The last BR STANDARD GAUGE passenger locomotive?

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

Why are you all still tryin to suggest that a loco that hauled a train on a railtour in 67 was the last passenger train working when it was No. 7 (in GWR & BR listings)on the Vale of Rheidol! Which ever way you want to butter it its officially the Rheidol that run the last BR steam powered train in November 1988!

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

We're talking about proper locomotives, not toy ones.

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

Thanks for the info on 35030, most interesting
Cheers
IAN

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

talyllyn07 is quite correct in what he says , the locos at the VoR were passenger only for many decades. "Toy loco" jibes do not do yourself any favours

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

i would say james is quite narrow minded if he knew about the Rheidol engines he would know that most of the components of them are from of the shelf at Swindon and are only six inches narrower than a GWR King and weighs 25 tons! Its no toy mate!

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

Read the title of the thread!

"The last BR passenger locomotive"

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

how big you are! Instead of admitting the Rheidol ran THE OFFICIAL LAST BR PASSENGER STEAM HAULED TRAIN you have changed the title of the thread aww James have you thrown your teddys out of the pram? Aw bless never mind you must be getting restless have you had your afternoon nap yet? ](*,) ](*,)

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

35029 around 1979 / 1980... she's hardly complete or a runner now and the rest went into the melting pot.

 

I think some clarification on what's a Passenger loco and what isn't is needed.

In my opinion despite classifications, some classes are more obviously Mixed Traffic (Black 5, Hall etc) than others (Bob/WC, Jubilee etc), Having an F on the cabside just means it CAN haul freight, doesn't mean it's intended or ideal for that task, if we use that basis then only about 2% of British locomotives ever would qualify.

Hence i believe the belief that it was a Jubilee for standard gauge.

 

Re: The last BR passenger locomotive?

That particular book says that the Jubilee is Express Passenger and the Britannia Mixed traffic. However it also states that the Castle is Express passenger, and as noted above that does not seem to relate to how they were used in practice, so how much that description relates to what was in the design team's mind or how the operating dept used any particular class who can say? Frankly I suspect you guys are having a disagreement about a distinction that scarcely existed.

 

I agree entirely with jimc here. I too think that a false distinction is being drawn between designs that are designated as 'mixed traffic' or 'passenger'.

In practice the Royal Scots were 7P5F and so were the Britannias, WC & BB designs. The last two of these were promoted as mixed traffic designs by the Southern and it wasn't just a political ploy to get them built during WWII.

I'll try to dig out some haulage data on the types, but it can't be done today, the plumbers cometh!

Regards

 

I don't understand what's happened here! Could the moderator please place my last post in the real 'The last BR STANDARD GAUGE passenger locomotive' topic?

Regards

 

I gree with 'jimc' here, I too think that a false distinction is being made between 'mixed traffic' and 'passenger' types.

The attached might be worth looking at although it is too early for the 'Jubilees' it refers to 'Patriots' and rebuilt 'Claughtons' but I think the general idea can be seen clearly.

 

whatever their designations the Brittanias on the Western and Eastern (at least) were certainly used as Express engines which would mean 70013 still holds the crown as the last one. Castles were certainly used on Milk trains and Mail trains etc but these would still be regarded as Express traffic. I don't think a Jubillee a Brittania a WC, a MN or a Castle would have been used to lug a coal train from loop to loop,certainly not what any of them were intended for, so its a bit of a moot question. It's all in the eye of the beholder no doubt

 

The basic problem of interpretation of whether a loco was for passenger and / or freight was that in the last 2 / 3 years of service the steam fleet was operated on a "common user" basis similar to the diesel fleet where the first available loco was used - unless it was a passenger duty when purely freight locos such as the LMS 8Fs or the NER J27 would rarely - if ever - be used. This would particularly apply to previous passenger locos such as Jubilees / Royal Scots / Britannias et al which would often be used on freight turns simply to keep them operational.

The fact that the last steam passenger services operated in the North West saw mainly Stanier 5MTs was because (a) that was all that was left and (b) they were useful for all the available steam duties - both freight and passenger - that were diagrammed.

But to step back a little all regions had fast freight services that used the speed of a passenger locomotive to maintain schedules - including the WR whose 47xx locomotives were built for fast freight with the bonus that they provided a "summer reserve" for the West of England services. Thus it was quite common to see "passenger" locomotives on certain special freight services throughout BR days and increasingly on "normal" freight duties as they were displaced by diesel / electric traction.

 

There were NO exclusively passenger locomotives unless you count railmotors. Anything would be used on a freight if it was convenient to the operators or fulfilled some special need. For example, all the Scottish companies would use their crack passenger locos on express fish trains.

But there is usually a clear indication of what the designer intended to be the _principal_ use of an engine.

It seems obvious from the way they were rostered that Jubilees and MN's were regarded as a passenger design, and it's stated in the designer's aims that the Britannia's were deliberately mixed-traffic. WC's/BB's are slightly more dubious, although that's partly due to the Southern's reluctance to build out-and-out freight designs anyway. Anything 'freight' with a tender on the Southern seems to have been pressed into passenger service at some time or other!

In late grouping / BR days 6'2'' wheels seem to have been a sort of 'cusp' - anything below, pretty definitely mixed traffic, anything over, definitely passenger, 6'2" exactly - debatable . For large tender engines, anyway.

So I'd give the prize to the Jub, and I seem to remember it being reported in that way in RM at the time.

 

What I find interesting about this discussion is that so far there hasn't been any attempt to define wether or not the service performed by this hypothetical passenger locomotive was an express service or just an ordinary one.

On the LMS and BR(M) an express service was defined (I'm pretty sure about this) as one that was 'Limited' or 'Special Limit' and a distance in between stops and average speed. I can't find at present a reference to the distance in between stops and average speed but I have found a reference to the loads. The 'Limited' and 'Special Limit' loads for a Black 5 or Jubilee were 345/375 and 310/350 between Liverpool and Manchester (or at least they were in 1935(!) the date of my reference but I doubt if it changed much). It follows then that a Black 5 travelling between Liverpool and Manchester hauling 345 or 310 tons on an express service would be an express passenger locomotive for that service.

Now I wonder .... 45110 hauled the final leg of the 'Fifteen Guinea Special' and there is video of it going at a pretty fair lick past the Rainhill Memorial and it was non-stop Victoria-Limestreet. I haven't got a photo to hand, but the head code could just tell all.

Could the very last steam service on BR be the one all this discussion is about?

Regards #-o #-o #-o :-k :-k :-k

 

Just to adopt PEDANT Mode but the "Final Train" was run as 1T57- T representing a charter / excursion train whereas "service" train is one which appears in the public timetable. On that basis any steam hauled passenger service after the acknowledged "final train" from Preston would be a charter - and therefore not a service train within the definitions accepted by most posters on this thread.