Sir Nigel Gresley - The L.N.E.R.’s First C.M.E.

I assume that the Belgian expresses were Brussels to Ostend trains hauled by SNCB Class 12 Atlantics?

During the 1932-39 period, the "Cheltenham Flyer" train was scheduled to run from Swindon to London Paddington (77 miles / 124 km) in 65 minutes, which works out as 71 mph (114km/hr), using GWR Castle-class engines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheltenham_Flyer

After 1945, it took a long time for express trains to get back to anywhere near pre-war speeds. From 1954, the Bristolian ran the 118 miles (189km) from Bristol to London in 105 minutes at 67 mph (108km/hr). I think that was the fastest British train during the 1950s?

The LNER high-speed Silver Jubilee and Coronation trains (and the 1950s Elizabethan) were of course over much longer distances - and used Gresley A4 Pacifics.

 

Especially since the Silver Jubilee was built to prove that steam could compete with the Fliegender Hamburger. It may also be that the commitment to steam was - in part - due to the newness of diesel traction on rail and the LNER willing to stick to tried and tested motive power rather than experiment with new and untried technology. Perhaps further research of the Board minutes might provide a clue / answer.

 

I don't see it as having been intended to "prove" anything. The LNER investigated how to provide a high speed service. The story as generally recounted is that the Germans were asked what schedule they could achieve between London and Newcastle, and that that turned out to be significantly slower than on the Hamburg run. So Gresley and his team then assessed what could be done with steam and found it would be better. So it wasn't "We think steam is better, so we need to prove it". It was "What's best?" and the answer (for the circumstances of the time) was steam.

 

The original Flying Hamburger that Gresley travelled in during 1934 was a two car articulated set with a 420 PS (German Horsepower) diesel engine mounted on each of the end bogies and electric transmission with traction motors on the articulated bogie. Gresley reported that the accommodation was very cramped, seats being arranged 3 and 1 in open saloons and the 3 look quite narrow if fully occupied (and Gresley was a big man), and no proper refreshments. The German proposal to the LNER was a 3 car set weighing 114 or 115 tons, so substantially heavier than the original German set and with the same horsepower output it is perhaps not too surprising that the schedule proposed was somewhat slower.
Although the line between Berlin and Hamburg is generally well aligned and easily graded, there were restricted lengths at both ends and some intermediate restrictions the worst of which was 60 Km/h (37mph) through Wittenberge.
The initial set was a prototype, and the production 2-car sets of 1935 were less cramped, longer and heavier with fewer seats but of course a lower power to weight ratio. One of these sets is displayed in Leipzig station; the driving cab is very cramped and the diesel motor occupies a huge box right behind it; this arrangement means the motors have to be at the end of the sets and would appear to preclude a through corridor. Meanwhile the diesel motors were being developed and power raised to 610 PS, and this enabled three car sets to be introduced in 1937, firstly with a couple of articulated sets but the production versions had separate coaches but a lower power/weight ratio. As far as I am aware, all the production sets could work in multiple, for instance the Fliegende Koelner comprised two sets between Berlin and Hamm, separating through the Ruhr area.

 

In 1936 (two years after Gresley went to Germany), a large group from the Institution of Locomotive Engineers visited, led by Stanier.

Holcroft devotes a chapter of his book to the visit, in which it is clear that they were shown the best and newest of German railways, including steam, diesel and electric traction. He says very little about the 'Flying Hamburger', just one paragraph, and reading between the lines I don't think he was very impressed. (FWIW, he was also a rather tall man, I believe).

"Arrived at Hamburg we saw in the station the diesel-propelled train set known as the 'Flying Hamburger', capable of running at nearly 100 m.p.h. on the level. The accommodation for passengers was more cramped and they did not have the same freedom of movement as in the normal coaching stock, steam or electric hauled. We also saw the streamlined double-decker steam train used in the Lubeck service."
​

By contrast, he was fulsome in his praise of a journey behind the 4-6-4 streamlined steam loco 05.002, which achieved over 190 kph (about 120mph) while they were travelling; that was only a day or two after it had run at 125mph.

Tom

 

The Burlington Pioneer Zephyr was contemporary with these developments. Did any British railway investigate this train's technology as it was developed into a successful series that lasted until the 1960s?

 

These posts made me think of the Breitspurbahn which I learnt of recently
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitspurbahn

 

Oh, how dull. Now, the Boot-Bennie 'railplane' on the other hand .......

 

The Flying Hamburger isn't really a like for like comparison with the Silver Jubilee from an accommodation view either, one was a loco hauled formation of 6? coaches, the other a 2 car DMU, no different to a Cravens or Metro Cammell really

 

The Zephyr, on the other hand, did extend to a full train.

Answering the question posed by @Enterprise, I see very little evidence of the Zephyr inspiring pre-war developments in the UK, but suspect it was one of a number of early innovations that helped establish diesel traction as a viable technology.

 

Some measurements
Silver Jubilee train 141m long 391 tons 198 seats and 108 inches wide
Flying Hamburger 41m long 85 tons 102 seats and 112 inches wide

 

..... and your point is? As I've said upthread, the real comparison is between the amenities offered by either train.

 

From one of the booklets I have on the Silver Jubilee which came from my grandfather, who might have travelled on it to visit family in Newcastle.

 

Fascinating stuff! Thanks for posting it

 

My pleasure. The booklets also give route map, timetable, mentions note paper and envelopes available free of charge and souvenirs available

 

You wouldn't get one of those paperweights for a half crown these days!

 

Locomotive hauled fast trains were a dead end.

 

Was it though? As it stands today, that's true of long distance intercity passenger services on most mainlines in the UK (with notable exceptions including the sleeper out of Euston) but for goods traffic locomotive haulage is thriving.

Besides which, in the 1930s when the Silver Jubilee/etc were developed, we'd see another two decades of fast locomotive hauled services. So it wasn't a dead end at that point...

 

Everything is a dead end if you wait long enough. As for locomotive hauled fast trains, they're still running today.

 

They became a dead end because other technologies - high speed multiple units, push-pull working - became available following wider technological developments.

In the mid 1930s, those technologies were bleeding edge or non-existent. What's surprising is not that the LNER (and others) didn't adopt them for their blue riband services, but that others did, when those services also required luxury. On which point, having travelled on modern intercity DMUs (e.g. cl. 180 Adelante, cl. 220/1 Voyager), my mind boggles as to how uncomfortable and noisy 1930s era underfloor DMUs must have been - and how that must have weighed in the balance for making investment decisions.

Once again, as has been discussed in various ways in the Thompson thread, railways' choices of rolling stock and traction were not just about a top trumps game of fastest/most powerful, but also a commercial decision about how that business could boost itself.