The Railway : Then & Now

[Trev52A]

Here's the same view at Newcastle in pictures 54 years apart, showing it's not all doom and gloom with the modern scene!

 

Class A3 60052 'Prince Palatine' stands at the old platform 10 on 5th June 1965 at the head of a 'special' from Edinburgh, bound for Carlisle and the Waverley Route back to its starting point. The loco had to come off at Carlisle due to an overheated axlebox and was replaced by A4 60027 'Merlin' for the final leg.

 

The modern view, taken today (28th June) shows a 'full house' - the HST has just arrived with the 0755 from Inverness to Kings Cross, the 'Super Voyager' is standing with a terminating train from Reading and the Pacer is waiting its next run. The new platforms were installed when the wires went up about thirty years ago.

 

Trevor

[Northmoor]

5 minutes ago, Trev52A said:

The modern view, taken today (28th June) shows a 'full house' - the HST has just arrived with the 0755 from Inverness to Kings Cross, the 'Super Voyager' is standing with a terminating train from Reading and the Pacer is waiting its next run. The new platforms were installed when the wires went up about thirty years ago.

 

Well done Trevor for grabbing the opportunity; in a few months, you won't see 2 out of 3 of those at Newcastle any more.

[eastwestdivide]

39 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

I have been working on project in this field for the last year and the idea that steam trains were responsible for burning back early tree growth seems widely accepted

Another interpretation I've heard is that once you no longer have trains spitting out burning stuff onto the lineside, there's less need for preventive cutting back of the lineside growth.

In other words the steam trains weren't responsible for burning it back so much as having it cut back to prevent fires.

[LMS2968]

A bit further apart at Parkside first station on the Liverpool & Manchester Railway. A part of a sketch by Isaac Shaw about 1832, and the same steps down from Parkside Road, 7th February 2014.

 

 

[caradoc]

59 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

I have been working on project in this field for the last year and the idea that steam trains were responsible for burning back early tree growth seems widely accepted.  Quite apart from the fact that is is moisture, not leaves themselves that are the problem, I would suggest two things; (1) it wasn't the end of steam itself but the massive redundancies amongst track maintenance staff at the same time (1960s), and (2) steam trains didn't suffer from adhesion-related delay minutes because, quite simply, they didn't brake hard enough to overcome the available adhesion.  The acceleration and brake rates of modern electric stock in particular, is on a different scale from steam. Also remember, delay causes weren't attributed to anything like the same degree.  There is plenty of archive footage of express trains struggling to get their trains underway which must have caused significant delays.  What was the resulting delay recorded as caused by?  Or did the "railway" just lose it in slack scheduling?

 

Regarding the section I have italicised - If indeed the delay was recorded at all ! As late as 1984, when I started in Glasgow Control, all train recording was manual, and the only trains we recorded actual timings for were long distance services; For the Glasgow suburban network for example, IIRC we only maintained train running sheets for the Ayr line and GSW services, and for the former Glasgow Central arrival times were calculated by adding 4 minutes to the time shown at Shields Jc on the ATR (Automatic Train Recorder) print out. Similarly, arrival times at Central for Down WCML trains were 7 minutes after passing Cambuslang. If a delay occurred between the last ATR point and destination, unless Control was aware or was advised of it, it went unrecorded and therefore unexplained. For all other services delays were recorded as they occurred, again if of course, Control knew about it ! Therefore I take any comparison of train service reliability 'Then and Now' with a very large pinch of salt.

[Reorte]

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

I have been working on project in this field for the last year and the idea that steam trains were responsible for burning back early tree growth seems widely accepted.  Quite apart from the fact that is is moisture, not leaves themselves that are the problem, I would suggest two things; (1) it wasn't the end of steam itself but the massive redundancies amongst track maintenance staff at the same time (1960s), and (2) steam trains didn't suffer from adhesion-related delay minutes because, quite simply, they didn't brake hard enough to overcome the available adhesion.  The acceleration and brake rates of modern electric stock in particular, is on a different scale from steam. Also remember, delay causes weren't attributed to anything like the same degree.  There is plenty of archive footage of express trains struggling to get their trains underway which must have caused significant delays.  What was the resulting delay recorded as caused by?  Or did the "railway" just lose it in slack scheduling?

The acceleration of modern stock is undoubtedly faster but is the braking that much more powerful? You can only go so far before you'll lock the wheels anyway. Modern brakes will apply and release quicker, and obviously an unfitted freight wouldn't have been able to stop in a hurry, but the rest (although I assume modern trains also have some form of ABS)?

Edited June 28, 2019 by Reorte

[96701]

1 minute ago, Reorte said:

The acceleration of modern stock is undoubtedly faster but is the braking that much more powerful? You can only go so far before you'll lock the wheels anyway. Modern brakes will apply and release quicker, and obviously an unfitted freight wouldn't have been able to stop in a hurry, but the rest (although I assume modern trains also have some form of ABS)?

For ABS on roads, read Wheel Slide Protection on trains. Disc brakes on modern trains will normally decelerate a train far quicker than clasp brakes did on older trains. Obviously, this depends on the friction between rail and wheel which is humungously reduced by crushed leaf mould or a heavy dew, both of which happen about the same time of year.

 

A lightweight train fitted with disc brakes will lock up a wheelset, put a flat on the tyre before the Wheel Slide Protection can react.

[62613]

I would imagine that clasp brakes would wipe any leaf mulch from the wheel treads, wouldn't it?

 

[Northmoor]

Note that not all stock has WSP.

36 minutes ago, Reorte said:

The acceleration of modern stock is undoubtedly faster but is the braking that much more powerful? You can only go so far before you'll lock the wheels anyway. Modern brakes will apply and release quicker, and obviously an unfitted freight wouldn't have been able to stop in a hurry, but the rest (although I assume modern trains also have some form of ABS)?

Yes - braking is much, MUCH harder.  Remember that one of the key design requirements of the HST was to stop from 125mph in the same distance as loco-hauled stock could from 100mph, so that existing signalling didn't need to be moved.  Then remember that modern EMUs brake harder than this.

 

If available adhesion is very low, yes, you will lock your brakes anyway, but when the available adhesion is high, braking can be very high.  Note that DLR or Central Line tube stock normally brakes at something like 0.7m/s2.  You can barely stand up without hanging on to something (which is a real problem for older travellers).

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I have been working on project in this field for the last year and the idea that steam trains were responsible for burning back early tree growth seems widely accepted.  Quite apart from the fact that is is moisture, not leaves themselves that are the problem, I would suggest two things; (1) it wasn't the end of steam itself but the massive redundancies amongst track maintenance staff at the same time (1960s), and (2) steam trains didn't suffer from adhesion-related delay minutes because, quite simply, they didn't brake hard enough to overcome the available adhesion.  The acceleration and brake rates of modern electric stock in particular, is on a different scale from steam. Also remember, delay causes weren't attributed to anything like the same degree.  There is plenty of archive footage of express trains struggling to get their trains underway which must have caused significant delays.  What was the resulting delay recorded as caused by?  Or did the "railway" just lose it in slack scheduling?

Steam trains didn't do the bank burning - the PerWay gangs did it as controlled burns (although steam trains did occasionally start lineside fires.  Part of the idea of burning back was to control vegetation so that there wasn't a mass of it there to catch fire.  But that wasn't done everywhere and most gangs had men who could use scythes and they would cut grass.

 

And incidentally all the delays or lack of them that I mentioned were on railways which were 100% dieselised.  But it was noticeable even in the late '60s and particularly in the '70s that leave fall was presenting problems in lines where steam had virtually disappeared or had not long disappeared and trains were largely mu operated.

[david.hill64]

Actually braking rates are more complicated than disc is better than tread brakes. 

 

It is an undeniable fact that disc brakes give a reasonably uniform braking rate at all speeds from 125mph (taken as the normal limit in UK) to rest and much better than tread braked stock which had a practical limit of 100mph.  (Yes I know that some WCML stock was authorised to run at 110mph with special maintenance). The standard BR braking curve, known as the W curve, used to calculate signal spacings was derived empirically from brake tests with a Deltic and a rake of mark 1 coaches in the worst condition that would be allowed to run without speed restriction. I think the load was 12 coaches, one with isolated brakes. Allowing for margins this required a full service braking rate of about 0.7m/s/s or 7%g (g = gravitational acceleration). 

 

When HST's were introduced they had to stop from 125mph in the same distance that the Deltic did from 100mph. This lead to the W125 curve which required a full service braking rate of 0.9m/s/s or 9%g. The disc brakes allowed this.

Cast iron brake blocks become ineffective above about 100mph: they melt.

However, the braking rate of cast iron for the same applied brake force is very non-linear and rises significantly as speed decreases. Hence drivers would always be releasing the brake as the train came to rest (stopping on a 'rising brake') to avoid significant jerks. At speeds below about 50mph the braking force of a standard multiple unit with cast iron blocks would exceed that of a disc braked train.

 

In suburban areas where low speed multiple units were the main traffic a different braking curve - the S curve - could be used. This took advantage of the better stopping characteristics of the stock at low speed. 

This made all sorts of problems when disc braked suburban EMUs were introduced. Although on paper their braking rate was the same or better than the trains they replaced, the handling required was very different and having only a three step control added to problems. Eventually a higher rate emergency braking rate - 12%g - was introduced to try to reduce Signals Passed At Danger. Measurements of actual braking rates on the Euston 4 rail EMUs showed actual braking rates in full service of about 20%g and it is probable that the 4-SUBs and 4EPBs were similar. (I worked in Derby - the railway south of the Thames was jealously guarded by Croydon).

 

As the design of modern EMUs braking tends to be conservative, the actual braking rates in full service and emergency tend to exceed the minimum values more than previous generations.

 

It isn't the deceleration rate that causes people to fall over, it is the jerk rate - the rate of change of acceleration measured in m/s/s/s so this is always specified as well as braking rates. 0.5m/s/s/s is typical.

 

On the modern metros I have worked on, braking rates are normally 10 or 11%g in full service and 13 or 14%g in emergency. Modern metro vehicles usually use electric (dynamic) braking only until very low speeds (about 5km/h) when the friction brakes kick in. Tread brakes are making a comeback where braking is usually dynamic: they are lighter and cheaper than disc brakes and don't consume much energy when not working, unlike disc brakes.

 

All of the above rates assume of course that there is sufficient wheel-rail adhesion.

Edited June 29, 2019 by david.hill64
Typos

[david.hill64]

14 hours ago, 62613 said:

I would imagine that clasp brakes would wipe any leaf mulch from the wheel treads, wouldn't it?

 

To a degree, but there was a case of an overrun of  a red signal by about 2 miles with a 12 car SR block braked VEP set.

Edited June 29, 2019 by david.hill64
New information provided by Northmoor.

[Oldddudders]

15 hours ago, Northmoor said:

Also remember, delay causes weren't attributed to anything like the same degree.  There is plenty of archive footage of express trains struggling to get their trains underway which must have caused significant delays.  What was the resulting delay recorded as caused by?  Or did the "railway" just lose it in slack scheduling?

If time was lost, the guard should have given the driver a "Lost Time" ticket. 

[Northmoor]

10 hours ago, david.hill64 said:

To a degree, but the longest recorded overrun of a red signal was about 2 miles with a 12 car SR block braked VEP set.

Possibly now beaten by Class 37Xs in the Stonegates incident, which included going through a level crossing......

[david.hill64]

14 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Possibly now beaten by Class 37Xs in the Stonegates incident, which included going through a level crossing......

Hmm missed that one. Is it on the RAIB list?

 

Ah yes it is. I'll need to update my notes!  And amend the post above.

Edited June 29, 2019 by david.hill64
new information

[Trev52A]

In contrast to my previous pictures at Newcastle last Friday 28th June, here is a pair with a different outcome 

 

View from the east end of Central Station on 6th May 1967 with a Tyneside electric train arriving from the coast. I am sure I am not the only one who didn't bother recording the numbers of diesel shunters! (Or for that matter, the numbers of the electric units, sadly!)

 

This is the same view earlier this week. No more to be said, really..

 

Cheers

Trevor

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, Trev52A said:

In contrast to my previous pictures at Newcastle last Friday 28th June, here is a pair with a different outcome 

 

View from the east end of Central Station on 6th May 1967 with a Tyneside electric train arriving from the coast. I am sure I am not the only one who didn't bother recording the numbers of diesel shunters! (Or for that matter, the numbers of the electric units, sadly!)

 

Cheers

Trevor

That comment caused me to look at the relevant pages in my Winter 1962/3 Combined Volume wherein 96 vehicles of the North Tyneside units are underlined  - how sad is that?  (but I was a teenager of course)

[caradoc]

I didn't record DMU numbers until they became an endangered species - Now I go out of my way to ride on them on heritage lines ! That must rank high on the sad scale too ?

[Nearholmer]

Yes, I actually made the effort to ride on the last “bubblecar” in ordinary service, and wondered how something that I thought beneath contempt forty years ago had become an object of nostalgia.

[caradoc]

In 40 (or maybe less) years time people might be flocking to ride on the last 800 in daily service, and decrying their replacements as horrible plastic things ! 

[stewartingram]

1 hour ago, caradoc said:

In 40 (or maybe less) years time people might be flocking to ride on the last 800 in daily service, and decrying their replacements as horrible plastic things ! 

NO they won't...plastic is soooo out of fashion! They will have real wood interiors (to help the planet), with horsehair seats too!

 

Stewart

[dvdlcs]

Looking at the most recent pair of pictures, I also noted some changes to the skyline.

 

A tall building on the left, behind where the blue flag is flying on the 'now' picture, seems to have gone as has an ornate structure just to the right of the EMU cab.

 

Thank you for posting these, always interesting to see the "then and now" comparisons, although they are often slightly depressing...

[Reorte]

4 hours ago, caradoc said:

In 40 (or maybe less) years time people might be flocking to ride on the last 800 in daily service, and decrying their replacements as horrible plastic things ! 

That could be because people always say that about what they're used to - or things just get more and more unappealing!

 

Joking aside there are those things that are gone that you may have genuinely liked (or at least preferred), and those that are gone that have some appeal simply because they were a reminder of another time, and nostalgia's really just the latter. Notice how people are currently taking a bit more interest in Pacers than they've ever done so before!

[Davexoc]

10 hours ago, caradoc said:

In 40 (or maybe less) years time people might be flocking to ride on the last 800 in daily service, and decrying their replacements as horrible plastic things ! 

I reckon 30 or less is nearer the mark....

[Trev52A]

9 hours ago, dvdlcs said:

Looking at the most recent pair of pictures, I also noted some changes to the skyline.

 

A tall building on the left, behind where the blue flag is flying on the 'now' picture, seems to have gone as has an ornate structure just to the right of the EMU cab.

 

 

 

The ornate structure was/is actually part of the Bridge Hotel (location for the inaugural meeting of the North Eastern Locomotive Preservation Group on 28th October 1966 and still very much going strong!). I didn't have the original print with me when I took the 'now' shot so I wasn't as precise in location as I could have been. I went back today and got the exact match. Tried to edit the post in question but seems I can't change pictures, only words.

So here is the new 'correct' picture, hot off the press. (I have disguised the number plates of the private cars in case of problems!)

Well spotted with your other observation - I can't imagine what the building must have been.

 

 

Cheers

Trevor

Edited July 5, 2019 by Trev52A
typos