diesel classes, the worst of which were a complete waste of money.

The diesel design failures, NBL, Metrovics etc occurred well before the end of steam.

 

[6Gman]

What about the arrival of 50 very powerful Co-Co D400s, meanwhile?

I seem to remember some of the press coverage at the time basically said that delivery of these 50 locos would allow the final elimination of steam from the North West.

 

[randyrippley]

Do you mean by downrating them, their availability went up - so the WR didn't need so many?

For the cl47, exactly so. As I said earlier, for a while having 100+ type 4 Sulzers of all types out of service wasn't rare, with the 47 being the majority
Of course you can't claim that for the cl37 reduction: that was probably directly due to overestimating the needs of the declining steel and coal traffic in South Wales

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Jul 2023 ==

I seem to remember some of the press coverage at the time basically said that delivery of these 50 locos would allow the final elimination of steam from the North West.

Just imagine how that would have worked out if they'd been fitted with the 12LVA24 Sulzers the engineers wanted

 

[Clarence Yard]

And I wonder to what extent solving the cl47 Sulzer problems was part of that transfer away. When did they get downrated?

No, it was the tightening of the availability and loss of traffic on the WR that was the main cause - the engine problems were annoying but BR were working on around 20-25 locos (from all regions) out at any one time, with the turnaround for an individual engine for mods being 18 working days. By 1967 they had got a real handle on it.

The cl.47 were shocking for availability in their early years (around 75% to 78% was normal) but as BR got to grips with them, they got the availability back up to over 80%. You will notice that the WR cl.37 had a similar dramatic reduction, that was definitely down to loss of traffic, especially coal, which was in sharp decline in the mid sixties. But please remember, a diesel loco isn’t going to give you much more than 85% availability at the best of times, unless you have a very special maintenance regime for them - the Deltics in their heyday being one.

The drop off in conditional freight work meant that you could reduce locomotive allocations substantially. Then factor in some changes in the amount of commodities being carried (and the move to block services) and the years 1965-70 were quite revolutionary for rail freight.

 

[ac6000cw]

I seem to remember some of the press coverage at the time basically said that delivery of these 50 locos would allow the final elimination of steam from the North West.

It might have helped from a financial point of view that the class 50's were originally leased from EE, which I assume didn't increase BR's borrowings at the time.

Out of interest, roughly how many reasonably active steam locos did BR have in the early 1960s?

 

[randyrippley]

Have you got any idea of how the cl30-31 conversion affected their availability? That's another example where large numbers were moved between regions