• 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!

Is/was using the straight air brake to moderate train speed realistic?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Egg Centric

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
2,912
Location
Land of the Prince Bishops
In common with other railforum-ers I enjoy playing simulators when I have time and one of the techniques I have adopted for driving medium length consists c. the early 80s is using the straight air brake to hold the speed of the consist when descending a gradient, and potentially even to decelerate for small speed reductions of around 5-10mph since it's so much easier to make fine-grained adjustments. On the other hand, you are discharging all that kinetic energy into the friction between 8 or 12 wheels and their pads and I could see that being bad practice. It was recommended in the manual though but not sure I set any store by that.

Am particularly interested in what drivers did (or do) rather than theoretical answers.

Also, am I using the prototypical terms for all of the above? For example, maybe I should be saying "locomotive brake" instead of "straight air brake", or "train" instead of "consist". These terms seem to be interchangeable but maybe one or t'other is either incorrect usage or equivalent to speaking Ancient Greek in Cyprus* in that it may be understandable but immediately marks you out as a bit of a weirdo.

*Basing this on a fun visit there with one of my better-educated friends
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
4,089
Do you mean using the locomotive air brake only, not the full train air-brake system, to regulate speed?

I think this would be very strange and potentially dangerous.

As i remember, drivers always used the full train brake to slow down trains. In the case of passenger trains stopping in stations, they would stop using the full train system, then switch to holding the train in the station on the locomotive brake. I suppose at a station on an incline, they might keep the full train brakes on, but I never experienced, or never noticed this. I'm talking about practice in the 1970s.
 

Egg Centric

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
2,912
Location
Land of the Prince Bishops
Do you mean using the locomotive air brake only, not the full train air-brake system, to regulate speed?

I think this would be very strange and potentially dangerous.

As i remember, drivers always used the full train brake to slow down trains. In the case of passenger trains stopping in stations, they would stop using the full train system, then switch to holding the train in the station on the locomotive brake. I suppose at a station on an incline, they might keep the full train brakes on, but I never experienced, or never noticed this. I'm talking about practice in the 1970s.

That's what I mean yes, although to be clear I'm not talking about slowing the train to a stop - I'm talking primarily about maintaining a speed on a descent with a secondary role of a fine-tuning adjustment (e.g. approaching a 70 limit at 72mph)

I wasn't intentionally asking about what you are speaking of but you have managed to pique my interest! Why was it that they would take the train brake off and switch to the locomotive brake? Faster despatch?
 

ExRes

Established Member
Joined
16 Dec 2012
Messages
8,471
Location
Back in Sussex
An absolute no-no, you'll soon have the passengers pulling the emergency when their coaches start banging into the loco, I did it due to brain fade with a mail van set once, the vans very quickly reminded me that they were still moving at the original speed
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,912
I did this on a heritage railway shunting with an 03, ended up with quite a long unbraked consist and had to run some way onto the running line to clear points.
I was doing about 5mph and it took a very long time to stop. For a few seconds I was genuinely worried it wasn't going to stop and I was going to runaway done the bank (1 in 47).
Didn't do that again!
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
18,333
Location
Glasgow
In common with other railforum-ers I enjoy playing simulators when I have time and one of the techniques I have adopted for driving medium length consists c. the early 80s is using the straight air brake to hold the speed of the consist when descending a gradient, and potentially even to decelerate for small speed reductions of around 5-10mph since it's so much easier to make fine-grained adjustments. On the other hand, you are discharging all that kinetic energy into the friction between 8 or 12 wheels and their pads and I could see that being bad practice. It was recommended in the manual though but not sure I set any store by that.

Am particularly interested in what drivers did (or do) rather than theoretical answers.

Also, am I using the prototypical terms for all of the above? For example, maybe I should be saying "locomotive brake" instead of "straight air brake", or "train" instead of "consist". These terms seem to be interchangeable but maybe one or t'other is either incorrect usage or equivalent to speaking Ancient Greek in Cyprus* in that it may be understandable but immediately marks you out as a bit of a weirdo.

*Basing this on a fun visit there with one of my better-educated friends
No, absolutely against braking instructions.

From BR 33056/3 - Driver's Braking Instructions:

6. STRAIGHT AIR BRAKE
6.4 --The straight air brake MUST NOT be used for checking the speed on falling gradients, for reducing the speed when approaching speed restrictions or for stopping when fully or partially fitted trains are being hauled.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
7,367
I understood that (a bit like unfitted or partially-fitted freight, where it was imperative to keep the couplings taut to avoid snatching and broken couplings, and the guard in the brakevan's job was to ensure that) a passenger train would be braked so that the train couplings were all in tension. Hence braking propogating back along the train, governed by loss of pressure in the brake pipe and the response of the valves on each vehicle.

Where very quick reaction times and frequent repetition was needed, e.g. on Southern EMUs, the electro-pneumatic brake was employed, with the actuation happening instantaneously along the whole train.
Wasn't the 2-pipe air-brake system developed so that non-EPB air brakes could be released more quickly?
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
18,333
Location
Glasgow
Wasn't the 2-pipe air-brake system developed so that non-EPB air brakes could be released more quickly?
It does give a quicker brake release but more importantly compared to a single pipe system, the reservoirs are charged independently of the brake pipe and it is much more difficult (if not impossible with further features added since it was developed) to use up all the air through repeated applications and releases and find a greatly reduced or non-existent brake left.

It's also graduated in both application and release, a traditional single pipe air brake with triple valves is direct release (you can only graduate the strength of application, any release must be a full release), one reason why Britain mostly favoured the vacuum brake for the first half of the 20th century when train speeds got ever higher.
 

Egg Centric

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
2,912
Location
Land of the Prince Bishops
Thank you all, that absolutely answers the question. I shall hand myself in at the next simulated depot for simulated tea without simulated biscuits!

Bonus question: What was it for? Light engine only?
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
18,333
Location
Glasgow
Thank you all, that absolutely answers the question. I shall hand myself in at the next simulated depot for simulated tea without simulated biscuits!

Bonus question: What was it for? Light engine only?
From the same document:

6.3 The straight air brake valve may be used for the following purposes -

6.3.1 For securing a locomotive and train when it is necessary for the automatic brake to be released, e.g. when starting away on a rising gradient (See Clauses 12.1.4, 12.2.2 and 12.3.2.)

6.3.2 For securing the train when making a brake continuity test

6.3.3 For securing a locomotive during coupling operations

6.3.4 For making an application of 5-10 p.s.i. in order to bring a freight train together prior to application of the automatic brake. This technique may be used to avoid braking shocks, especially at low speeds and where complex gradients exist.
Note: not applicable to air braked freight trains and those hauled by E.Q. braked locomotives.

6.3.5 When running 'light locomotive'
 

GC class B1

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2021
Messages
460
Location
East midlands
Although not strictly relevant to the question, the straight air brake is also known on US vehicles as the direct brake. A straight air brake is fitted to all vehicles in the rail grinder trains and the now withdrawn NIR class 70 and 80 DEMUs had a straight air brake on all three vehicles.
 

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,837
Location
Nottinghamshire
Only time it was permissible was for braking on unfitted freight trains (ie loco brake only) and on vacuum braked freight trains to buffer up the wagons prior to applying the vacuum brake.
 

craigybagel

Established Member
Joined
25 Oct 2012
Messages
5,829
I recently went through conversion training to locos, and we were told to not even use the straight air brake for light engine moves, except at low speeds, and for coupling.

We've also recently had an instruction at our TOC to apply the automatic brake in full survice at station stops and keep it there until the right away from the guard is received, and not to hold the train using just the straight air as some drivers preferred. It does mean it takes a while to get going once the right away is received, but our locos are so much more powerful than our units that that extra time is soon made up.
 

Townsend Hook

Member
Joined
3 Aug 2011
Messages
932
Location
GB
I have definitely experienced drivers using the straight air brake on test trains, some seem to favour it. You really know about it when the the unbraked rear loco catches up with the rest of the train.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,107
Location
North Wales
I have definitely experienced drivers using the straight air brake on test trains, some seem to favour it. You really know about it when the the unbraked rear loco catches up with the rest of the train.
Could that use be by design, what with it being a test train? (I'm assuming not...)
 

Taunton

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
12,333
I sometimes wonder how current crews (and those who write their procedures) would have got on with unbraked freight trains. Not necessarily loose coupled - look up the Instanter coupling. The books written by David L Smith about the Glasgow & South Western 100 years ago are instructive.

In the USA it is common for regulating speed on downhills to be done principally by the dynamic, rheostatic brake on the locomotives, and in fact the number of locomotives provided for a given formation can be driven as much, if not more, by the dynamic brake requirement on the downhill, as opposed to haulage capacity on the uphill. Air brakes are for stopping. Descending 'Cajon Pass' from the high desert into Los Angeles, dropping down about 3,000 feet in 20 miles on 1 in 40 gradients, is done by the Amtrak Southwest Limited in this way, with notable shocks along the train as it goes down.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
18,333
Location
Glasgow
the now withdrawn NIR class 70 and 80 DEMUs had a straight air brake on all three vehicles.
They had a unique three pipe air brake
1. Straight air propagation pipe
2. Main res pipe
3. Emergency pipe

With EP application control overlaid, release was straight air only.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,760
Location
Nottingham
In North America it is common practice to use the dynamic brake on the locomotive(s) to keep the speed of a train under control on a descent. The air brake isn't suitable to do this because of the lack of graduated release, and because it becomes less effective as multiple applications use up the air in the reservoirs that can't be replenished without releasing the brake completely. This dynamic brake is a rheostatic brake in European parlance, using the traction motors to generate electrical energy which is then dissipated as heat in resistors. This also allows more controlled release of the surplus heat rather than producing it all in the brake discs and shoes.

Do UK/European freight operations do similar with locomotives that have rheostatic or (on electrics) regenerative braking?
 

XAM2175

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2016
Messages
3,471
Location
Glasgow
Do UK/European freight operations do similar with locomotives that have rheostatic or (on electrics) regenerative braking?
It's certainly acceptable (and normal, to the best of my knowledge) in both Germany and Australia.

Here some of the most obvious candidates for it don't actually have the capability - 59s, 60s, and 66s, for example (there being insufficient space for it on the EMDs).

Of the trains in GB that are equipped with rheo/regen, most of them use it in a 'blended' manner; the driver simply applies the train brake and the brake controller blends rheo/regen with the friction brakes as necessary and proportionate to the train's speed and the level of application commanded by the driver. However, some electric locos and MUs fitted with a speed-set control will use regen only when maintaining the set speed and thus require the driver to intervene with the friction brakes if regen proves insufficient.
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,233
Location
Dyfneint
I sometimes wonder how current crews (and those who write their procedures) would have got on with unbraked freight trains. Not necessarily loose coupled - look up the Instanter coupling. The books written by David L Smith about the Glasgow & South Western 100 years ago are instructive.

In the USA it is common for regulating speed on downhills to be done principally by the dynamic, rheostatic brake on the locomotives, and in fact the number of locomotives provided for a given formation can be driven as much, if not more, by the dynamic brake requirement on the downhill, as opposed to haulage capacity on the uphill. Air brakes are for stopping. Descending 'Cajon Pass' from the high desert into Los Angeles, dropping down about 3,000 feet in 20 miles on 1 in 40 gradients, is done by the Amtrak Southwest Limited in this way, with notable shocks along the train as it goes down.

I think they do set the train brake a little ( depending on grade I guess ) and then modulate it further with the dynamics, which is somewhat like the way we used to pin brakes down. It takes a long time just to propagate brake applications on those lengthy consists so I'm not surprised they don't use the air brake much... plus I think they'd end up overheating brakes on some of those gradients; I seem to remember a runaway at San Bernadino when there wasn't enough dnamic brake allocated to the consist - some of what *was* was U/S & the crew didn't check properly, iirc. Some vague memory of the wheels getting red/white hot.

I believe US passenger stock uses distributors like Europe tends to.
 

Taunton

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
12,333
which is somewhat like the way we used to pin brakes down.
USA uses (or used to used before dynamic brakes on the locos became standard) an air brake equipment called "Retainers", which had to be manually set on each vehicle before a major descent and taken off afterwards, just like pinning down brakes. Others can describe better, I'm sure, how it works and why it's done differently to the UK. Here's the manufacturer's detail on it:

https://www.wabteccorp.com/freight-car/braking-systems/pneumatic-components/retaining-valves
 

randyrippley

Established Member
Joined
21 Feb 2016
Messages
5,382
Surely the point is that if you try to stop or slow a train using just a locomotive air brake you're going to cook the brakes.
If you tried the same with just a rheostatic locomotive brake all that heat will (or at least should) get safely dumped to atmosphere by the resistances with no risk of overheating.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
18,333
Location
Glasgow
Surely the point is that if you try to stop or slow a train using just a locomotive air brake you're going to cook the brakes.
If you tried the same with just a rheostatic locomotive brake all that heat will (or at least should) get safely dumped to atmosphere by the resistances with no risk of overheating.
You can overheat the traction motors, of sustaining a high load for too long. In exactly the same way can overheat the traction motors by exceeding the one-hour or maximum ratings for too long.

Much less of a problem with AC motors of course, and the big US freight carriers often have not only AC traction motors on the newest locos, but long-range dynamics which can be effective to as little as 0.5mph!
 

Taunton

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
12,333
USA dynamic (rheostatic) loco brakes have progressed over time from a grille in the upper body to the huge extended "wings" of the present generation. They also used to be a (significantly) chargeable option, so only those lines with substantial gradients ordered them, now they seem universal factory fittings.

Brake tests now are not only the air brake, but also all the dynamics. If there is a failure then on some downhills extra locos are added purely for dynamic brake capability. Remote control locos, mid-train and at the rear, also now commonplace, enables dynamic braking to be applied from elsewhere than just at the front.
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,637
Location
South Staffordshire
Surely the point is that if you try to stop or slow a train using just a locomotive air brake you're going to cook the brakes.
If you tried the same with just a rheostatic locomotive brake all that heat will (or at least should) get safely dumped to atmosphere by the resistances with no risk of overheating.
Obviously train brakes have evolved over the years and we no longer have unbraked freight trains on the railway. It wasn't like it when I joined BR in 1978 and in the 1980s when things were the most interesting for me. I became a TOPS clerk in 1980 in the West Mids and there were still "loose coupled trains" into the mid 1980s. At that time freights were classified 4,6,7,8 and 9. Only class 4 and class 6 were fully braked with 7 8 and 9 requiring a brakevan. This changed at some point in the early 1980s but don't know exactly when. From this point classes 7 and 8 became fully fitted too with just class 9 relegated to unfitted status. Class 6 became 60mph, class 7 - 45mph and class 8 - 35mph.

With loose couple trains there was minimal braking and I recall a ride on Saltley target 76 where i had officially arranged a brakevan pass in order to "do" the Kingsbury branch. Target 76 was a pair of 20s and we went off the shed over to Bromford yard then propelled a brakevan to Hams Hall power station onto the rear of 32 HUOs, then ran round onto the front. The train would officially have run loose coupled as the only brakes were on the two class 20s, and the guards brake in the van. On locos in multi the straight air brake only applies to the loco you are driving from so it was best practice to use the auto brake to apply the brake on your "slave" multi d loco but this wasn't always applied depending on the individual driver.

We took the hoppers up to Daw Mill colliery over the weighbridge, then loaded them under the rapid loader, weighed them again then set off down the hill to Whitace Jn then into Hams Hall. There was a very slight drizzle breakfast time on a warm morning so it was a good rail for loose couple trains and sure enough on the decent through Shustoke they "picked their wheels up". The experience of the driver was enough to juggle the brake valve and get control of the loco brakes again, and with the brake hard on in the van at the rear to keep the heavy and unbraked hoppers tight on the rear we didn't come to any bother.

At Hams Hall we ran round and took our brakevan to Kingsbury then u the branch to collect traffic from Baddesley then making up at Birch Coppice before running the "full digger" back to Lawley St "A" box to stable.

Regarding the straight air brake - yes, used a lot on unfitted trains to gather the wagons up, but also remember that totally unfitted trains like T76 that day rely on only the loco wheels for power brakes. A job from Bescot used to be Target 18 known as the Lea Hall tripper. This engine went light or engine and brakevan from Bescot to Mid Cannock, then shunted together up to 32 unfitted coal wagons. These would be loaded by gravity under the rapid loaded ad then marshalled with a brakevan on the rear. This was one of the very few coal jobs that didn't need a slow speed fitted loco and I believe was diagrammed a class 45 at one stage. Wagons would be anything that carried coal, mostly 21T hoppers or minerals but a smattering of 16 tonners too. There was a minimum brake force requirement but the crew very rarely tried to shunt a couple of vac fitted wagons next to the loco and the train ran across the Cannock Chase and into Lea Hall colliery yard adjacent to Rugeley power station. Here the wagon contents from Mid Cannock open cast were tipped onto a conveyer belt and delivered to Rugeley A power station.

As a single type 4 diesel on T18 the driver often used the straight air brake as the loco brakes were more responsive than applying and releasing the auto brake to do the same job.

HTH
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,233
Location
Dyfneint
Are stock movements still sometimes partially braked, or do we have enough translator vehicles now to avoid that?

Loose-coupled is something that should never have left a yard... convenient for shunting but no reason to take it further.
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,637
Location
South Staffordshire
Are stock movements still sometimes partially braked, or do we have enough translator vehicles now to avoid that?

Loose-coupled is something that should never have left a yard... convenient for shunting but no reason to take it further.
In terms of partially braked, yes, I believe a number of new multiple units are sanctioned to run in "piped" condition with loco(s) and barrier vehicles to provide the brake force. The SPAD report last near near Sileby on the MML was partly attributed, or maybe involved a multiple unit with no brake force. I believe the TPE 397s as one class were moved from Portbury or Avonmouth as piped units with barrier vehicles providing the brakes. Possibly also the CAF 196s and 197s from Donnington yard. There are around 7 Freightliner hopper wagons in a formation with a 197 in the middle, two if the hoppers having a compatible coupler with the 197

Loose coupled is how it was back then, but I refer to anything that wasn't fully fitted as "loose coupled" even if the instanter was in the short position.
 

LWB

Member
Joined
31 Dec 2009
Messages
245
Another point…… loco brake shoes are generally harder to source/cost more than say carriage shoes. Also, taking a loco out of service early in a cycle simply to replace prematurely worn shoes is mucho frowned on. Wear the carriage/wagon brakes out, not the loco’s
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,637
Location
South Staffordshire
Another point…… loco brake shoes are generally harder to source/cost more than say carriage shoes. Also, taking a loco out of service early in a cycle simply to replace prematurely worn shoes is mucho frowned on. Wear the carriage/wagon brakes out, not the loco’s
You are absolutely right, but it was all part of BR's very expensive and very painful evolution. You could ask why BR were building rolling stock with three different brake types in the early 1960s, and why D1500-D1519 were dual braked when so many subsequent locos were built vac and had to be (expensively) dual braked.

The allies did the Germans a massive favour in WW2 by a huge new rolling stock programme where everything became bogied or LWB. All the rickety old stuff got withdrawn. In actually fact, when the Germans annexed Austria they introduced air brakes to Austrian standard gauge who was hitherto an all vacuum railway prewar. fifteen years after that we were still building unfitted 21t coal wagons !!!

BR should have gone air braked from 1960.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top