History of Class 308

[pdeaves]

What is the history behind 308994 and 308995? I've found that 991-993 were parcels units but can find almost nothing about 994 and 995 apart from these photos:

308994 http://80srail.zenfolio.com/p723755944/h328F44B3#h294b3e8d and http://80srail.zenfolio.com/p723755944/h328F44B3#h328f44b3

308995 http://80srail.zenfolio.com/p723755944/h328F44B3#h3a9794e9 and http://80srail.zenfolio.com/p723755944/h328F44B3#h3b0f10bd

What were they converted from?

Thanks all!

 

[DidcotDickie]

I'm not sure but it looks like they are the original 308/2s which were built for Tilbury boat trains and parcels use on the London Tilbury & Southend line. These were originally 4 car units with passenger accommodation in the three trailers and parcels in the motor coach which contains the guards van. Most of these parcel vans were converted in the 1970s to passenger accommodation so that they could be used throughout the LT&S. They weren't very popular with the punters or operators as the absence of one passenger car was a nuisance, especially on peak workings. Usually they were confined to Tilbury loop line working where passenger loadings were lower, but they were also used when parcels and newspaper traffic required more space than the usual guards van. Boat train workings were fairly rare.

These two units retain the original parcels van motor coaches of the 308/2 which were not converted to passenger accommodation and presumably two of the driving trailers. The intermediate trailer has been removed so they are running as three car units. I don't know but it's possible that the driving trailers have been gutted for parcels use.

Hope this helps.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm surprised that they didn't go for a MLV type solution for heavy parcels traffic.

 

[delt1c]

MLV on 25v overhead would have requiered a considerable redesign.

 

[yorksrob]

MLV on 25v overhead would have requiered a considerable redesign.

I would have assumed something more organically linked to the AC electrics, but a single car luggage vehicle, rather than a redesign of the Southern/Tyneside version.

 

[delt1c]

without todays intensive turnaround the 308 was sufficient, to my mind the only flaw was incorporating it in the power car.

 

[306024]

In the late 70s these units (in 4 car configuration) were diagrammed to the 03.59 Liverpool St to Shoeburyness and 04.10 Liverpool St to Tilbury Riverside newspaper trains. Their peak workings were indeed hidden on quieter services. Occasionally a cruise ship docking at Tilbury would see a special boat train working with one or two of these units to accommodate the luggage, but as DidcotDickie says, these were not at all frequent.

 

[delt1c]

The logical solution would have been a wired BG to operate between 2 x 4 car units, but then this was BR thinking at the time

 

[306024]

The logical solution would have been a wired BG to operate between 2 x 4 car units, but then this was BR thinking at the time

Fortunately BR logic and thinking at the time included fitting the train in the platform. Such a formation wouldn't have fitted in platforms 16 to 18 at Liverpool St, which had to be used occasionally for the newspaper trains when engineering work prevented use of longer platforms.

Post #4 of this thread explains a lot more.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-308-with-luggage-van.123176/

 

[Alfie1014]

The logical solution would have been a wired BG to operate between 2 x 4 car units, but then this was BR thinking at the time

I don't think any of the BR MkI ER EMUs ever worked with hauled stock, they were EP brake compared with most of the hauled fleet at the time being vacumn braked and no provision for through control for the EMUs. I'm not saying it couldn't be done but there was no need at the time, compared to DMUs where they frequently hauled vans especially in the early days. Also on the LTS where the units worked for most of their lives, post electrification there were few facilities for, shunting and releasing hauled stock left after modernisation. In their latter lives 991-5 were also used a departmental/sandite units.

There are more pictures including this one of mine of 308317 at Upminster in this Flickr group for the 302-312s;

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8673209@N04/22699309733/in/pool-class302-312/

and this one of 308991 with a Class 309 en-route to Ilford in 1983;

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8673209@N04/23300291186/in/pool-class302-312/

 

[delt1c]

i agree that none of the BG.s ever operated with EMU's. My thinking always was that the 308/9's could have been built as standard 3 car units making them more flexible and 5 BG's could have been through wired for EMU operation. That way any available EMU on ER could have been used with the BG's as requiered.

 

[pdeaves]

Post #4 of this thread explains a lot more.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-308-with-luggage-van.123176/

Thanks. From that, we have 308317-321 renumbered 308991-995. Were they done sequentially or randomly?

 

[30907]

i agree that none of the BG.s ever operated with EMU's. My thinking always was that the 308/9's could have been built as standard 3 car units making them more flexible and 5 BG's could have been through wired for EMU operation. That way any available EMU on ER could have been used with the BG's as requiered.

Can't see that 3-car sets would have been a great advantage on the LTS (unless you diagrammed 4 together, I suppose)