Dom K
Global Moderator
The future is bright
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by Dom K on Nov 9, 2016 21:36:53 GMT
So I'm at Stratford waiting for my Tottenham Hale bound train on platform 12 and notice some observations.. A London Overground train going southbound on platform 11 (normally used by Stratford to Tottenham Hale services). I assume it used the curve by Stratford international DLR. I also saw a Network rail train (track detection unit?) with a Deltic either end Good night for a trainspotter
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Nov 9, 2016 21:41:27 GMT
I also saw a Network rail train (track detection unit?) with a Deltic either end Good night for a trainspotter Wouldn't have thought a pair of Deltics (class 55) more likely class 37s ?
|
|
Dom K
Global Moderator
The future is bright
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by Dom K on Nov 9, 2016 22:00:30 GMT
I also saw a Network rail train (track detection unit?) with a Deltic either end Good night for a trainspotter Wouldn't have thought a pair of Deltics (class 55) more likely class 37s ? Quite possibly as it was viewed from a distance
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 9, 2016 22:10:49 GMT
This is a class 55 (Deltic) and this is a class 37 Only the class 55 (and the extinct class 23) had the delta-form engine that gives them the name. The class 37 hasa conventional twin bank 12-cyl engine
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Nov 9, 2016 23:35:55 GMT
I also saw a Network rail train (track detection unit?) with a Deltic either en Now that I would like to see! However, as others have already suggested, it was probably 'just' a class 37: or possibly 97 (the ERTMS fitted locos for the Cambrian Line):
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Nov 9, 2016 23:36:46 GMT
They are 37s.
The train is a regular on the Great Eastern. It checks track geometry.
After it does it's work the rails are ground by the Railhead Treatment Train.
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Nov 10, 2016 0:24:02 GMT
Just went through Seven Kings on the slow line towards London.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Nov 10, 2016 9:07:13 GMT
After it does it's work the rails are ground by the Railhead Treatment Train. Slight pedantry, but RHTTs go around blasting the rails with high pressure water and cleaning agents to remove leaf mulch and other contaminants. If the rails do need grinding, then they'll bring a grinder out.
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Nov 10, 2016 14:04:23 GMT
After it does it's work the rails are ground by the Railhead Treatment Train. Slight pedantry, but RHTTs go around blasting the rails with high pressure water and cleaning agents to remove leaf mulch and other contaminants. If the rails do need grinding, then they'll bring a grinder out. Apologies, got my trains mixed up. Have had both grinding and rail treatment running through the stations recently.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Nov 10, 2016 14:05:15 GMT
Only the class 55 (and the extinct class 23) had the delta-form engine that gives them the name. The class 37 hasa conventional twin bank 12-cyl engine Correct about the extinction of the class 23, however the sole-remaining Napier Deltic type T9-29 engine and generator set from a class 23 loco, is to be installed into a replica Class 23, See The Baby Deltic Project for more details.
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Nov 10, 2016 16:05:24 GMT
This is a class 55 (Deltic) and this is a class 37 Only the class 55 (and the extinct class 23) had the delta-form engine that gives them the name. The class 37 hasa conventional twin bank 12-cyl engine I remember when a 37 was parked up at Clapham junction, I presume if there was a faulty Eurostar at Waterloo(?)used to get pumped up 'til I remembered the Deltics only had two windows at each end.(The only diesel I ever enthused over)
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 10, 2016 17:25:33 GMT
I remember when a 37 was parked up at Clapham junction, I presume if there was a faulty Eurostar at Waterloo(?) They had special couplers fitted for precisely that contingency. They were also intended to be used for the Swansea and Plymouth portions of the "Nightstar" service, which would each combine in London with a portion from Glasgow and continue, to Paris and Brussels respectively, behind a Class 92.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744
|
Post by class411 on Nov 10, 2016 18:30:26 GMT
Slightly askew from the topic,but does anyone know why they built so many diesel locomotives with 'snouts'?
There doesn't seem any particular point to it and it restricts the driver's vision - not important in normal operation but I would have thought there would be times (maintenance, etc. ) when it would be safer to be able to see closer to the front.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Nov 10, 2016 19:11:45 GMT
Slightly askew from the topic,but does anyone know why they built so many diesel locomotives with 'snouts'? There doesn't seem any particular point to it and it restricts the driver's vision - not important in normal operation but I would have thought there would be times (maintenance, etc. ) when it would be safer to be able to see closer to the front. When you consider that the early drivers were used to having a boiler and/or tender/bunker between them and the buffers of their loco, I don't think the noses were that much of a problem! The Eurostar 37s had additional headlights fitted which IMO spoil the lines a little:
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744
|
Post by class411 on Nov 11, 2016 8:32:59 GMT
I suppose the question really is: is there some need for plant to be installed over the front of the lead bogie/rear of the trailing bogie that means the cab cannot be right at the front?
Or is it just a 'style' thing that became de-rigueur?
I'm not very well up on loco types, but one that is flat-fronted that springs to mind is the Western - a diesel-hydraulic loco. Could it be something to do with the electrical transmission?
|
|
|
Post by countryman on Nov 11, 2016 9:19:04 GMT
I suppose the question really is: is there some need for plant to be installed over the front of the lead bogie/rear of the trailing bogie that means the cab cannot be right at the front? Or is it just a 'style' thing that became de-rigueur? I'm not very well up on loco types, but one that is flat-fronted that springs to mind is the Western - a diesel-hydraulic loco. Could it be something to do with the electrical transmission? As well as the hydraulics, other flat fronted classes, off the top of my head, were 31s and 33s, both of which were diesel electrics.
|
|
|
Post by arun on Nov 11, 2016 11:07:17 GMT
I think that the reason was that many early diesels were designed to work in multiple and were therefore fitted with nose doors. To allow crews moving from one engine to another, they would have needed a certain amount of wiggle [or is it wriggle] room.
Arun
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 11, 2016 11:29:49 GMT
Most contemporary American locomotives had noses, and I think English Electric in particular were keen to get into that market - look at the styling of the prototype Deltic with its huge US-style headlamp. Other than EE products, the only other bonneted designs were the LMS twins (10000/1), the pilot scheme type 4 "Peaks" and the early (D600) "Warships". And the bizarre "Fell" locomotive which had two engines under each bonnet - the centre portion being largely taken up by the complex mechanical transmission system Plenty of pilot scheme Type 2s had end doors in their flat fronted ends - hence the characteristic "letterbox" centre windscreen in the BR, Birmingham, and Brush Type 2s (Classes 24-27 and 31) and the concave lower edge to the windscreens of the Metrovicks (class 28) and the North British types (classes 21,22,29) (as well as the position of the headcode boxes) End doors proved to be of little use, and a serious cause of draughts, so were sealed up early on in most loco's careers, and not fitted at all to later builds.
|
|
|
Post by nickf on Nov 11, 2016 14:18:13 GMT
... And the bizarre "Fell" locomotive which had two engines under each bonnet - the centre portion being largely taken up by the complex mechanical transmission system ... The wonderful Fell locomotive! Do I recall correctly that it disgraced itself by locking up solid and immovable while crossing a rather important set of points?
|
|
|
Post by countryman on Nov 11, 2016 17:08:59 GMT
I think that the reason was that many early diesels were designed to work in multiple and were therefore fitted with nose doors. To allow crews moving from one engine to another, they would have needed a certain amount of wiggle [or is it wriggle] room. Arun Pretty sure 31s had doors in their flat fronts! EDIT. Went too early without seeing photos further down the thread. Sorry!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2016 19:53:38 GMT
The clue as to why locos needed a snout is that they have a ventilation grille so something was generating heat.
Locos had to replace steam locos and thus "backwards compatibility" had to be built in - steam and electric train heating, vacuum, air and dual braking, different signalling systems - and all the gubbins in addition to the "business bits" of the loco - engine & transmission - was separated and stuck where it could be whipped in and out for repair & maintenance without needing a costly workshop job of lifting the superstructure off the frame.
As passenger rolling stock evolved into DMUs and EMUs and intermodal fully-braked freight trains took over, more of the gubbins could be distributed throughout the train.
A few types of diesels were built without heating systems and only used on passenger services in summer.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 14, 2016 20:31:01 GMT
I'm not sure the snout was provided specifically to house the auxiliaries, rather than the presence of the snout being a convenient place to put them. After all, plenty of pilot scheme diesels without snouts had steam heating equipment, dual braking systems, and so forth. In particular, whether or not the loco had a snout, the steam heating boiler tended to be placed amidships, near the centre of gravity, so that the balance was not affected by the varying weight of water present.
I am looking at a general arrangement drawing of a Deltic, as built. The boiler is indeed amidships, below the exhaust manifold which serves both engines. Most of the components in the noses seem to be concerned with a forced ventilation system for the traction motors.
I don't understand your comment about removing equipment. Most equipment, up to and including engines, was extracted for repair from above, through access hatches in the roof (or the nose) , not by removing the superstructure. Indeed as most locos other than shunters, Type 1s and the Class 58, were of monocoque construction, you could no more remove the superstructure than you could do so for a car.
Reading further round the subject, the fashion for noses in early USA diesels was partly following automobile styling, partly for crash protection (level crsossing accidents in particular are far more common across the Pond) and partly to avoid the perceived problem of sleeper (rail-tie in US parlance) hypnosis.
English Electric were the only UK loco builders to go in for noses in a big way, probably as they already had a big export business before the BR pilot scheme came along - it is no coincidence that their products tended to be more successful than some of the other builders, more used to building carriages or steam locos. The LMS twins were essentially EE products, although built at Derby, but their close relatives, the SR trio, lacked them (their external design owing a lot to Oliver Bulleid's influence - he had even designed a cab-forward stream locomotive!) The Peaks were also built by Derby and probably followed the design cues from their LMS forbears.
|
|