• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

How to distinguish between different "Peak" class 44/45/46 locomotives

Status
Not open for further replies.

DB

Guest
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
5,036
They did. Their electrical equipment was used by Brush to build D1500-D1519, which is why this batch were different to the rest. The ETH was tapped from the generator rather than an alternator, and the braking system was also different.

Not quite correct - they had an ETS generator in addition to the main traction generator. Later ETS 47s had a similar setup of separate machines for traction power and ETS, but in this case the ETS one was an alternator.

This setup of two separate machines was the norm, with alternators succeeding generators for both over time (last as-built BR loco to use generators was the Class 50). Very recent locos use a DC-link setup with just one alternator and the output from that split to provide traction power and ETS - Class 68 and the Brush-rebuilt 73s have this arrangement.

The only BR-era class I know of where the ETS power was taken off the traction generators was the Class 55, where there wasn't room for additional electrical machines. This led to issues with some stock as the ETS output fluctuated considerably depending on traction power demand. More sophisticated modern locos such as the Class 68 have control systems which avoid issues like this.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MrEd

Member
Joined
13 Jan 2019
Messages
599
They did. Their electrical equipment was used by Brush to build D1500-D1519, which is why this batch were different to the rest. The ETH was tapped from the generator rather than an alternator, and the braking system was also different.
That’s right. I seem to recall that the first 20 Class 47s, unlike the Peaks and unlike the rest of the Class 47 fleet, were fitted with Westinghouse brakes rather than Davies and Metcalfe. Why was this I wonder?

Did Brush have some Westinghouse equipment spare from the 31s (which use this braking system) which they had just finished constructing?
 

D1537

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2019
Messages
2,105
Location
North Yorkshire
Not quite correct - they had an ETS generator in addition to the main traction generator. Later ETS 47s had a similar setup of separate machines for traction power and ETS, but in this case the ETS one was an alternator.
Quite right - I meant to say "a generator" rather than "the generator".

That’s right. I seem to recall that the first 20 Class 47s, unlike the Peaks and unlike the rest of the Class 47 fleet, were fitted with Westinghouse brakes rather than Davies and Metcalfe. Why was this I wonder?

Did Brush have some Westinghouse equipment spare from the 31s (which use this braking system) which they had just finished constructing?
Good question. The 46s were D&M so it wasn't for that reason, and all the other 47s were too. Given that there was barely a month between the delivery of D1519 and D1520, it does suggest that they did have some spare equipment knocking about.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
18,965
Location
Devon
They did. Their electrical equipment was used by Brush to build D1500-D1519, which is why this batch were different to the rest. The ETH was tapped from the generator rather than an alternator, and the braking system was also different.

I seem to remember that the reason they made a bit of a roaring/hoover type sound at times was because they had a different cooling system too (maybe different radiator fans and vents in the cooler group or something similar)?
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Associate Staff
International Transport
Railtours & Preservation
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
4,586
I seem to remember that the reason they made a bit of a roaring/hoover type sound at times was because they had a different cooling system too (maybe different radiator fans and vents in the cooler group or something similar)?
They had electric fans like 45s and 50s as opposed to hydrostatic fans in 46s and rest of the 47 fleet.
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
2,592
Never realised the Generators had so many differences. Surprised they weren't classed as their own sub-class at the very least given the Class 48 designation was used for the five machines that had a different power plant!
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
7,908
Never realised the Generators had so many differences. Surprised they weren't classed as their own sub-class at the very least given the Class 48 designation was used for the five machines that had a different power plant!
Class 46/1?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top