Scratch sets

[superjohn]

I remember travelling from the 1994 Motor Show at Birmingham NEC back to York on a relief train that was formed of a class 47 and a set comprised entirely of declassified mk2 air conditioned first class open coaches. It was almost empty. Derby was a hub for ‘spare‘ coaches at the time so it may have been put together there.

 

[theblackwatch]

I remember travelling from the 1994 Motor Show at Birmingham NEC back to York on a relief train that was formed of a class 47 and a set comprised entirely of declassified mk2 air conditioned first class open coaches. It was almost empty. Derby was a hub for ‘spare‘ coaches at the time so it may have been put together there.

I think that may have been one of the charter rakes at the time - I went on a Ridings Railtours trip with such a set (and I think a Mk 2 air con BFK) in September 1993. A look at the 1994 Platform 5 book lists a lot of these as being in the Charter fleet, although based at Carlisle Upperby,

 

[hexagon789]

At a guess displaced by HSTs from the Deltic+8 sets.

Possibly, I need to find the photos again

 

[hexagon789]

Here’s a couple of my N gauge recreations of the same trains at Lapford @ChiefPlanner. Inspired partly by your input in that thread.
View attachment 77143View attachment 77144

Are you sure that 50 is filthy enough?

 

[Cowley]

Are you sure that 50 is filthy enough?

The real one was worse!

 

[hexagon789]

The real one was worse!

I can imagine, some of the 50s looked utterly deplorable towards the end, rather like many steam locos.


Back on topic - how about a scratch Inverness-Keith terminator formed of a 47/4 and single Mk2 BSO, replacing a 156?

 

[randyrippley]

I can imagine, some of the 50s looked utterly deplorable towards the end, rather like many steam locos.


Back on topic - how about a scratch Inverness-Keith terminator formed of a 47/4 and single Mk2 BSO, replacing a 156?

I read somewhere a 47 had to have at least three coaches to provide braking force when hauling passengers......any truth in that???

 

[Bletchleyite]

I read somewhere a 47 had to have at least three coaches to provide braking force when hauling passengers......any truth in that???

There is a minimum number of coaches to run at linespeed for that reason, I forget what it is though.

 

[Cowley]

I read somewhere a 47 had to have at least three coaches to provide braking force when hauling passengers......any truth in that???

I’d say not.

 

[hexagon789]

I read somewhere a 47 had to have at least three coaches to provide braking force when hauling passengers......any truth in that???

Three to no longer be classed as running 'light engine'. With three coaches or less (including none) loco, with a few exceptions - 67s for one, are restricted to 75mph where linespeed is at least 90mph, 60mph where it's 85mph or less. Certainly that was the case, the sectional appendices don't seem to carry the speed restriction depending on number of coaches tables anymore that I see

 

[dubscottie]

I read somewhere a 47 had to have at least three coaches to provide braking force when hauling passengers......any truth in that???

There was a rule brought in the late 80s that any train with fewer than 5 coaches could only run at 90% of the locos top speed (all classes) or something similar.

I have to dig through my old mags for something else so will try and find the bit about it.

 

[Mag_seven]

I read somewhere a 47 had to have at least three coaches to provide braking force when hauling passengers......any truth in that???

In the eighties there was the infamous 20.50 Carlisle to Perth service (1S81) which carried both passenger and mail coaches. However on Saturday night it ran with no mail coaches and was formed of only two passenger vehicles hauled by an electric loco to Mossend Yard with a diesel north from there. See this article from Leighton Logs for details.

1S81 was a classic late evening passenger and mail service from Carlisle to Perth. The formation was normally 2 MK Is including a BSK with a TPO and various sundry vans behind. (just 2 Mk I's on Sats in the 80's as no mail) Electric hauled to Mossend it was famous for its g-force acceleration where an AC electric, light load and Scotrail driver keen to get home, sometimes had u thrown back hard against your compo seat as the 86 was whacked out of Carlisle and Lockerbie.

 

[Cowley]

In the eighties there was the infamous 20.50 Carlisle to Perth service (1S81) which carried both passenger and mail coaches. However on Saturday night it ran with no mail coaches and was formed of only two passenger vehicles hauled by an electric loco to Mossend Yard with a diesel north from there. See this article from Leighton Logs for details.

That looks amazing.

 

[hexagon789]

There was a rule brought in the late 80s that any train with fewer than 5 coaches could only run at 90% of the locos top speed (all classes) or something similar.

I have to dig through my old mags for something else so will try and find the bit about it.

Doing a bit more digging it seems that until presumably the rule you mention was brought in the restrictions were:

Light loco - 75mph
Loco + 1 - 80mph
Loco + 2 - 85mph
Loco + 3 or greater - no restrictions


No specifics about whether those only applied of linespeed was 90 or greater as with the previous figures I quoted mind you.

 

[Mag_seven]

That looks amazing.

I can assure you it was.

 

[hexagon789]

In the eighties there was the infamous 20.50 Carlisle to Perth service (1S81) which carried both passenger and mail coaches. However on Saturday night it ran with no mail coaches and was formed of only two passenger vehicles hauled by an electric loco to Mossend Yard with a diesel north from there. See this article from Leighton Logs for details.

If an 87 got on that, it would certainly shift! And I imagine a driver keen to get home would have the needles as high as they dared coaxing every possible drop of the potential 7860hp if an Electric Scot was provided.

 

[Mag_seven]

If an 87 got on that, it would certainly shift! And I imagine a driver keen to get home would have the needles as high as they dared coaxing every possible drop of the potential 7860hp if an Electric Scot was provided.

Sadly it was vacuum braked so no 87 - however an 86 could handle it well as well as an 81 or 85.

 

[hexagon789]

Sadly it was vacuum braked so no 87 - however an 86 could handle it well as well as an 81 or 85.

Ah of course, forgotten about that.

An 86 would still shift nicely though. Did the working remain vacuum braked Mk1s until it's demise then?

 

[Mag_seven]

Did the working remain vacuum braked Mk1s until it's demise then?

It did - I can verify that as I travelled on the last ever working.

 

[43096]

Ah of course, forgotten about that.

An 86 would still shift nicely though. Did the working remain vacuum braked Mk1s until it's demise then?

Repeat comments about an 87 if one of 86101-103 produced!

 

[hexagon789]

Repeat comments about an 87 if one of 86101-103 produced!

Did they retain dual brakes then?

 

[43096]

Did they retain dual brakes then?

They still had vac bags on the bufferbeam, so believe so.

 

[hexagon789]

It did - I can verify that as I travelled on the last ever working.

Cheers, perhaps one of the last high-speed (90+mph) vacuum braked workings?

 

[hexagon789]

They still had vac bags on the bufferbeam, so believe so.

In that case - yes, my previous comments stands but as regards the 86/1s!

 

[Mag_seven]

Repeat comments about an 87 if one of 86101-103 produced!

In that case - yes, my previous comments stands but as regards the 86/1s!

Some argued that the 86/1 was actually slighty better performance wise on passenger workings than a Class 87.

 

[hexagon789]

Some argued that the 86/1 was actually slighty better performance wise on passenger workings than a Class 87.

Intriguing, given they were identical in terms of power outputs and top speeds and the 86/1s were two tonnes heavier.

Unless that latter quality improved the adhesion starting away enough to give an edge?

 

[Mag_seven]

Intriguing, given they were identical in terms of power outputs and top speeds and the 86/1s were two tonnes heavier.

Unless that latter quality improved the adhesion starting away enough to give an edge?

I remember the term "sure footed" being used when drivers were talking about them.

 

[hexagon789]

I remember the term "sure footed" being used when drivers were talking about them.

That's probably it then, 87s seem to have been a bit slippery in the wet with so much power to so little weight.

 

[randyrippley]

I remember the term "sure footed" being used when drivers were talking about them.

Surely that was in comparison to the original 86/0 which were notorious for slipping, railburning, hammering and bouncing.
Platform 4 at Lancaster was a good example of track damage by the 86/0 both under braking and overenthusiastic use of power - at one stage virtually the whole platform length was a series of rail burns

 

[AY1975]

I believe that for a time in the late 1970s and early '80s you used to get Class 20-hauled trains on the Hull-Scarborough line formed of scratch sets consisting of a mixture of conventional loco-hauled Mark 1s and Class 123/124 Trans-Pennine DMU cars.

Presumably the train heating and interior lighting wouldn't work in that case, although in the summer that wouldn't be too much of a problem during daylight hours provided that there were no tunnels on the line.