|
|
Post by carltona on Jan 31, 2014 19:06:03 GMT
Have read elsewhere that a southbound Master Cutler was once sent towards Watford Met by mistake. Any truth in this?
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,256
|
Post by roythebus on Feb 1, 2014 1:09:56 GMT
I doubt it, the Master Cutler ran into St.Pancras from what I remember.
|
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Feb 1, 2014 10:54:17 GMT
roythebus -well, it started life as a GC route steam operation, Sheffield Victoria to Marylebone (I remember watching it from that convenient hill (Haste Hill?)on the south side of the line beyond Northwood - one of the few opportunities for those of us who lived in NW London to see an LNER Pacific at work). So, a wrong stick to Watford would have been theoretically possible - goodness knows how they would have disposed of it at Watford.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 1, 2014 11:00:23 GMT
I doubt it, the Master Cutler ran into St.Pancras from what I remember. It was introduced in the LNER's last winter timetable in 1947 on the GC route, switching to the East Coast line (with Retford as the only call) in 1958, before being switched to the Midland route in 1968. De-named at some stage, the name was revived in 1987 and still runs - identified in the current East Midland timetable as the 0729 from Sheffield and 1657 return. Watford Met was built for electric unit working from the outset, so there was no easy way of running round the train there, or of turning the loco. The account I found on Google suggested the stray was reversed (possibly with another loco at the country end of the train?) back to Rickmansworth for another go. |
|
|
|
Post by carltona on Feb 1, 2014 17:51:32 GMT
[quote source="/post/381626/thread" Watford Met was built for electric unit working from the outset, so there was no easy way of running round the train there, or of turning the loco. The account I found on Google suggested the stray was reversed (possibly with another loco at the country end of the train?) back to Rickmansworth for another go. Yes that was the account I had heard about. No point in running round at Watford Met as the loco would have been the wrong way round. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 1, 2014 18:05:38 GMT
No point in running round at Watford Met as the loco would have been the wrong way round. I I understand it was an up service, so running tender-first for the relatively short run to Marylebone might have been considered - although less than desirable - unless there was some absolute prohibition on tender-first running on that route. I am reminded of Wilbert Awdry's story of "tenders and turntables", where Gordon - a "modified" A3! - had to run tender-first after a turntable got stuck. The loco could also have been turned on the Watford triangle of course. But all of these take time (and there were never any run-round facilities at Watford so it would have had to be propelled out, or another loco found to attach to the other end - probably by commandeering a Met loco (steam or electric) from the changeover point at Rickmansworth. The quickest solution of all would have been to transfer all the passengers to a Metropolitan train and run it non-stop to Baker Street, and recover the errant BR train later as ECS. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2014 18:59:28 GMT
Watford Met was built for electric unit working from the outset, so there was no easy way of running round the train there, or of turning the loco. The account I found on Google suggested the stray was reversed (possibly with another loco at the country end of the train?) back to Rickmansworth for another go. While Met services to Watford were electric unit worked from the start, the line was built as Met-LNER joint and initially (until IIRC the General strike) there were equal numbers of Met & LNER trains - the LNER ones being steam hauled from Marylebone. So there were run round facilities for both platforms - I have one of Harsig's excellent diagrams 'Metropolitan 1933' showing this. (Whether the Master Cutler and a Pacific would have fitted is another matter) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2014 19:52:46 GMT
I know this might be slightly off thread, but are there any other cases of Mainline trains "wrong sticking" on to the LU network anywhere?
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,233 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Feb 1, 2014 19:59:22 GMT
Gunnersbury immediately springs to mind as somewhere where things have tried to go the wrong way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2014 20:36:52 GMT
How far could a 313 or a 378 get on the district line?
|
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Feb 1, 2014 20:42:46 GMT
Running around the loco may have been difficult at Watford, particularly if the train was long - The Master Cutler generally ran with heavy loadings as it was the premier train between London and the East Midlands. I've seen an image with an A3 hauling 15 coaches on the Master Cutler. Gunnersbury immediately springs to mind as somewhere where things have tried to go the wrong way. I've been 'wrong sticked' a few of times as a passenger on the Met. One time my Aylesbury bound Chiltern arrived at Amersham (unusually Platform 2) and we were held for around 10 minutes, the reason was that signalman at Amersham thought we were a Met and routed us back towards London! Another time I was on a fast Met to Baker St, and the driver accepted the wrong stick to Harrow Platform 2. I have heard of a story in the noughties, that a new Met driver not only accepted the wrong stick into Harrow Platform 2 but also continued beyond Platform 2, accepting the route towards Marylebone! I believe soon after this incident LU put up signs warning Met drivers that the track south of Platform 2 was not electified. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 1, 2014 21:09:38 GMT
Many years ago a district driver of my acquaintance told me he had once taken a wrong stick at Wimbledon and ended up stranded on the Southern with no negative rail
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Feb 2, 2014 6:22:01 GMT
Many years ago a district driver of my acquaintance told me he had once taken a wrong stick at Wimbledon and ended up stranded on the Southern with no negative rail Certainly not been easily possible at either Wimbledon, East Putney or Richmond since resignalling from semaphore in the early '80s. A cl.313 did make it to just beyond the section gap behind Chiswick Park in 1991. |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Feb 2, 2014 17:32:35 GMT
Watford did have run round loops as there is a photo from 1959 showing a T stock train stabled on it.
Of course the run round round option my not have been possible if a train was stabled and the train was too long!
The A stock ending up beyond platform 2 at harrow was documented in an underground news.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2014 18:27:29 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by motorman on Feb 2, 2014 21:48:00 GMT
I am sure that some years ago conductor rails extended south from platform 2 at Harrow-on-the-Hill to just over a trains length beyond the points on the southbound Marylebone line. Is memory playing tricks or was this the case?
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,256
|
Post by roythebus on Feb 3, 2014 10:05:37 GMT
Many years ago a district driver of my acquaintance told me he had once taken a wrong stick at Wimbledon and ended up stranded on the Southern with no negative rail Certainly not been easily possible at either Wimbledon, East Putney or Richmond since resignalling from semaphore in the early '80s. A cl.313 did make it to just beyond the section gap behind Chiswick Park in 1991. The train stops at Gunnersbury, Wimbledon, Wimbledon Park and Richmond "should " have stopped any wrong moves, but of course brakes take time to apply! I know someone diId put a DR train in at Wimbledon Park when the CP broke an axle at PG in 1971-ish. |
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,421
|
Post by DWS on Feb 3, 2014 13:21:09 GMT
I am sure that some years ago conductor rails extended south from platform 2 at Harrow-on-the-Hill to just over a trains length beyond the points on the southbound Marylebone line. Is memory playing tricks or was this the case? No your memory is not playing tricks, at the southend of platforms 1 & 2 there was a crossover number 94 with signals JB96 and JB91. The current rails on the up line went a trains berth beyond platform 2 to allow A Stock to shunt from platform 2 to platform 1 via crossover number 94. This was in about 1964 when I was at Harrow on the Hill signal cabin, as to when the current rails were remover it must have been after crossover number 94 was removed. A rusty rail move was in the then time table to use this route, this was after the evening peak a train was run into platform 2 then it shunted to platform 1 then run northbound down the fast line to its next destination. |
|
|
|
Post by motorman on Feb 3, 2014 22:14:51 GMT
Many thanks DWS for confirming that. I had not realised it was that long ago!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 5, 2014 7:51:04 GMT
Didn't the Croxley Tip trains use the runround at Watford aswell?
Would have thought a 501 could have gone a *bit* further than just the section gap on the District whilst they were 4 rail...
A few chilterns have accepted the local over the years. At one point there was supposedly talk of gauge clearing them over the local to help with this and other scenarios.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2014 20:08:31 GMT
Didn't the Croxley Tip trains use the runround at Watford aswell? Would have thought a 501 could have gone a *bit* further than just the section gap on the District whilst they were 4 rail... A few chilterns have accepted the local over the years. At one point there was supposedly talk of gauge clearing them over the local to help with this and other scenarios. That is correct Benedict the panniers did run round at Watford however I think it was in the goods yard. It would still be possible to do the same today using the south siding/loop at the station A Class 501 could have run quite along ay along the District however tripcocks might have been an issue! Nigel |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 5, 2014 22:25:02 GMT
A Class 501 could have run quite along ay along the District however tripcocks might have been an issue! Why? 501s weren't fitted with tripcocks, so provided they could get enough juice from the +ve (420V instead of 630V!) rail and deliver the current back through running rails not intended to take it I can't see why it couldn't have gone quite a long way. |
|
|
|
Post by bassmike on Feb 6, 2014 15:19:46 GMT
I think you are a bit confused in your understanding of TC technics.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 6, 2014 16:23:02 GMT
I think you are a bit confused in your understanding of TC technics. I'm always happy to learn. How can a train not fitted with a tripcock be tripped? (Or were they in fact fitted to 501s because of the shared track with Bakerloo and District?) |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 6, 2014 16:40:36 GMT
501s were 4 rail when introduced
|
|
|
|
Post by bassmike on Feb 6, 2014 17:12:22 GMT
That is what I meant. So 501's could have gone anywhere they would physically fit with or without tripcocks although they would need a second man in the cab. If ,after being converted to R/R return, they could not run on the 420 (+ - ?) volt from the pos: rail to running rail as they would f--k up all the signalling and blow fuses etc:
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 6, 2014 17:26:02 GMT
How do track circuits in 3rd rail territory avoid being blown up by the running rail return? Do they have some isolation that LU track circuits don't require (unless someone does drive a three rail unit onto them? When Sarah Siddons was adapted to run on the 3rd rail, was she then unable to run on the 4th until she'd been converted back?
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 6, 2014 18:50:13 GMT
Track circuits in 3rd rail DC areas are AC. Its able to tell the difference, as it were, by exploiting the fact that DC can travel over an inductor but AC can't. I think!
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,256
|
Post by roythebus on Feb 7, 2014 20:47:31 GMT
But the Master Cutler in those days would probably have been steam-hauled!
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 7, 2014 23:26:45 GMT
Track circuits in 3rd rail DC areas are AC. Its able to tell the difference, as it were, by exploiting the fact that DC can travel over an inductor but AC can't. I think! Indeed, but whacking a big traction current through running rails not intended to take it, which is what would happen if a 3-rail unit ran on LU's 4-rail system, could fry any rack circuits in the 4-rail not designed to cope with such currents. Indeed, wasn't avoiding stray currents in the running rails (and tunnel linings) the reason for going for 4-rail in the first place? But the Master Cutler in those days would probably have been steam-hauled! Almost certainly: by the time diesels appeared in any significant numbers, it had already moved to the ECML (1958). |
|
