Diesels on steam tours

I was told the reason the diesel was on Green Arrow was to increase brake power. Any question that a loco is 'tired' and it should not be on the mainline. On the 25th November 2006 4771 performed very well and didn't need the help it was given by the diesel on the back. The diesel shoving up Stoke was pointless and frustrating.

 

I think we should all be very grateful that we still have steam on the mainline in 2008. However, sometimes it is nessessary for a diesel to be included in the train or for part of the journey.

I think it is fair that if a tour is stated as 'steam hauled throughout' then thats what it should be (excluding shunting and assistance with turning if the whole trian needs to be turned). However, I believe that it should only state this if the loadings are correct for the route/loco. Basically, if I was a tour operator I wouldn't want to send a Hall over Dainton with 12 on and then say 'steam hauled throughout' (just an example!)! There have been several cases in recent years of locos being overloaded where they probably should have been assisted by a diesel.

From a business point of view, the railtour operator wants to fill as many seats as possible, in some cases adding another coach or two to the formation increasing the load, making it nessessary (or desirable) for a diesel to assist. We must remember that steam isn't the norm, and therefore if the loco was only pulling 7 or 8 coaches rather than 11 or 12 as many do today, the charter company would not get as much profit. I believe only the 'tried and tested' tours can get away with the smaller loads as they are regular and very popular, mostly with tourists as apposed to entusiasts (such as the Torbays and the Shakespeares).

Of course there are times when diesels are at the back purely to generate electricity and heating for the coaching stock and provide no assistance.

Here is an example of when a diesel was probably nessessary:

Recently 5029 was given the task of hauling 11 coaches plus a generator coach (so about the wieght of 12 1/2 coaches) from Bristol to Shrewsbury and return. In my opinion (just to clarify, this is not the opinion of the support crew) I believe a diesel at the rear assisting with this heavy load would have prevent the loco being declared a failure, and would have certainly stopped the path being blocked for so long. It would have also prevented the need to call for a diesel from Crewe and would have meant that there was a steam loco on the return journey. I know that I would much rather have a steam loco at the front with a diesel at the back than just a diesel. I'm sure many of you think this is a fair point?

There are many people who complain about diesels being included in steam railtours, but we should all remember that it is a steam loco at the front doing most of the work for most of the journey and we should be happy with that, especially in this day and age.

 

Ben,
Your train was too heavy for the loco and the timings were to tight for the load.There would have been no need for a diesel if the train was restricted to 10 including the Generator.No,the anticipation of a good profit played a bit part in this one.Someone was being greedy and paid the price.
Could anyone please tell me it they have a record of a Castle travelling from Newport to Shewsbury pre 1965 with a load
equivalent to 360tons? Remember mark ones are generally heavier than Great Western vehicles so that 10 GW cars might work out to be 9 Mark 1 cars.
Finally I would like to point out that if a Castle was given a load of 12.5 on the flat,I personally feel that it would not have a problem,but to try Llanfihangel with 12+ is just too much.You would need a Class 8 for that.

 

Im sure Castle will have taken 12 over the Marches at some point, but certainly not in the sort of timings NR asked of 5029, route gradients and locomotive capabilities need to taken into account when deciding on the trailing weight, on that occasion someone got it horribly wrong.

In the case of 30777 to Edinburgh recently, WCRC quite rightly decided the trailing weight and timings were too much to ask of a class 5 locomotive when a class 8 was originally intended and included a diesel in the formation, on this occasion the planning was fine but loco availibility was the let down and WCRC did what was needed to get the train to run.

 

5051 took 12 over there during the early 80's, but then it has always been a good slogger, unlike 5029 which is more of a racer.

It's surprising that engines are allowed to be overloaded these days, you'd think there would be more emphasis on trying to reduce risks. Even on the level, 12 coaches is a fair load for a Castle - you can't expect it to go running around as if there's 7 on, especially if you try driving it like that.

 

Tornado - diesel on the back

From the thread covering Tornado's run today...

Totally ruined by BOX on back, not required for heating as the blue mk2 generator coach is included. Hope this is not a sign of things to come with future Tornado tours. Nice to see Tangmere without a box this morning. I thought it was Steam Dreams policy not to use a box.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

You can be bothered by the appearance of the diesel if you wish. I was awestruck by the new engine racing thorugh working hard as it was designed and made to do. I was just five when Evening Star was built and can still visualise the Rice Krispies box with free cards or something (Copperknob being another in the series I recall). To get to my advanced years and see another mainline engine is amazing. A diesle at the back takes nothing away from the spectacle for me.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

With all the shunting required today it probably makes sense to stick it on the back, at least until she leaves Victoria for the evening run. Besides, the train is a pretty weird mix of liveries again so its not really spoiling the look of it.

Chris

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

This is the thread for your stuck-record tedious gibberings, please use it and stop wrecking threads that everyone else is enjoying:

viewtopic.php?f=36&t=12221

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

Please throw your insults elsewhere or keep quiet. I am entitled to my opinion.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

In posting your comments you could possibly think a little more yourself. The tone of the start suggests it is my video which is ruined rather than the global view of the train, which as others have observed is an odd collection of assorted liveries.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

Its brand new , its bound to have some teething problems pop up for the first 6 or 7 months , maybe its there as insurance and is propuly going to be cheaper for SD to have it on the back rather then building up a massive fine for having a train stuck on the line.

Plus whats the big deal with a diesel on the back , are you shutting your eyes for the A1 to pass then looking at the back of the train?

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

The box on the back is required for the shunting manoeuvres and train heating!

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

As I said, there is a generator coach in the train, It looks like a complete circular trip, so therefore no no reversing en-route. The only shunting/reversing is in London.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

It's already run several trips on it's own, last Saturday for instance.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

It wasn't your video I was criticising, it was the fact the diesel was there in the first place.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

Buseng: please look at the manoeuvres that the train has to perform from leaving the depot this morning until returning in the early hours of tomorrow. There is no way that repeated coupling-uncoupling of the diesel could have been resourced without very significant extra cost and delay (if at all).

It had to run as a complete consist today- simple as that and I am very sorry if it offends you but that is the realism of main line operating today. Would you rather that the trains had not run?

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

Well it managed its first three passenger runs on the mainline without a diesel on the back so I suspect the one on the back today was for operational reasons rather than "performance guarantee" reasons. Being relatively new but having had a lot of running in makes 60163 less likely to fail IMHO.

 

Re: Steam Dreams Valentine Trips with 60163 14/02/09

The diesel is there to remove the train from Waterloo later when 60163 is stuck on the blocks, best to look at the facts before launching into a tirade.