304s/310s & 312s

[Taunton]

The "big first motorshow" of 1978 at the NEC in Birmingham had huge attendance. Went there from New Street in an 8-car 304 formation. Coupling up the 304s in multiple was unusual, in fact I can't ever recall it anywhere else. We returned in a 9-car Tyseley 116 dmu, again most unusual, so I guess there weren't a lot of 304s spare.

But the most surprising 304 substitution I recall was in youthful times, around 1966, when an all-stations Liverpool to Crewe service, which had been solid 304s since electrification, turned out one Saturday to be a Yellow Diamond dmu set. The nearest these were was on the Romiley etc lines from Manchester, so however it got here goodness knows. If someone had told me I would have thought them mistaken. But there it was, and I rode to Crewe with a front lookout.

 

[Revaulx]

See

EMUs on WCML 70s to 2000s

I recognise the 304s (mainly Midlands / N West) and 310s , but for a while 312s were on certain services between West Mids and Euston. When were these phased out? mid 90s? 304s were very bumpy, 310s less so. 350s are luxury in comparison. I recall 310s and 312s mainly Brum/Rugby to Euston.

www.railforums.co.uk

which repeats a lot of what's been said here and adds more.

Essentially a 312 did make it to Manchester once, and the 310/AM10 on the Altrincham line was unusual but clearly not impossible.

Not that unusual. I was a regular on Alty-Oxford Road from DC days to 1975 and would ride on an AM10 once a month or so.

They looked really stylish and suited the all-yellow ends, which the AM4s most certainly didn’t. The ride was a lot better than the latter as well, though as a result the seats didn’t need to be so bouncy

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Aug 2024 ==

The most notorious 'feature' of the 304s was, of course, the appalling ride quality - if a bad oscillation set in after going over the points at Cheadle Hulme or wherever you could be literally bounced out of your seat! As a regular commuter I very much welcomed the introduction of the 323s. Oddly, the 303s, with the same Gresley bogies, rode perfectly fine.

Also of note, is that the 304s were also reduced to 3 cars in the period 1984-6, which did nothing for capacity, but did remove the by then unacceptable compartments in the early batch and improved the power to weight ratio.

I don’t think the 305s and 308s had such bad riding either. Something to do with the 304 depots oiling the spring suspension, which those with long experience of Gresley bogies knew not to do.

The performance of the 4-car 304s on the Alty line was a lot poorer than that of the elderly DC units they replaced. And frankly the first batch of them didn’t really look any more modern.

 

[Bikeman78]

Also of note, is that the 304s were also reduced to 3 cars in the period 1984-6, which did nothing for capacity, but did remove the by then unacceptable compartments in the early batch and improved the power to weight ratio.

Compartments lasted another decade elsewhere, or two decades if you count the 205s that had a single compartment behind the driver. Seems odd to simply bin off the trailers. Most other units had them opened out in to saloons during the 80s.

 

[D7666]

Keeping to the context of LM 304s and 310s, where it was posted upthread about commuter shorts trains LH with AC Mk2, what contemporary trains were these refering to the LM ? I can't ever think of any. Cobblers were not short, and were mostly (all ?) Mk1.

There were short LH sets that ran with ACL - there were the three or four 5-6 car Mk2 PV (not AC) sets in the assorted Birmingham / Crewe / Preston / Lancaster / Barrow circuits - but these were not commuter trains per se they ran all day which obviously covered certain am and pm peaks in doing so.

The only short ACL LH slow/stopping 'commuter' train I can think of, at least late 70s and into 80s in west midlands, was the evening peak 17:21 SX Birmingham Euston semi slow (ecs from Oxley) that went from EMU to load 5 vac LH in about 1984 or so, and ran in the same path same timings as 310; stock returned in those timetables 00:10 ex Euston vice EBW AC set (couple of timetables before 0010 SO became the overnight Aberystwyth). It was in effect of the very early days of BR Sectorisation. There was no correspnding a.m. peak working.


310s worked to Carlisle. On a few high peak summer Saturday c.1983/84 the 'Clansman' had a Birmingham - Carlisle relief running in front of 1S53; the booked single 310 right away then ECS to Lancaster; then formed a relief in front of whatever the next southbound AC XC to/through Birmingham was (not 1M42; EMU came back erlier then that iirc). IIRC New Street crew to Preston and conducted north thereof.

I mention crewing as one of the limits setting the arbitrary approximate 310s south of Birmingham 304s north of rule of thumb was crew traction knowledge; New St / Wolverhampton / Rugby sure knew both 304 and 310, but AIUI depots north did not know 310s and depots south not know 304s; of course that did not block their use as they were simply crewed by a depot that did know the train type and knew the road anyway.

Why then was the Birmingham Carlisle EMU a 310 not a 304 ? Allegedly, and this is the reason given at the time, not some wibble from the web this century, is non gangwayed trains not permitted over Shap. I am not going into why or when or how that came about, nor even if it is correct, only saying that was the reason given to me at the time by a LMR diagrammer at Crewe. Yes I know, and had already been said upthread, 310 were not fully gangwayed*** but 2+2 so what precisely this 'rule' is was unclear.

12car LM 310 : no-one mentioned any yet. There were occasional Birmingham Euston 'adex' / 'shoppex' trains that were more often than not 12car 310; not a great quantity of these, maybe only 3-4 a year at most, and, were usually weekends, including Sundays, when enough 310s were spare. Oddly these ran with exactly the same stoping pattern as bog standard EBWs - but at a much lower fare.

IME early 1980s 23:15 Sun Birmingham Euston semi fast was regular 12car ex NewSt at least to Rugby but ISTR it detached units somewhere and was not 12car throughout.

12car 304 ; were there ever any ? NOT ECS, I mean 12car in passenger service ?

304s : these were ordered and built in 3 seperate batches - but the second two are nominally the same. 001-015 were open driving trailers and compartment both middle cars; 016-045 three opens and only the trailer composite was compartment. The batches 001-015, 016-035 and 036-045 were ordered against sucessive OLE phases. There are maybe electrical differences with the 001 batch too but I need go look that up.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Keeping to the context of LM 304s and 310s, where it was posted upthread about commuter shorts trains LH with aircons - what contemporary trains were these refering to the LM ? I can't ever think of any. Cobblers were not short, and were mostly (all ?) Mk1.

Towards the end of the original (i.e. pre - 321 introduction) Cobbler services one on the up was a Euston-Birmingham-Wolverhampton set (obviously air conditioning.) intercepted from a Oxley - Euston E.C.S. working. This sort of came back in Virgin days, when it was first loco-hauled and then a double Voyager, again otherwise up ECS from Oxley. For the first years of operation the Voyagers were ECS to Northampton then class 1 forward but after successive timetable changes started its passenger work back to Rugby and then from Birmingham. But none of these could be described as 'short'.
The dedicated Cobbler sets were always Mk 1; one set briefly contained a 2Z but the low mileage was insufficient to charge the batteries for the pressure ventilation.

 

[D7666]

Towards the end of the original (i.e. pre - 321 introduction) Cobbler services one on the up was a Euston-Birmingham-Wolverhampton set (obviously air conditioning.) intercepted from a Oxley - Euston E.C.S. working. This sort of came back in Virgin days, when it was first loco-hauled and then a double Voyager, again otherwise up ECS from Oxley. For the first years of operation the Voyagers were ECS to Northampton then class 1 forward but after successive timetable changes started its passenger work back to Rugby and then from Birmingham. But none of these could be described as 'short'.
The dedicated Cobbler sets were always Mk 1; one set briefly contained a 2Z but the low mileage was insufficient to charge the batteries for the pressure ventilation.

Indeed.

That is what threw me.

 

[87015]

There were short sets on off-peak and weekend workings for some timetables. Google finds quite quickly:

In 1986/87 there were six train sets, all made up of vac' braked Mk1s:

EN100: BSK 4xSK FK 5xSK
EN101: 4xTSO FK 3xTSO BSK
EN102 & EN104: BSK 2xTSO CK 2xTSO
EN103 & EN105: TSO CK 2xTSO BSK

EN100 & EN101 ran self contained diagrams. The four half sets (EN102-EN105) would be combined for peak time services (EN102+EN103 and EN104+EN105). EN100 and EN101 could also be seen working summer Saturdays on the Cambrian.

Nice picture of a 304 at Carlisle in 1987 too.

 

[D7666]

One difference from 310s was that they had gangways between the 2nd and 3rd cars (the 310s only had gangways between pairs)

................

'm not sure what the logic was to provide a through gangway for sets intended to work Birmingham New St - International but not on ones that worked Birmingham New St - Euston.

Don't try to apply logic to that. There is none.

The reason is simple. 310s dated from 1966. 312s from 1975 - almost a decade apart. The 4 West Mids 312s were just an add on build to the ER 312s not an attempt to do anything else.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Aug 2024 ==

There were short sets on off-peak and weekend workings for some timetables. Google finds quite quickly:

In 1986/87 there were six train sets, all made up of vac' braked Mk1s:

EN100: BSK 4xSK FK 5xSK
EN101: 4xTSO FK 3xTSO BSK
EN102 & EN104: BSK 2xTSO CK 2xTSO
EN103 & EN105: TSO CK 2xTSO BSK

EN100 & EN101 ran self contained diagrams. The four half sets (EN102-EN105) would be combined for peak time services (EN102+EN103 and EN104+EN105). EN100 and EN101 could also be seen working summer Saturdays on the Cambrian.

Nice picture of a 304 at Carlisle in 1987 too.

Surely if I have read right all of that makes assorted not-short 9/10/11 car sets ?

if 102/104 and 103/105 attached each other for peak and summer SO workings, that accounts for SX 52 weeks per year, and half the SO; whatever else did they do unattached ????? Short LM LH sets on ACL stopping trains on the left over Sundays I put it to you were rarer than snowballs in the Belgian Congo.

Admittedly 86/87 was the year I left the West Mids so possibly lost track, but up to then every year I obtained an LMR carriage marshalling circular and I can assure was scoured from end to end for oddball workings by myself and several others, including Ken Howard, master of the 1H80 etc headcode books.

 

[87015]

Is as it reads. The noted short sets worked SX off peak and Saturday Northampton services, as it says, combining for the peak work. The long sets did weekend off-patch work.

 

[D7666]

Is as it reads. The noted short sets worked SX off peak and Saturday Northampton services, as it says, combining for the peak work. The long sets did weekend off-patch work.

hhmmmmmm

not sure that is right, never ever heard of LM operating short Euston (EN) sets in service off peak and combining on peak. some meaning has got lost there.

AFAIR in general the short sets were a marshalling and maintenance convenience only, enabling them to mix and match cars as needed to do things like position of brakes, but always in traffic as long sets

As said I lost track of WCML detail actually in the 86/87 timetable but I'm pretty sure i'd remember detaching / attaching LH sets after am and before pm peaks.

I might be wrong but I'll have to see some actual contemporary operating notices to convince me otherwise.

 

[Merle Haggard]

hhmmmmmm

not sure that is right, never ever heard of LM operating short Euston (EN) sets in service off peak and combining on peak. some meaning has got lost there.

A

That is correct.


Not sure of the dates, but certainly some off peak Euston - Northampton trains were formed of half a 'Cobbler' set for a year or so. May have been only for one t.t.

I'm certain because I travelled on them on half-days off work in London. Obviously electric-hauled, and called Leighton B - Bletchley - Milton K - Northampton.

The Cobbler sets had only one brake, (from memory, at the South end) so this dictated which half was used.

 

[Magdalia]

In 1986/87 there were six train sets, all made up of vac' braked Mk1s:

EN100: BSK 4xSK FK 5xSK
EN101: 4xTSO FK 3xTSO BSK
EN102 & EN104: BSK 2xTSO CK 2xTSO
EN103 & EN105: TSO CK 2xTSO BSK

EN100 & EN101 ran self contained diagrams. The four half sets (EN102-EN105) would be combined for peak time services (EN102+EN103 and EN104+EN105). EN100 and EN101 could also be seen working summer Saturdays on the Cambrian.

I'm certain because I travelled on them on half-days off work in London. Obviously electric-hauled, and called Leighton B - Bletchley - Milton K - Northampton.

The following off peak trains are in Ken Howard's 1H86 book:

Euston-Northampton 1B01 0925 SX/0930 SO, 1B02 1110 SX/1123 SO, 1B03 1305 SX/1520 SO
Northampton-Euston 1A22 1109 SX/1131 SO, 1A35 1313 SX/1337 SO. 1A53 1611 SX/1745 SO

They are also in 1H87, same codes but different times.

 

[Merle Haggard]

The following off peak trains are in Ken Howard's 1H86 book:

Euston-Northampton 1B01 0925 SX/0930 SO, 1B02 1110 SX/1123 SO, 1B03 1305 SX/1520 SO
Northampton-Euston 1A22 1109 SX/1131 SO, 1A35 1313 SX/1337 SO. 1A53 1611 SX/1745 SO

They are also in 1H87, same codes but different times.

Thanks for that info', it would have been an SX 1B03 that I caught.

Worth saying that, if you thought that the journey with an 86 and 5 (or 6??) on would be sparkling you would be disappointed. From what I remember, it was sedate and spent most of the journey slow-line. Class 1, though, and the emu were all 2s then.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Geek moment: do any of you readers recall which 310 still retained its wrap around windscreens, after its refurbishment and NSE livery? I know the answer - I have a photo of the unit at Euston.

As I see this hasn’t been answered, I will do the honours by way of a YouTube link:

Jump to 05:26 for the answer, or watch the whole video and bask in the late-80s WCML goodness

 

[D7666]

I remember those mid day off peak trains but I am sure those I did were full 9/10/11 car sets and not short sets, which is my point.

And, if there was any kind of attaching or detaching of short sets I don't remember seeing any of that at Euston nor associated ECS to/from Stonebridge (or even Camden) or anywhere else.

ISTR the middle ones (in that list 1B02 1A35) were 310s more often than not - whether by design or impromtu working I can't say - but if they did not split one set then a full set doing the 1st and 3rd and EMU the 2nd all fits with my travel on those. Which admittedly was not a lot. OTH not everything on paper actually happened.

 

[Sun Chariot]

As I see this hasn’t been answered, I will do the honours by way of a YouTube link:

Jump to 05:26 for the answer, or watch the whole video and bask in the late-80s WCML goodness

Teen memories of the south WCML and the unique 310 056. Well discovered

 

[D7666]

304s : these were ordered and built in 3 seperate batches - but the second two are nominally the same. 001-015 were open driving trailers and compartment both middle cars; 016-045 three opens and only the trailer composite was compartment. The batches 001-015, 016-035 and 036-045 were ordered against sucessive OLE phases. There are maybe electrical differences with the 001 batch too but I need go look that up.

I can't find a reference to it but I am sure I had read somewhere on AM4 there was a split between Germanium and Silicon rectifiers - just like AL5 - but one principal resource I have refers only to Germanium; however it refers only to the first 35 units.

The same source states they were internally wired for 6.25 kV as well, and a look at the power schematic confirms this. Obviously this was never activated on LM units, and I /think/ the changeover detection kit was either removed early and or not fitted at all on the later units. always wondered where the LM 6.25 kV was going to be - the changes that allowed WCML to be all 25 kV came after planning and construction started but before completion and commissioning. Birmingham New Street area is an obvious guesswork candidate.

Nominally 001-015 were booked against Manchester Crewe and 016-035 against Liverpool Crewe.

 

[Merle Haggard]

An unfortunate.(possible) side effect of the splitting into half sets and re-joining was that, at that time, one of the evening peak Cobblers divided (round about the middle) in the Watford area - possibly as a result of the buckeyes not being fully up when re-forming. I was travelling on the following Cobbler which made a special stop at Watford, where the passengers who had been in the rear half joined us - not sure how they got to Watford from their coaches, though. Someone I know was travelling at the front of the culprit train, and they said that there was a sudden stop and some unexplained delay ('Cobbler' situation normal) but they then got going well again. When the alighted at Northampton and walked done the platform they then noticed the train was a lot shorter than when they'd boarded it at Euston
Commuting on the 'Cobblers' often provided excitement.

 

[Bevan Price]

Might be of interest -
312.204 in Manchester Piccadilly, Summer 1987

 

[Sun Chariot]

Might be of interest -
312.204 in Manchester Piccadilly, Summer 1987

The "canary" did get about in the mid 1980s My only photo of it, was Wolverton works in the summer of 1985

 

[nw1]

There were short sets on off-peak and weekend workings for some timetables. Google finds quite quickly:

In 1986/87 there were six train sets, all made up of vac' braked Mk1s:

EN100: BSK 4xSK FK 5xSK
EN101: 4xTSO FK 3xTSO BSK
EN102 & EN104: BSK 2xTSO CK 2xTSO
EN103 & EN105: TSO CK 2xTSO BSK

EN100 & EN101 ran self contained diagrams. The four half sets (EN102-EN105) would be combined for peak time services (EN102+EN103 and EN104+EN105). EN100 and EN101 could also be seen working summer Saturdays on the Cambrian.

Nice picture of a 304 at Carlisle in 1987 too.

What workings did these do?

Sorry, answered above!

 

[Tester]

I can't find a reference to it but I am sure I had read somewhere on AM4 there was a split between Germanium and Silicon rectifiers - just like AL5 - but one principal resource I have refers only to Germanium; however it refers only to the first 35 units.

The same source states they were internally wired for 6.25 kV as well, and a look at the power schematic confirms this. Obviously this was never activated on LM units, and I /think/ the changeover detection kit was either removed early and or not fitted at all on the later units. always wondered where the LM 6.25 kV was going to be - the changes that allowed WCML to be all 25 kV came after planning and construction started but before completion and commissioning. Birmingham New Street area is an obvious guesswork candidate.

Nominally 001-015 were booked against Manchester Crewe and 016-035 against Liverpool Crewe.

At least Euston to Headstone Lane, as I recall hearing in the 1970s

 

[43096]

Nominally 001-015 were booked against Manchester Crewe and 016-035 against Liverpool Crewe.

You do wonder how BR got approval for 20 units for Liverpool-Crewe when that service would have needed five sets at most.

 

[Merle Haggard]

The same source states they were internally wired for 6.25 kV as well, and a look at the power schematic confirms this. Obviously this was never activated on LM units, and I /think/ the changeover detection kit was either removed early and or not fitted at all on the later units. always wondered where the LM 6.25 kV was going to be - the changes that allowed WCML to be all 25 kV came after planning and construction started but before completion and commissioning. Birmingham New Street area is an obvious guesswork candidate.

I think that some of the L.M. units were on loan to the G.E. when new and this suggests that the 6.25kv system had actually been installed in them - photo of one in Trains Illustrated from memory.

//

The 'Liverpool' AM4s had one more seating bay in the MBS than the 'Manchester' ones (obviously with a smaller van) which suggests a very detailed analysis of specific traffic requirements...

 

[Taunton]

I think that some of the L.M. units were on loan to the G.E. when new and this suggests that the 6.25kv system had actually been installed in them - photo of one in Trains Illustrated from memory.

Some of the units were loaned to the GE from the day after the Liverpool Street to Southend line was converted from 1,500V DC to 6.25kV AC, while the home units were away being converted. The entirety of the GE DC system was changed to 6.25, so there was no need to go over any conversion points to 25kV - it was much later that this was progressively changed over again in the outer area, and finally the entire system.

If the changeover equipment could be omitted that made the arrangement more simpler. At the time of voltage conversion I don't think there was any such point anyway - the initial 25kV installation was further out along the GEML and not yet joined up.

 

[Magdalia]

The entirety of the GE DC system was changed to 6.25, so there was no need to go over any conversion points to 25kV

That's not entirely correct. Shenfield-Chelmsford was converted from DC to 25kV AC.

 

[D7666]

I think that some of the L.M. units were on loan to the G.E. when new and this suggests that the 6.25kv system had actually been installed in them - photo of one in Trains Illustrated from memory.

//

That is true.

The 'Liverpool' AM4s had one more seating bay in the MBS than the 'Manchester' ones (obviously with a smaller van) which suggests a very detailed analysis of specific traffic requirements...

Doubt it. Suggests to me more like in a general drift away from more compos + less opens to less compos + more opens through batch 2 ordered later than batch 1.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Aug 2024 ==

You do wonder how BR got approval for 20 units for Liverpool-Crewe when that service would have needed five sets at most.

I thought that too, but wondered if it was simply a book keeping exercise - as there is no listed seperate batch for CRewe / West Midlands, and the last 10 obviously don't account for all it's needs.

Or maybe they have published the Manchester and Liverpool batches the wrong way round - although even that don't add up directly to the service level demands.

It all obviously drifted with time anyway, the intent to build and EMU depot at Walsall plus that Walsall / Rugeley, Walsall / Lichfield and Birmingham / Lichfield (and others) were all included in the 1955 plan must have meant book keeping batch twiddling.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Aug 2024 ==

Some of the units were loaned to the GE from the day after the Liverpool Street to Southend line was converted from 1,500V DC to 6.25kV AC, while the home units were away being converted. The entirety of the GE DC system was changed to 6.25, so there was no need to go over any conversion points to 25kV - it was much later that this was progressively changed over again in the outer area, and finally the entire system.

If the changeover equipment could be omitted that made the arrangement more simpler. At the time of voltage conversion I don't think there was any such point anyway - the initial 25kV installation was further out along the GEML and not yet joined up.

The changeover equipment relied on actually detecting 25 or 6.25 kV and switch transformer connections - it would still have to detect what it was on even if not transitioning from one to the other either way.

Again as I often say, apply Occams Razor, the simplest explanation is most likely the actual explanation.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Aug 2024 ==

The entirety of the GE DC system was changed to 6.25, so there was no need to go over any conversion points to 25kV

No. Shenfield / Chelmsford was 1500 V DC to 25 kV AC it never had 6.25 kV. Time and time again web chatter and even 'professional' journos omit Chelmsford was in the 1500 V DC system, not just the Southend line.

 

[Taunton]

No. Shenfield / Chelmsford was 1500 V DC to 25 kV AC it never had 6.25 kV. Time and time again web chatter and even 'professional' journos omit Chelmsford was in the 1500 V DC system, not just the Southend line.

The 1962 Ministry of Transport official report into the electrical failures and explosions on the new high voltage AC lines in both East London and Glasgow has definitive maps on the last page of the detail of what was at 6.25kV and what was at 25kV. As the changeover equipment from one to another was at the centre of the investigation, and as the maps show detail of all the voltages of the various lines and the feeder stations (four needed for Shenfield to Southend; just one needed for all of Colchester to Clacton/Walton) and other aspects, I think they are unlikely to be wrong, as at 1962. The changeover to 25kV is shown north of Shenfield on the GEML. This section to Chelmsford had indeed initially been DC, but only had an hourly local service in DC days. Here it is, last page:

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_EMUFailures1962.pdf

 

[Ken H]

Surely, many of these detail differencies were based on sub classes. 312/1, 312/2 for instance. These were hardly just cosmetic

 

[D7666]

The 1962 Ministry of Transport official report into the electrical failures and explosions on the new high voltage AC lines in both East London and Glasgow has definitive maps on the last page of the detail of what was at 6.25kV and what was at 25kV. As the changeover equipment from one to another was at the centre of the investigation, and as the maps show detail of all the voltages of the various lines and the feeder stations (four needed for Shenfield to Southend; just one needed for all of Colchester to Clacton/Walton) and other aspects, I think they are unlikely to be wrong, as at 1962. The changeover to 25kV is shown north of Shenfield on the GEML. This section to Chelmsford had indeed initially been DC, but only had an hourly local service in DC days. Here it is, last page:

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_EMUFailures1962.pdf

and your point is now what ?

you are now correcting yourself where you said earlier QUOTE The entirety of the GE DC system was changed to 6.25 UNQUOTE which was the point I (and I see one other) was responding to - the entirety of the GE DC was NOT changed to 6.25.