Banking trains in the UK

[ChiefPlanner]

When the line had coal traffic, the Pantyffynon to Abernant and Gwaun Cae Gurwen route had a 37 front and rear (they were fearful of a brakaway on the 1-37 gradient after Garnant) , even though the traffic was basically empties at that point. At the termini when were coupled together and double headed the return workings which were un-braked , apart from the first mile where a % of wagon brakes would be pinned down on some of the load.

Coming down , the extra brake force was invaluable - even though speed was not much more than 15mph. As each 37 had a secondman , (in those days) , a fairly expensive line to operate. 4 locomen , a guard and a travelling shunter !

Towards the end , HAA were used - fully fitted and much cheaper to operate.

 

[Wyrleybart]

You mean Kingswinford Junction (near Brierley Hill) I assume?

In the early/mid 1970s, Stourbridge Junction was one of my favourite train watching spots - bankers back then usually sat in the loop on the east side of the mainline between duties, then ran south into the station and reversed through the crossover onto the rear of freights. Usually a 45 or 47, but occasionally a pair of 25s.

Yes. I did mean Kingswinford Junction.

 

[Trackman]

Correct, and by the late 1980s a Class 37 and then a Class 60 (or to my infant son when we passed through Victoria, a big-nose diesel or a see-through diesel).

Indeed, also it was Goyles (31s) after the Rats were withdrawn.

 

[childwallblues]

Biomass seems a very pejorative word for passengers - even if strictly accurate!

Nothing in the title about passenger.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Nothing in the title about passenger.

It was tongue-in-cheek obvs

 

[D7666]

Something I've wondered about in the past: trains were banked up Upwey, but all the comments I've read indicate that going southbound up Evershot bank trains were piloted. Same line, but different procedures. Any idea why?

On a point of order, w.r.t. steam days, when assisting, WR trains with WR power were banked up Upwey and SR trains with SR power piloted. At least that was how it was before reorganisation when boat trains were switched from Paddington to Waterloo c.1962 +/- a year (I not looked it up).

Take a look at the many photos - assisted SR trains have two SR allocated locos are in twos at train front but WR trains do not. I do not know why it was worked like this except there were suggestions about track layouts at the point of detachment - and certainly with the OLD Dorchester South layout that required Up trains to reverse into platform having the assisting loco at the front made sense.

 

[Merle Haggard]

On a point of order, w.r.t. steam days, when assisting, WR with WR power trains were banked up Upwey and SR trains with SR power piloted. At least that was how it was before reorganisation when boat trains were switched from Paddington to Waterloo c.1962 +/- a year (I not looked it up).

Take a look at the many photos - assisted SR trains have SR locos are in twos at train front but WR trains do not. I do not know why it was worked like this except there were suggestions about track layouts at the point of detachment - and certainly with the OLD Dorchester South layout that required Up trains to reverse into platform having the assisting loco at the front made sense.

Don't forget that the GWR/WR convention was that the assisting engine (at the front) had to be inside the train engine. The logic was the train engine driver should be in charge of the train, I guess - but, if adhered to, it would make for a lot of shunting for a comparatively short distance.
.

 

[The exile]

Nothing in the title about passenger.

The comment about the biomass trains was a direct answer to my post (quoted in the post) asking about passenger trains, though.

 

[D7666]

Don't forget that the GWR/WR convention was that the assisting engine (at the front) had to be inside the train engine.
.

I disagree that was a hard rule at least in BR WR days.

Indeed I believe it is a myth at least in more modern times, or something that has been misunderstood and or misquoted over time, although it might have been the case way way long ago.

If it as you say it is, then there must have been quite a lot of WR express passenger trains over Dainton and other South Devon banks that had Moguls or Prairies etc as train engines and Kings and Castles as assisting engines - for many of the BR WR are pictures you can find on the web have the smaller engine in front of the bigger engine which you say train engine in front of assisting engine. And I'm pretty sure they did not faff at Newton Abbot doing any more than detaching (Up) or attaching (Down) a pilot.

Likewise every image I can find of steam assisting freight through Severn Tunnel in BR WR where there are two engines on the front are of a Prairie piloting a 28xx/38xx or Hall etc - the Prairie surely is not the train engine which is what you imply, especially when STJ Prairies were based there as the normal assisting power, the 28xx/38xx is the train engine.

 

[The exile]

I disagree that was a a hard rule at least in BR WR days.

Indeed I believe it is a myth, at least in more modern times, or something that has been misunderstood and or misquoted over time,although it might have been the case way way long ago.

If it as you say it is, then there must have been quite a lot of express passenger trains over Dainton and other South Devon banks that had Moguls or Prairies etc as train engines and Kings and Castles as assisting engines - for many of the BR WR are pictures you can find on the web have the smaller engine in front of the bigger engine which you say train engine in front of assisting engine.

Likewise every image I can find of steam assisting freight through Severn Tunnel in BR WR where there are two engines on the front are of a Prairie piloting a 28xx/38xx or Hall etc - the Prairie sure is not the train engine which is what you imply.

Wasn’t the rule only hard-and-fast when the pilot engine didn’t have a pony-truck leading?

 

[D7666]

Wasn’t the rule only hard-and-fast when the pilot engine didn’t have a pony-truck leading?

I'd never heard that BUT it sure makes sense and tends to confirm my comment about something being misquoted or misunderstood.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I disagree that was a hard rule at least in BR WR days.

Indeed I believe it is a myth at least in more modern times, or something that has been misunderstood and or misquoted over time, although it might have been the case way way long ago.

If it as you say it is, then there must have been quite a lot of WR express passenger trains over Dainton and other South Devon banks that had Moguls or Prairies etc as train engines and Kings and Castles as assisting engines - for many of the BR WR are pictures you can find on the web have the smaller engine in front of the bigger engine which you say train engine in front of assisting engine. And I'm pretty sure they did not faff at Newton Abbot doing any more than detaching (Up) or attaching (Down) a pilot.

Likewise every image I can find of steam assisting freight through Severn Tunnel in BR WR where there are two engines on the front are of a Prairie piloting a 28xx/38xx or Hall etc - the Prairie surely is not the train engine which is what you imply, especially when STJ Prairies were based there as the normal assisting power, the 28xx/38xx is the train engine.

The rules were set out in the WR Regional Appendix:-

Assisting or double heading may take place only ... ... i.e. on main lines and other routes detailed in the Sectional Appendices

Passenger trains

The engine required to assist or double head may be coupled in front of the train engine, providing it is in the same group or superior as below.I f this is not the case, the second engine must, with certain exceptions, set out in sub-sections (ii) and (iii) below, be placed inside the train engine.
In broad terms from superior downwards a) 4-6-0, 4-6-2 b) 4-4-0 2-10-0, 2-8-0 & T,2-6-0 with bogie/pony truck leading: 2-8-2T, 2-6-4T, 2-6-2T either direction, 0-6-2T with bunker leading and most inferior c) 0-6-2T chimney leading, 0-6-0, 0-6-0T

(ii) Tender engines of the 2-6-0 type with driving wheels not less than 5' 8" (my note - 4300 were that diameter) may assist in front of any engine except Kings over a variety of lines but including Totnes-Newton Abbot, N.A to Brent and Plymouth-Hemerden.

(ii) Tank engines of the 2-6-2T type with driving wheels not less than 5' 8" ( so that limits to big prairies except 8100) may - a list then follows, same as the 2-6-0 plus additions.

Freight trains - too much to type! but broadly similar.

Wasn’t the rule only hard-and-fast when the pilot engine didn’t have a pony-truck leading?

Having the pony truck leading (eg 0-6-2Ts had to be bunker first) was a parameter but if they didn't - i.e. group c) - , then the only loco that they could pilot was also one in group c).

So there were situations where the train loco had to be moved 'inside'.

Edited to add the keys (ii) and (iii) missed that in the copy typing

 

[IanMac]

I was at school in Poole from 1955 to 1962 and I well remember seeing the banking locos employed from there on the adjacent line up to Branksome on Weymouth to Waterloo expresses pre-electrification. Perhaps more impressive were the summer Saturday trains to Bournemouth from the Midlands and North via the S&D, some with 11 or 12 carriages and needing double header plus banker.