Presumably that was via the Class 50s replacing diesels that could then replace steam. I presume they weren't directly replacing steam locos on WCML expresses.
-
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!
Did BR Miss a Trick With Steam Locos
- Thread starter Andy873
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
The impact was negligible. All of the conversions were done as part of classified repairs when the locos would be completely dismantled and have a power unit swap anyway.
There were no large scale moves of class 31s away from the Eastern Region until 1971.
Clarence Yard
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Dec 2014
- Messages
- 3,278
Standard gauge steam locos at end of year.
1954 - 18420. 1955 - 17955. 1956 - 17522. 1957 - 16954. 1958 - 16103. 1959 - 14452. 1960 - 13271. 1961 - 11687. 1962 - 8764. 1963 - 7047. 1964 - 4970. 1965 - 2984. 1966 - 1686. 1967 - 359.
Deliveries of Type 1 - 5 diesels and electric locos started to ramp up to reach just over 300 delivered in 1959, well over 400 in each of 1960 and 1961 and then it settled down to around the 400 a year mark until 1965 when it reached 433, dropping down to 231 in 1966, 64 in 1967 and 50 in 1968. (source RCTS stock books)
For normal use, WR finished with steam in 12/65 (except for S&D 3/66), the old ER in 4/66, ScR in 5/67, SR in 7/67, NER in 11/67 and LMR in 8/68.
On my local line, Preston - Liverpool Exchange via Ormskirk, class 50s actually did directly replace (some) steam on the fast trains.
But I'm sure you're broadly right that this wouldn't have been the norm!
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Worth noting that DMUs replaced most of the steam-hauled local passenger services several years earlier. They were built in large numbers from the late 1950s onwards, and many of the routes they operated were closed in the Beeching era, to the extent that some of the early DMU classes were scrapped even before the end of steam. One reason for Liverpool-Preston being one of the last steam passenger routes was that many trains were split and joined at Preston for Scotland, so were fairly light and secondary in nature but couldn't use a DMU.
ac6000cw
Established Member
Thanks for the info.
So using the 1958 steam loco total as maybe the last before diesels and electrics arrived in large numbers, around 3000-3500 mainline diesel and electric locos plus (info from other sources) around 2000 shunters (nearly 1000 08's alone!) plus numerous DMUs replaced around 16,000 steam locos. If diesels and electrics hadn't arrived, the steam loco stock would have reduced anyway in line with reducing traffic between 1958 and 1968, so the real steam to diesel/electric 'replacement ratio' is harder to work out.
I was interested in comparing it against the US steam to diesel 'replacement ratio' where I think around around 20,000 diesels replaced around 40,000 steam locos - but over there they needed several diesel locos to equal the power of a single large modern steam loco, which makes it harder to compare directly with BR where one diesel or electric loco usually replaced one steam loco, in terms of train haulage.
There was, I believe, a definite issue around the operation of Camden Motive Power Depot where the local authority was very critical of its impact on the area.
(A bit of googling indicates that both Camden and Kings Cross were served with notices under the Clean Air Act by the local authorities.)
Last edited:
ac6000cw
Established Member
I think Stratford (East London) was pretty bad for air pollution too - wasn't it the largest steam MPD in the country in its heyday?
The Clean Air Act was passed in 1956, after the Modernisation Plan had been published, and was mainly a response to the London smog of December 1952.
The Eastern Region gave the London area priority for modernisation, both on the ex GE and ex GN lines, but I've never found a definitive link between that and the Clean Air Act of 1956. What is much clearer is the difficulty of recruiting staff to work on steam traction when there were other options in a buoyant London labour market, particularly Ford at Dagenham.
Peter Townend mentions in ‘Top Shed’ that it was an offence under the 1956 Clean Air Act if a loco emitted smoke darker than ‘2’ on the Ringelmann scale of 1-5, for more than a few minutes. For a while at Top Shed, Ringelmann charts were nailed to poles that could be carried around the shed and held up in line with a loco‘s chimney. A supervisor would then stand back and compared the smoke emitted with the grades on the chart, for possible breaches of the Act. Needless to say this practice didn’t work well, and a more practical solution was to appoint a full time Smoke Inspector.
70014IronDuke
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 4,094
I don't know, but would think so. It had something like 450 - 500 locos before electrification began to eat into the allocation. A staggering number. And given the prevailing winds, it would also get a little of the junk from depots to the west (Kentish Town, Kings X, Camden, Neasden).
Even without the labour shortages and air pollution, it would make sense to eliminate steam from the south end of the GN first, if only to save a few WDs on mineral trains carrying coal all the way to Kings X and Hornsey every day.
However, strictly speaking, all this is off topic - the OP wasn't advocating keeping massive shed loads of steam, just a limited number to extract a better economical result from the original investment.
Having written that - it is an appropriate thread in the sense that it is August 3 - 55 years to the day of the last standard-gauge scheduled steam-hauled service on BR.
God Bless Ernie Hayes and his fireman!
I think the response of the local authority under the Clean Air Act might have depended on a number of factors.
If the shed was well away from residential properties or surrounded by railway land (e.g. Crewe South) I suspect there would have been little pressure to act.
The type of residential area may have been relevant - the residents of Primrose Hill (close to Camden, and said to have had the highest proportion of solicitors in London) may have been taken more seriously than the residents of working class Stratford! And, of course, if many of the residents were railway employees (such as those in the terraced houses alongside Crewe North) they may have been disinclined to complain.
And I would assume Crewe Council (stacked with railway employees) would be less inclined to make a fuss than - say - Harrogate Council.
If the shed was well away from residential properties or surrounded by railway land (e.g. Crewe South) I suspect there would have been little pressure to act.
The type of residential area may have been relevant - the residents of Primrose Hill (close to Camden, and said to have had the highest proportion of solicitors in London) may have been taken more seriously than the residents of working class Stratford! And, of course, if many of the residents were railway employees (such as those in the terraced houses alongside Crewe North) they may have been disinclined to complain.
And I would assume Crewe Council (stacked with railway employees) would be less inclined to make a fuss than - say - Harrogate Council.
D6130
Established Member
Absolutely....but Harrogate's steam motive power depot, where my wife's great uncle was a driver, was situated well outside of the posh, leafy town centre, in the working class suburb of Starbeck.
Indeed, but my general point stands.
Brompton Blue
New Member
I don’t believe the demand would have been there in 1968 to make BR steam specials viable, especially at the prices they would need to charge to make them profitable. It’s true steam specials were popular in the years leading up to the end of steam in 1968, but they largely attracted enthusiasts looking to make last journeys on soon to be closed routes, or behind engines soon to be withdrawn. I don’t believe the interest from the general public was there and even interest from a dwindling number of hard core rail enthusiasts would wane if, as suggested, BR only retained one class of steam loco for said specials.
From my experience trainspotting was in decline through the 60s and becoming less and less fashionable. It was increasingly something you tended to keep quiet about to avoid ridicule. Starting school in the early 60s I have many happy memories of trainspotting at Wood Green with school mates clocking the early diesels. By the time I left school in 1973 you could count the number admitting to be train spotters/rail enthusiasts (anoraks) on one hand. Excursions were still popular with the public, but governed by price and destination rather than what was on the front of the train. Reference has been made to a 1968 steam special to Manchester costing £4. To put that into perspective I travelled on a diesel hauled excursion from New Southgate to Paignton in 1972 for just £2.
From my experience trainspotting was in decline through the 60s and becoming less and less fashionable. It was increasingly something you tended to keep quiet about to avoid ridicule. Starting school in the early 60s I have many happy memories of trainspotting at Wood Green with school mates clocking the early diesels. By the time I left school in 1973 you could count the number admitting to be train spotters/rail enthusiasts (anoraks) on one hand. Excursions were still popular with the public, but governed by price and destination rather than what was on the front of the train. Reference has been made to a 1968 steam special to Manchester costing £4. To put that into perspective I travelled on a diesel hauled excursion from New Southgate to Paignton in 1972 for just £2.
Surreytraveller
On Moderation
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 3,905
Heritage railways operate with volunteer staff. British Rail couldn't do that, so no, they didn't miss a trick
Conversion of Devons Road, Bow was an early priority owing to notices served under the Clean Air Act, I believe..
H&S legislation was only passed in 1974. Not sure what direct effect that would have had immediately, and steam is still operated pretty much in the same fashion as before the Act. Some of the depot facilities would have had to be upgraded in time, I am sure.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
I don't think there was ever an outright ban, but following several cases of steam traincrew being electrocuted, BR did endeavour to move steam locos away from the wires, notably on the WCML.
Is there any proper research evidence of that? If yes I'd like to see it! Who served the notices and where?
Health and safety legal regulation of the railways starts with the Offices, Shops and Railway Premises Act of 1963, which followed on from the Factories Act of 1961.
The first instance I know of this was on the Clacton branch in 1959. It led directly to the fixing of electrification warning signs on locomotives, which started the following year.
This commenced on the WCML in the summer of 1964, with numerous steam classes being barred from working under the wires south of Crewe. The surviving locos of these classes had a broad yellow diagonal band painted across the cab sides to highlight their prohibition!
H&S legislation relating to the railways long predates the 1960s!
Merle Haggard
Established Member
The prohibition wasn't because of danger to train crew but because the locos were out of gauge with respect to reduced clearance with the the O.L.E. South of Crewe. There was a lot of cost - cutting as the electrification proceeded South (e.g. Northampton retaining manual boxes and a new station built from agricultural barn components) and, by reducing clearances money could be saved. I'm not sure whether this was by done reducing the work to increase clearance or by avoiding sections of 6.25 k.v.,though.
- Status