Push-pull operation of suburban trains

[LickeyIncliner]

From travels around Western Europe (particularly France, Germany and Italy) over several decades, I have the impression that push-pull operation of suburban trains is common and that new trains of this type are still being introduced. To be clear, by "push-pull operation" I mean that the train has a clearly identifiable, non-passenger-carrying locomotive at one end, and a rake of unpowered passenger coaches with, at a minimum, a single driving cab at the far end of from the locomotive. My questions:

[1] is my impression correct, i.e. is push-pull operation actually widely used ?

[2] if my impression is correct, why the difference from British practice? I can't think of any British examples of suburban push-pull using diesel or electric locomotives. (Inter-city push-pull is clearly a different story.)

 

[Route115?]

Its certainly common in Switzerland, the Zurich S-bahn has had loco push pull since 1989 (Re 450 with three double deck verhicles, often in multiple). Elsewhere there is often a power car at one end of an EMU.

Also in Germany, particularly RE sets.

Britain uses very few locos on passenger services these days and they are often topped & tailed. Greater Anglia used push pull on services to Norwich until their recent withdrawal, but they were not really suburban and Chiltern still uses Class 67 + Mk 3s on outer suburban services. Other examples such as Transport for Wales services are also not suburban, so no I can't think of many.

 

[StephenHunter]

Milan still has some push-pull stuff in operation.

 

[etr221]

Yes, your impression is I think correct, that p-p suburban working is common in Europe.

My understanding is that it was reasonably widely adopted - including with steam power - back in the inter- and earlyish post-war periods, a time period in which p-p operation of long trains was not permitted in Britain. For 'reversible' trains, Britain adopted mu working by the time pp was permitted - the late 1960s - British practice was to always use mu stock for such workings.

Coming forward one of the mysteries is why some countries/railways favour using locomotives/power cars (it can be difficult to distinguish them) and p-p trailers; while others choose mus and railcars for the same purposes - I think its something that goes back, and has become a national style...

One oddity it has led to is that the Italian E464 - a loco purpose designed to work p-p local passenger trains, and a current mainstay of Italian train working - is the most numerous class (ever) of Italian loco: for every other European (if not global) system the most numerous class was back in steam (or early diesel) days.

 

[U-Bahnfreund]

Where loco-hauled stock is still used in Germany in regional train service, it's always a push-pull train and have been for decades in my experience. I can't think of any example of loco-hauled regional trains that isn't push-pull, maybe apart from the half-touristy steam operations (Molli, HSB).

However loco-hauled push-pull trains are getting very much rarer while they are being replaced by EMUs and DMUs.

 

[Taunton]

There was a longstanding Board of Trade (government department, DfT predecessor) requirement that only two vehicles could be propelled in passenger service. This lasted right up to the mid 1960s when it was relaxed, initially for the Bournemouth electrification. This meant that all the Modernisation Plan for diesel and electric was done with either hauled stock or multiple units, and for suburban trains almost entirely the latter to overcome hauled stock difficulties at termini etc. The restriction made push-pull only practical for light branches, and also led to formations like the VEP/CIG/304 stock, where there were never more than two coaches ahead of the power car.

 

[Transilien]

I’ve always found the idea of a push pull train doing suburban workings fascinating as it seems to go against the logic that multiple units are most suitable for these workings due to their increased acceleration.

 

[dutchflyer]

@1. as always depends on what your idea is of ´widespread´ but above lists most of them. To me it seems more like a ´specific for some countries´ idea. And its also by far not limited to just suburbane/short distance services-in DE they may take over 2,5/till 3 hrs. There is/was even the odd case of coupling 2 such sets in very heavy traffic-same-same as for sets.
@2.I am not really aware of coming NEW into service such sets since at least the last 10 yrs, maybe even longer. So they are slowly fading away.
In fact it amazes me a little-the old (last century) explanation was that then such locoś could be used also-night time- for other/freight service, vs the usual EMUsets. But that does not happen with these locoś-only exchange in case of failure/maintenance is a little easier vs taking out the complete set as EMU.
From the eyes of the continent UK/GB has always been and probably also as a very 1st one the country that favours EMU-sets-even with hand-opened doors and no through passageway-very odd in the eyes from across the NorthSea. That was my very 1st remembrance of taking a train in GB: 3bridges to Brighton.

 

[Austriantrain]

Austria: Push-pull on local trains is getting less and less with new EMUs constantly delivered with many more on order. Some will remain for a while (with Double-deck stock), but no new push-pull sets will be ordered (unlike LD trains, where more RJ2 are still to be delivered).

 

[dastocks]

NJ Transit run sets of MultiLevel coaches in push-pull configuration:

Bombardier MultiLevel Coach - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It looks like they may also have some self-powered EMU sets that can be combined with the trailers/cab-cars to run trains without a locomotive.

The Dutch DDZ sets have a single power car at one end and are treated as EMUs:

NS DDZ - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The power car can be replaced with a locomotive, but I think the resulting consist is still treated as an EMU.

 

[30907]

My impression is that PP working plus double deck stock on regional/suburban routes is giving way to double-deck (or mixed single and double) MU stock in most countries - presumably because technological advance means distributed traction is possible within loading gauge constraints.

 

[StephenHunter]

My impression is that PP working plus double deck stock on regional/suburban routes is giving way to double-deck (or mixed single and double) MU stock in most countries - presumably because technological advance means distributed traction is possible within loading gauge constraints.

The last of the ones from Paris Nord on TER services have gone or almost gone.

 

[Bemined]

The Dutch DDZ sets have a single power car at one end and are treated as EMUs:

NS DDZ - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The power car can be replaced with a locomotive, but I think the resulting consist is still treated as an EMU.

DDZ is the renovated version which runs intercity services, it does not use locomotives anymore, just the power cars. The last original DDAR trainsets with locomotives that ran suburban trains were taken out of service 5 years ago.

 

[Transilien]

The Transilien J push-pull trains out of Paris St Lazare have not long left with the extension of the RER E to Mantes-la-Jolie. I am unsure about the TER services though.

 

[Richard Scott]

In France there are still a number of push-pull services around Strasbourg using 22000 and 67400s. Few around Lille with 22200s and Paris with 27300s (still clinging on but doubt around for much longer as stated above), also a number around Hungary using 432s and a few with 418s. Also a considerable number of push-pull double deck sets working around Copenhagen with EB3200 locos. Think there's a fair number of 4000s in Luxembourg on double deck sets, still?
A large amount of loco hauled operations still in Italy with class 464 electrics, still plenty around Rome and Florence when I was last there and a few class 445 diesels clinging on on the Borgo route from Florence.

 

[MotCO]

I've always thought pushing a train from the rear as counter-intuitive and unsafe. Is it any less safe or stable than pulling a train?

 

[duesselmartin]

The Rhine Ruhr and Nürnberg S-Bahn had been push pull well into the 2000s. The frequent stop and go did cause reliability issues with the 111 and 141 class used.

 

[hexagon789]

Is it any less safe or stable than pulling a train?

No, as widespread tests conducted by BR in the 1960s prior to the Bournemouth electrification demonstrated. Given how widespread it became across much of the world, I think that speaks as to its perceived safety.

Some countries in Europe had full-length push-pull suburban trains worked by steam power, many years before BR tried it with diesel and electric.

 

[43096]

The Rhine Ruhr and Nürnberg S-Bahn had been push pull well into the 2000s. The frequent stop and go did cause reliability issues with the 111 and 141 class used.

What about the 143s? They seemed quite rugged and reliable in S-Bahn duties.

 

[MarkyT]

Some countries in Europe had full-length push-pull suburban trains worked by steam power, many years before BR tried it with diesel and electric.

Paris had these until quite late. The very last suburban steam routes out of Gare du Nord finally succumbed to electrification in 1970. They used various classes of 2-8-2T locos and an electro-pneumatic remote control system from the cab car at the opposite end.

SNCF 141 TC 3, Gare Du Nord, Paris, 13th November 1970

Soon after sunrise SNCF 141 TC Class 2-8-2T No. 141 TC 3 has just arrived at the Gare du Nord in Paris with a commuter train from Valmondois. These were worked as "Push-Pull" with the engines on the country end and this route was the last regular steam passenger working in the Paris area. These...

plumbloco.smugmug.com

 

[Bemined]

I've always thought pushing a train from the rear as counter-intuitive and unsafe. Is it any less safe or stable than pulling a train?

In the Netherlands long push trains had a speed restriction in some locations as they were more likely to derail in tight curves. We also had some serious derailments with these trains about 20 years ago. I do have to add that these curves were tighter than according to the current design specifications, but for other trains it was still considered safe, just not for these long pushing trains.

 

[DanielB]

We also had some serious derailments with these trains about 20 years ago.

Even less than 20 years ago: https://onderzoeksraad.nl/onderzoek/ontsporing-15-augustus-2005/ (photos in the Dutch version, the English version describes another derailment)

As the report describes, it was pushed with maximum power through a tight S-curve.
Though this was an IC-consist of 12 cars. The suburban push-pull operations in the Netherlands had much shorter trains, the longest being 6-car DDM sets.

In fact it amazes me a little-the old (last century) explanation was that then such locoś could be used also-night time- for other/freight service, vs the usual EMUsets. But that does not happen with these locoś-only exchange in case of failure/maintenance is a little easier vs taking out the complete set as EMU.

Exchanging actually wasn't always that easy. I've read that in the Netherlands the locomotives used for DDAR-sets actually had only one functioning cab in most cases, so when removed from the trainset they could only be used in one direction.
With DDAR NS already had abandoned the use of the locomotive for freight overnight, but DDM-1 was specifically designed to enable this: the cab car had a pantograph so the carriages could remain powered whilst the locomotive was used for other purposes.

 

[12LDA28C]

From travels around Western Europe (particularly France, Germany and Italy) over several decades, I have the impression that push-pull operation of suburban trains is common and that new trains of this type are still being introduced. To be clear, by "push-pull operation" I mean that the train has a clearly identifiable, non-passenger-carrying locomotive at one end, and a rake of unpowered passenger coaches with, at a minimum, a single driving cab at the far end of the locomotive. My questions:

[1] is my impression correct, i.e. is push-pull operation actually widely used ?

[2] if my impression is correct, why the difference from British practice? I can't think of any British examples of suburban push-pull using diesel or electric locomotives. (Inter-city push-pull is clearly a different story.)

I was in Boston, USA in October and travelled on several push-pull local stopping services. These have been in operation for decades.

 

[duesselmartin]

What about the 143s? They seemed quite rugged and reliable in S-Bahn duties.

After initial problems they did it quiet well. East Getmany's VEB Hans Beimler did build a very solid locomotive.

 

[MarcVD]

The distinction between push pull trains and EMUs becomes more and more fuzzy nowadays.

Officially, this is a locomotive :



It can haul M7 and M6 cars, but also other stock like M4, and run in MU with HLE 18 and 19. Is this an EMU or a push-pull train ?

 

[Taunton]

I've always thought pushing a train from the rear as counter-intuitive and unsafe. Is it any less safe or stable than pulling a train?

The longstanding UK prohibition on propelling multiple vehicles did appear to have some merit with subsequent incidents of striking objects on the track leading to serious derailments where it was suggested, at least, that power was still being applied from the rear which was still on the rails, incidents such as Polmont (herd of cattle), Heck (crashed road vehicles), or even classic dmus with the driving trailer leading (Lockington level crossing, and others).

 

[MarkyT]

The longstanding UK prohibition on propelling multiple vehicles did appear to have some merit with subsequent incidents of striking objects on the track leading to serious derailments where it was suggested, at least, that power was still being applied from the rear which was still on the rails, incidents such as Polmont (herd of cattle), Heck (crashed road vehicles), or even classic dmus with the driving trailer leading (Lockington level crossing, and others).

After Polmont, I recall design standards changed for new driving trailers already envisaged for push-pull working of large numbers of express trains on ECML and WCML. As a result these orders specified significantly more weight on the leading bogie than previous designs as well as better obstacle deflection. As he acknowledged that increased leading axle load wasn't practical to accomplish quickly on existing Scottish DBSOs, the inspector recommended their equipment with a new robust obstacle deflector (cow catcher) alone as a 'quick win' to push away any substantial debris to the side that might otherwise get caught under the wheels. He was also concerned about fencing integrity and reporting of and operational response to animal incursions. He noted that the '84 incident had been the 1st UK derailment caused by animals on the line since 1948, and that the push-pull method avoided the risk of staff going on the track frequently to couple and uncouple the loco at each terminal reversal.

 

[route101]

Where loco-hauled stock is still used in Germany in regional train service, it's always a push-pull train and have been for decades in my experience. I can't think of any example of loco-hauled regional trains that isn't push-pull, maybe apart from the half-touristy steam operations (Molli, HSB).

However loco-hauled push-pull trains are getting very much rarer while they are being replaced by EMUs and DMUs.

I was in Germany recently and still some in Hamburg and Cologne. Double deck sets.

 

[DM352]

As others said, is very common in North America for push pull. Been on a few including Toronto and main observation is they feel slow compared to UK getting to line speed between stations. Think some of this is the crash worthiness requirements so increased carriage weight and think a few sets use converted freight engines.

 

[43096]

As others said, is very common in North America for push pull. Been on a few including Toronto and main observation is they feel slow compared to UK getting to line speed between stations. Think some of this is the crash worthiness requirements so increased carriage weight and think a few sets use converted freight engines.

There's no converted freight locos used for passenger work in Toronto, I don't think?

Plenty elsewhere, though: GP40s around Boston, with CTrail and New Jersey Transit and Metro-North west of Hudson operations. There's also the SD70MACH type that Metra in Chicago is currently introducing, rebuilt from Kansas City Southern SD70MAC locos.