Where is this class 50 in Chester ?

[Bevan Price]

Risk appetites change over time. This was the 70s. Until it closed in 1966, the normal method of running round at Cowes involved propelling the ecs out of the station up a gradient, then uncoupling and releasing the loco, before running the stock back towards the stops by gravity with the guard controlling the movement with the handbrake.

That procedure was also used at Liverpool Lime Street on the stock for some steam-hauled suburban services.

 

[Magdalia]

Could the train in the pic actually be reversing then ? ! ?

The simple explanation for why the driver in the picture is looking towards the camera, and not in the direction of travel, is that, at the moment when the picture was taken, they were not driving the train. A driver in the other loco cab, out of sight from the camera, is driving.

As others have pointed out, propelling moves were common at the time.

and there was a regular propelling move at Inverness when the last arrival from Wick went past the TMD and propelled back into the platforms usually used by the services heading south.

This is a specific example, but, more generally, joining two portions of a loco hauled train usually involved a propelling move, and single line working during engineering work usually involved propelling over trailing crossovers.

This diversion, with the propelling move, was still used as late as summer 1992. On Sunday 19th July that year, I did the 0819 Crewe - Blackpool North, hauled by 31442, which went this way.

On Sunday 12th September 1993 the 0753 Crewe - Blackpool North hauled by 37 414+37 408 was diverted via the Chester triangle reversal move.

And as others have noted, the summer Sunday Crewe-Blackpool train was still doing the Chester triangle reversal in the early 1990s.

You say it was "dangerous operation" ? How many accidents were as a result of carefully reversing a train ? And I mean serious accidents.

One method of operation was already recognised as being dangerous in the 1970s. That was driving 2 cab locos from the rear end. Although few accidents resulted in serious injuries or fatalities, there were lots and lots of minor accidents, and I actually got to watch one of them as it happened. A driver was making a light engine move from the rear cab, misread a signal, and I watched the loco tip off some catch points into the dirt. Some accidents where locos were being driven from the wrong end also had serious cost implications, with extensive collision damage to locos and rolling stock.

The way of operating the Chester triangle move is likely to have recognised this risk, and eliminated any driving from the cab at the wrong end of the loco. I suggest that the operation is likely to have gone roughly like this:

• driver A brings the train from Crewe, runs through Chester station and along the first side of the triangle
• driver A hands the loco master key to driver B, who is probably a local Chester driver
• driver B goes to the cab at the other end of the loco and drives the train along the second side of the triangle, and this is what is in the picture
• driver B then returns the loco master key to driver A, and his job is done
• driver A resumes control of the train along the third side of the triangle, through Chester station, and on towards Warrington, all without leaving their seat, and with the opportunity to admire the scenic vistas of the second side of the triangle

 

[Rescars]

This is a specific example, but, more generally, joining two portions of a loco hauled train usually involved a propelling move, and single line working during engineering work usually involved propelling over trailing crossovers.

I'd guess many with longer memories will have witnessed this. Going on a family holiday, I recall this happening to a Motorail service on the WCML north of Preston during the period when the OLE was being installed. Propelling car carriers and all back over a trailing crossover before running wrong line past the blockage whilst under the care of a pilotman. There was a delay of course, but the process added extra interest to the journey - for some of us at least!

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Have come to this discussion late, but;

The simple explanation for why the driver in the picture is looking towards the camera, and not in the direction of travel, is that, at the moment when the picture was taken, they were not driving the train. A driver in the other loco cab, out of sight from the camera, is driving.

That's what I was thinking.

Has the concept of an 08 hauling at the other end been discussed. Plenty of them based at CH to undertake such assisting duties?

Until it closed in 1966, the normal method of running round at Cowes involved propelling the ecs out of the station up a gradient, then uncoupling and releasing the loco, before running the stock back towards the stops by gravity with the guard controlling the movement with the handbrake

But that like many others, involved empty stock.

One such move involving a shunt and a short propelling movement with passengers on board, having done same myself, was that at Georgemas Junction, where the Thurso shuttle, often just 2 x Mk 1's, would shunt on to the rear of the Wick to Inverness train to form the combined service Southwards.

Edited: Going back further there were propelling moves with passengers on board at various places on the ex LSWR for example, when trains divided/attached en route, viz at Axminster, Halwill Junction etc, albeit most of these moves were more like short shunts. As time progressed the rules and regulations changed of course, so these examples can't really be comparable to the OP's Chester question.

 

[6Gman]

This is a specific example, but, more generally, joining two portions of a loco hauled train usually involved a propelling move, and single line working during engineering work usually involved propelling over trailing crossovers.

The propelling move at Carstairs to reattach the Edinburgh portion of the Midland Scot to the Glasgow portion was carried out with some gusto!

And, in the days of Mk IIc stock, one could stand in the end vestibule to look through the little windows in the corridor connection and see the Glasgow portion looming ever closer!

 

[Harpo]

The way of operating the Chester triangle move is likely to have recognised this risk, and eliminated any driving from the cab at the wrong end of the loco. I suggest that the operation is likely to have gone roughly like this:

• driver A brings the train from Crewe, runs through Chester station and along the first side of the triangle
• driver A hands the loco master key to driver B, who is probably a local Chester driver
• driver B goes to the cab at the other end of the loco and drives the train along the second side of the triangle, and this is what is in the picture
• driver B then returns the loco master key to driver A, and his job is done
• driver A resumes control of the train along the third side of the triangle, through Chester station, and on towards Warrington, all without leaving their seat, and with the opportunity to admire the scenic vistas of the second side of the triangle

Sorry, I won’t say ‘never’, as oddball stuff still surfaces, but I never came across anything like that in my decades in BR ops. If the operating instructions said that the loco needed two people on the footplate, the job got double manned, driver and second man. If instructions specified a driving end, the driver walked down the ballast.

Two drivers on one traction unit was generally only route conductor, an HST or the second man was a ‘passed man’, qualified to drive and waiting for a vacancy.

Lots of stuff from past decades would give modern H&S practitioners nightmares!

 

[43096]

The propelling move at Carstairs to reattach the Edinburgh portion of the Midland Scot to the Glasgow portion was carried out with some gusto!

The mention of Carstairs reminds me... there is still a propelling move with passengers on board on the British railway. The southbound Edinburgh sleeper (1C11) is propelled onto the back of the Glasgow to Euston sleeper (1M11) at Carstairs.

 

[Gloster]

I have been reluctant to join this discussion, but… Having a second driver at the end of the loco next to the train was unusual, except in places where experience had made it a requirement, which mostly seemed to be where there might be difficulties walking alongside the loco to change ends. Here it seems to have even less reason as the driver in the ’inner’ cab would be on the outside of the curve and unable to see the other end of the train or signals until part of the train was past them.

I can see several reasons why the driver may be looking towards the photographer. There might be a loco on the other end, the train might be halted for a second or two, he might be briefly straightening his neck because of the angle he has had to look out at when propelling, the photographer might have made a movement which has momentarily attracted his attention, etc. Remember, we are only seeing the situation at one split second.

This is written despite a former signalman’s mild cynicism about drivers. However, propelling was always a slightly more worrying movement as you don’t have the man in control of the loco at the sharp end.

 

[Harpo]

This is written despite a former signalman’s mild cynicism about drivers

That worked both ways. I’ve even known drivers say ‘my life in your hands’ to signallers. I always thought it a good thing though - Blind faith in each other’s actions leads to dangerous complacency.

 

[Rescars]

This has echoes of the old addage about the fireman telling the driver to start the guard's train on the signalman's railway!

 

[Fleetwood Boy]

There is, of course, one six nights a week at Cars

The propelling move at Carstairs to reattach the Edinburgh portion of the Midland Scot to the Glasgow portion was carried out with some gusto!

And, in the days of Mk IIc stock, one could stand in the end vestibule to look through the little windows in the corridor connection and see the Glasgow portion looming ever closer!

Happened every 2 hours at Carstairs in the 1980s, in zip time and as said with some gusto. Also at least once a day at Preston on the Manchester/Liverpool-Glasgow/Edinburgh service in the same era.

And of course still happens nightly at Carstairs plus some rather shorter shunting moves at Waverley.

 

[Justin Smith]

Risk appetites change over time.

Never a truer word spoken, how far will it all go though.....

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jan 2026 ==

I was in the industry half a century ago.

Obviously there were many accidents caused by propelled trains, asking me to quantify the number is a pathetic question because everybody knows it can't be answered. Fortunately, all such incidents that I know of involved non-passenger trains - authorisation to propel loaded passenger trains is extremely rare.

If you all want to brush off this operation as perfectly safe and normal then please do so. But you should put yourself into the real world and not pretend this kind of thing was normal and safe, then or now. In any railwayman's mind, such a movement is fraught with risk and needs to be managed carefully indeed.

"Top and tail" (an unofficial term which by definition actually refers to cutting each end off something) was indeed in use then, it came under the heading of "Assisting Locomotive In Rear" even if not powering - I first came across that in the early 1970s. But as this is apparently not what was done here, it doesn't apply.

Somebody at Divisional Level authorised this, and as I dealt with them in those days I am rather surprised they did, for they seemed incrediby awkward to deal with although they did, of course, have their reasons. The obvious solution would surely have been an engine change in the station area. There were plenty of non-platform lines they could have done that on. "Expensive and time consuming"? - it wouldn't take longer than reversals around a triangle and the provision of one extra engine would not have been considered an unacceptable financial burden in those days.

Anyway, I have said quite enough on the subject, I will leave those so anxious to argue regardless to it.

John

You talk like the cost is irrelevant, but it's not just the cost of the second loco, it's the cost of the wages for the second driver, in fact back then was it actually two drivers ?

 

[6Gman]

I have been reluctant to join this discussion, but… Having a second driver at the end of the loco next to the train was unusual, except in places where experience had made it a requirement, which mostly seemed to be where there might be difficulties walking alongside the loco to change ends. Here it seems to have even less reason as the driver in the ’inner’ cab would be on the outside of the curve and unable to see the other end of the train or signals until part of the train was past them.

Thinking about it, in my years as a traincrew diagrammer we'd have handled a fair number of reversing moves and I cannot ever recall putting a second driver onto a loco for such moves.

Which is not to say it might not have happened somewhere.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Speaking as a lay person. I am going to assume the reversing train was stationary and that the driver was waiting for the guard to give him the go ahead to proceed. I don't think I could stay permanently looking backwards just in case the guard at the other end starting indicating safe to move. Is it a bit of a neck twister to reverse ?.