The Rail Enthusiast thread

[Andy in Germany]

Same here, but there is no need for them to be ugly.

It makes me unfeasibly angry that someone was actually paid for designing that! 😆

If I'm correct, the shape of the Cl 70 is partly because they asked crews what they wanted and crash worthiness came high on the list: I agree it's fugugly but kudos to the builder for actually asking the people who'll use the things what they want.

There doesn't seem to be an equivalent of the Class 70's power rating in Europe, possibly because most trains that require a heavy locomotive will probably be hauled by an electric locomotive; diesel-only routes like the one I found in France are becoming the exception, not the rule.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

If I'm correct, the shape of the Cl 70 is partly because they asked crews what they wanted and crash worthiness came high on the list: I agree it's fugugly but kudos to the builder for actually asking the people who'll use the things what they want.

There doesn't seem to be an equivalent of the Class 70's power rating in Europe, possibly because most trains that require a heavy locomotive will probably be hauled by an electric locomotive; diesel-only routes like the one I found in France are becoming the exception, not the rule.

Yes the crumple zone bits had occurred to me. That said, there has to be better ways of doing it than that, but, annyway.

 

[Sallar55]

The Spanish are patient, gates down and a 5min wait.

 

[rogerzilla]

If I'm correct, the shape of the Cl 70 is partly because they asked crews what they wanted and crash worthiness came high on the list: I agree it's fugugly but kudos to the builder for actually asking the people who'll use the things what they want.

There doesn't seem to be an equivalent of the Class 70's power rating in Europe, possibly because most trains that require a heavy locomotive will probably be hauled by an electric locomotive; diesel-only routes like the one I found in France are becoming the exception, not the rule.

Ironically, the original BR class 70 was am electric locomotive. It's one of the rare cases when they re-used a TOPS class number (43 is the other one I know of; originally a NBL-built Warship, then an HST power car).

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Ironically, the original BR class 70 was am electric locomotive. It's one of the rare cases when they re-used a TOPS class number (43 is the other one I know of; originally a NBL-built Warship, then an HST power car).

Class 01 is another, although the '01s now are industrial thingies.

There is also class 41, which originally were the 5 (or 6) D600 Class 'Warships'. The class number was then used again only a few years later for the prototype HST powercars.
I'd have to think of units, but I can't think offhand of anything.

 

[Mike_P]

There was some reclassification of units. Originally the differing vehicle types in a formation had different classes so the Met Cam class 101s for example had amongst it's wider classes Class 144 Driving Trailer Composite (with Lavatory) (DTCL) , Class 168 Trailer Brake Second (with Lavatory) (TBSL) were and Class 171Trailer Composite (with Lavatory) (TCL) .

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

There was some reclassification of units. Originally the differing vehicle types in a formation had different classes so the Met Cam class 101s for example had amongst it's wider classes Class 144 Driving Trailer Composite (with Lavatory) (DTCL) , Class 168 Trailer Brake Second (with Lavatory) (TBSL) were and Class 171Trailer Composite (with Lavatory) (TCL) .

Were there not also different versions too?
Also, was it not class 147?

When I talk of different versions of things, there are also other examples such as the Class 105 Cravens units... That also had different variants that became, or would have been class 106, 112 or 113.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

There was some reclassification of units. Originally the differing vehicle types in a formation had different classes so the Met Cam class 101s for example had amongst it's wider classes Class 144 Driving Trailer Composite (with Lavatory) (DTCL) , Class 168 Trailer Brake Second (with Lavatory) (TBSL) were and Class 171Trailer Composite (with Lavatory) (TCL) .

Hold on, class 144, 168 and 171? I didn't know that!

 

[Mike_P]

Were there not also different versions too?
Also, was it not class 147?

The DTCLs were either 144 or 147 according to https://locomotive.fandom.com/wiki/British_Rail_Class_101

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

The DTCLs were either 144 or 147 according to https://locomotive.fandom.com/wiki/British_Rail_Class_101

Thanks, I will admit that DMUs are my weakest area (except for coaches and wagons).

 

[Jameshow]

View attachment 693429

View attachment 693430

View attachment 693431

A few more bits of rolling stock near Chapel Brampton..

Speaking of the devil scrapped!

 

[Jameshow]

My daughter's English paper today was on steam engines! She was not amused!!🤣🤣

 

[rogerzilla]

I always think of HSTs as class 253 or 254 but at some point BR decided they weren't real multiple units (presumably due to power car swapping) and put their "loco" numbers on instead.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

I always think of HSTs as class 253 or 254 but at some point BR decided they weren't real multiple units (presumably due to power car swapping) and put their "loco" numbers on instead.

They were considered DEMUs and always did have the 43xxx numbers too, only they were almost like vehicle/coach numbers initially (except it was a powercar, not a coach).

Set 253001 was made up by 43002* and 43003, for example.


* - There was no 43001 as the two prototypes had been 41000 and 41001, so the numbering just continued, which was a bit weird in the post 1973 TOPS era. Even 41000's number went against the rules of TOPS, where everything starts at '1', not '0'.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Ironically, the original BR class 70 was am electric locomotive. It's one of the rare cases when they re-used a TOPS class number (43 is the other one I know of; originally a NBL-built Warship, then an HST power car).

I have seen several examples of the same thing in other countries too, like Germany.
@Andy in Germany, care to comment?