TOPs number etc ex British India Line thread.

Martin1656 - you need to learn the numbering system methinks !

98 - Steam locomotive
8 - Power Classification
18 - Last 2 characters of running number.
Representing 35018

Now if you're talking Bodmin (34016) then

98 - Steam locomotive
7 - Power classification
16 - Last 2 characters of running number

Hence why checks for 46115 on the TOPS / TRUST lists should look for 98715 as represented by

98 - Steam locomotive
7 - Power classification
15 - Last 2 characters of running number.

 

But to be fair, 98-8-72 bucks that trend by now being rated 7P and still registered as an 8P.

 

Probably just as well none of Riddles Crosti Boilered 2-10-0s survived then.

 

Interesting - but does that mean that both 46100 "Royal Scot" and 70000 "Britannia" would have the same number on the mainline - 98700?

Tom

 

No. only the first to be registered follows that form. Any subsequent ones get a unique number, which follows the format as much as possible. Thus 76079 is registered as 98476 because 80079 was registered first.

 

Thanks Steve - guessed there had to be something more to it to account for duplicates. I wonder if there are any others?

Tom

 

Nope ! In that case the rule is that for any pair of locomotives with the "same" computer number, one would report as the "calculated" number (i.e. 98700) and the other would report as the next (free) higher number (98701). IIRC 70000 = 98700 and 46100 = 98701 but whether that rule applies if only one of the pair is active on the main line I am uncertain; anyone from the Rolling Stock Library around ?

 

By the time Ian Riley puts 35009 on the main line, 60009 may well have retired, but there would otherwise be a potential clash here. The other example which springs to mind is 5029/7029.

 

More than I thought of! I spent a while racking my brain just to find one example ...

Tom

 

Is 98 just for steam locos or any preserved loco capable of moving itself please?

 

I guess that NYMR engines need a TOPS number for Whitby, so there is a potential clash between 44806 and 61306.
Another main line retiree which may need to surrender its TOPS number is 34027 as it will be taken by 7027 in a few year's time.
Mallard is a pretty long-shot for future main line use, but if it was to run in its BR identity (60022) either it or 35022, when Jeremy Hosking gets round to restoring it, would need a different TOPS number. Still, if this is a very unlikely scenario, it's not as unlikely as a potential conflict between 35029 and 46229

 

Worth remembering that as far as I can tell any steam loco moved over the national network, regardless of being mainline certified in its own right, seems to have a TOPS number.

The best bit of 5029/7029 is that because 5029 was therefore registered as 98728, 34028 is 98730. Should they ever find themselves next to each other at Wareham, there's a trick question in there....

 

Diesel / Electric traction uses Code = 89 rather than 98 which is reserved for steam. Thus when 46009 was in RTC use its "official" number was :

89 = Diesel locomotive
4 = Power Classification [= Type 4]
09 = Last 2 characters of running number.

In the same analysis when Class 50 50026 operates on the main line it "operates as

89 = Diesel Locomotive
4 = Power classification [= Type 4]
26 = Last 2 characters of running number

I noted when Class 71 71001 / E5001 was on display at Barrow Hill it bore the number

89 = Electric Locomotive
4 = Power classification [ 2550 hp = Type 4]
01 = Last 2 characters of running number.

 

i wonder will we ever see 98220 ?

 

Presumably that included 98292

Tom

 

Is that little Furness 0-4-0 really rated 2P??

 

Of course!

 

Surprisingly big number!

What's the difference between "AWCS" and "MBSL"?

Tom

 

At a guess AWCS looks like a pool code for West Coast. MBSL looks like it's a loco that's operated by both West Coast and DBC. Happy to be corrected.

 

http://www.abrail.co.uk/pool_codes.htm