Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,382
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 5, 2019 13:27:03 GMT
If you're considering only predecessor organisations rather than predecessor operators (hence my "depends" comment), then I believe the London Overground 150s and 172s are the only diesel trains any have used to operate a regular passenger service. Whether there have been any diesel-operated rail tours or other specials I have no idea.
TfL have certainly used diesel locos to haul engineering trains on the Underground, but I don't know whether LT or LRT ever did. There is at least one diesel loco on the DLR, although as maintenance is not in-house so its probably not correct to say it is operated by TfL. Similarly I don't think TfL directly maintains any of the Overground network (I believe maintenance on the ELL core is contracted to NR) so there may have been diesel-hauled engineering trains operated on behalf of TfL there but not directly by them.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Mar 5, 2019 14:26:46 GMT
TfL have certainly used diesel locos to haul engineering trains on the Underground, but I don't know whether LT or LRT ever did. London Transport built an electro-diesel locomotive (DEL120), adapted from two CLR driving motors, in 1940, and also ran three second hand Sentinel shunters (DL81-83) in the 70s and 80s. There are also the Schoma locos built for construction work on the Jubilee Line, some of which are still in use, and Metronet leased class 66s for a while. These have, of cpuse, all been for maintenance work, not passenger use. districtdavesforum.co.uk/thread/9472 Whether a BR diesel loco ever deputised for a steam loco in the last days of the Met's Aylesbury service, I wouldn't know. (When did the LNER take over the Met's steam loco fleet?) It is unlikely a dmu ever deputised to Aylesbury as the Class 115s only entered service at Marylebone in 1960, the same year the Met was cut back to Amersham and electrified. |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 5, 2019 18:56:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Mar 5, 2019 20:46:14 GMT
I stand corrected! I did know about the dmus to Loughton, but assumed they were BR workings over LU metals. But DMUs at Chesham - that's definitelu LT.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1018509 on Mar 5, 2019 23:15:34 GMT
A rather "special" special I saw at Rayners Lane in December 84 was a class 47 hauling a BR breakdown through through Rayners Lane to the incident site at Kilburn. Before the days of mobile phones so no photographic evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Mar 6, 2019 8:30:14 GMT
I stand corrected! I did know about the dmus to Loughton, but assumed they were BR workings over LU metals. But DMUs at Chesham - that's definitelu LT. NF, I think these were BR workings. I may be wrong, but I don't think LT ran the service. It was specified and operated by BR. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Mar 6, 2019 15:03:00 GMT
The first gen diesel services would have been all BR. However, the Chesham Bubble special is a good call as that would have been LRT. However, as a deliberate special, rather than just an aberration, it probably shouldn't count. That leaves the BUT railcar trials, but as to how much LT was 'in charge' of those? www.railcar.co.uk/images/7997 |
|
|
|
Post by littlejohn on Mar 6, 2019 18:45:41 GMT
I recall being irritated by the phrase 'A company called Associated Commercial Vehicles (ACV)' when I first read this article. Far from being the fly-by-night outfit implied, ACV was the holding company set up by AEC when it bought Maudslay, Crossley and Park Royal Vehicles. So a definite railways heritage if only marginally connected to LT rail. |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 19, 2019 17:31:52 GMT
The first gen diesel services would have been all BR. However, the Chesham Bubble special is a good call as that would have been LRT. However, as a deliberate special, rather than just an aberration, it probably shouldn't count. That leaves the BUT railcar trials, but as to how much LT was 'in charge' of those? www.railcar.co.uk/images/7997Does the Hastings DEMU power cars + track recording vehicle that worked the Chesham branch one trip in LT passenger service in 198-blip (1984 ?) count here ? it certainly was not a railtour. It was a public service (I was delayed en route for it by a WCML shambles and missed it). The DEMU probably counts as an "aberration" but it was not a special train, just a special stock type on a scheduled public train. -- Nick |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 19, 2019 22:27:57 GMT
The first gen diesel services would have been all BR. However, the Chesham Bubble special is a good call as that would have been LRT. However, as a deliberate special, rather than just an aberration, it probably shouldn't count. That leaves the BUT railcar trials, but as to how much LT was 'in charge' of those? www.railcar.co.uk/images/7997Does the Hastings DEMU power cars + track recording vehicle that worked the Chesham branch one trip in LT passenger service in 198-blip (1984 ?) count here ? it certainly was not a railtour. It was a public service (I was delayed en route for it by a WCML shambles and missed it). The DEMU probably counts as an "aberration" but it was not a special train, just a special stock type on a scheduled public train. -- Nick Good question, and to revise my previous statement, perhaps the bubble should have counted as well since it replaced a regular passenger trip and was carrying normal fare payers. |
|
|
|
Post by arun on Mar 31, 2019 11:21:48 GMT
I recall being irritated by the phrase 'A company called Associated Commercial Vehicles (ACV)' when I first read this article. Far from being the fly-by-night outfit implied, ACV was the holding company set up by AEC when it bought Maudslay, Crossley and Park Royal Vehicles. So a definite railways heritage if only marginally connected to LT rail. AEC was the bus building/engineering element of the LGOC which was, in turn, a wholly owned subsidiary of the UERL so whilst the legal side of things changed quite a lot in June 1933, AEC and its subsidiaries had always had a relationship with what became LT rail - though possibly not so with the Metropolitan side of the shop. You might argue that the relationship of AEC and its bits to LT was the same as the relationship of UCC Feltham to LT. |
|
