• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Who brought in 'reversible ' trains?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Railcar

Member
Joined
27 Nov 2017
Messages
225
By 'reversible', I mean trains with a driving cab at both ends, removing the need for 'run-around loops' and turntables. Were they brought in after the Southern region was made three-rail? Was there resistance by drivers who had to learn familiar routes backwards?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
Not double-cabbed, but I imagine the double Fairlie would be among the first locomotive designs that were pretty much the same for drivers regardless of which way the loco was facing.

Apologies, that's not quite what you're after. On the big railway, when did the old GWR come up with their push-pull system? Other than that, double-ended tram cars probably pre-date what we now know as multiple units.
 

TheEdge

Established Member
Joined
29 Nov 2012
Messages
4,489
Location
Norwich
It won't be the earliest but the GWR introduced diesel railcars in 1933.

Even earlier they had the GWR Auto Trains with a steam loco at one end and an Auto Coach with a driving cab at the other, they appeared in 1904.
 

Dai Corner

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2015
Messages
6,316
By 'reversible', I mean trains with a driving cab at both ends, removing the need for 'run-around loops' and turntables. Were they brought in after the Southern region was made three-rail? Was there resistance by drivers who had to learn familiar routes backwards?
They certainly go back to steam days. There were locomotives that could be controlled from the cab at the front of the coach at the opposite end of the train.

Don't understand your second question as trains have always run in both directions.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
By 'reversible', I mean trains with a driving cab at both ends, removing the need for 'run-around loops' and turntables. Were they brought in after the Southern region was made three-rail? Was there resistance by drivers who had to learn familiar routes backwards?
(Mainline, outside London underground) LBSCR OHLE (6.7kV 25Hz) units had cabs at each end, the basic design concept was from 1902 but not operational till 1909. (So pre-dating LSWR 3rd rail)
 

beermaddavep

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2005
Messages
803
Location
East Durham
Bristol and Exeter Fairfield steam motor coach? Presumably this had a cab of sorts at the non boiler end, but I cannot find any pictures? Or maybe Budapest Millenium underground railcars, 1896?- Edit- Thanks DanNCL-I see that Liverpool beat Budapest!
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,276
The Liverpool Overhead Railway units from 1893 had cabs at both ends.
Slightly later were the 1904 Tyneside electric stock. Operational in 1904 AIUI. I think there were quite a variety of different carriage types, but they operated made up into sets with a cab at either end. Some individual cars had a cab at both ends and could presumably operate on their own?
 

contrex

Member
Joined
19 May 2009
Messages
862
Location
St Werburghs, Bristol
Was there resistance by drivers who had to learn familiar routes backwards?
I don't get this question. Before railcars/multiple units, drivers had to learn a road both ways.

The Liverpool Overhead Railway units from 1893 had cabs at both ends.
The City and South London railway originally had locos that looked like two upright pianos back to back. They had a cab at each end. The line opened on 18 Dec 1890.
 
Last edited:

DanNCL

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2017
Messages
4,196
Location
County Durham
Slightly later were the 1904 Tyneside electric stock. I think there were quite a variety of different carriage types, but they operated made up into sets with a cab at either end. Some individual cars had a cab at both ends and could presumably operate on their own?
I know of the following carriage types for the 1904 Tyneside units:
Diagram 90 cars - motors with a driving cab at one end, luggage compartments and composite seating
Diagram 91 cars - motors with a driving cab at one end and third class seating
Diagram 92 cars - trailers with no driving cabs and third class seating
Diagram 96/97 cars - motors with cabs at both ends and third class seating
Diagram 98 cars - motors with cabs at both ends, luggage compartments and third class seating
Diagram 99 cars - trailers with cabs at both ends and third class seating
Diagram 100 cars - motor luggage vans with cabs at both ends

The Diagram 100 cars could and regularly did operate on their own. The remaining cars ran in 2-8 car formations, with 3 car formations being the most common.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,276
I know of the following carriage types for the 1904 Tyneside units:
Diagram 90 cars - motors with a driving cab at one end, luggage compartments and composite seating
Diagram 91 cars - motors with a driving cab at one end and third class seating
Diagram 92 cars - trailers with no driving cabs and third class seating
Diagram 96/97 cars - motors with cabs at both ends and third class seating
Diagram 98 cars - motors with cabs at both ends, luggage compartments and third class seating
Diagram 99 cars - trailers with cabs at both ends and third class seating
Diagram 100 cars - motor luggage vans with cabs at both ends

The Diagram 100 cars could and regularly did operate on their own. The remaining cars ran in 2-8 car formations, with 3 car formations being the most common.
Crikey. Imagine the ideas for fantasy formations or complex diagramming that people would have had if only a 1904 rail forum had existed…. :D
 

contrex

Member
Joined
19 May 2009
Messages
862
Location
St Werburghs, Bristol
Steam railcars came pretty early in railway history. The first steam railcar was probably the one designed by James Samuel, the Eastern Counties Railway Locomotive Engineer & built by William Bridges Adams in 1847. A 2-2-0 example, Enfield was built by Adams for the Eastern Counties Railway in 1849. I presume they could be driven 'backwards' and didn't need turning.
 

etr221

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2018
Messages
1,037
The first steam railcars were built by William Bridges Adams in the late 1840s, but - for these and other early steam railcars - it is unclear whether they had controls at both ends, or how they were worked in the 'other' direction. But Dugald Drummond's steam railcars of 1902 did have controls at both ends - although I believe for these, and most steam push-pull operation there was some reliance on the fireman (on the loco end) to work some controls.

Volks Electric Railway of 1883 had reversible cars.

As stated above trams from the 1880s were reversible, with controllers at each end.

Mutiple unit control using the Sprague system (where each motor coach had its own local but remotely controlled controller) was introduced in 1897-98 on the Chicago & South Side Rapid Transit RR.
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
1,988
Location
Dyfneint
Steam railcars came pretty early in railway history. The first steam railcar was probably the one designed by James Samuel, the Eastern Counties Railway Locomotive Engineer & built by William Bridges Adams in 1847. A 2-2-0 example, Enfield was built by Adams for the Eastern Counties Railway in 1849. I presume they could be driven 'backwards' and didn't need turning.
Looks like it didn't have a cab at the other end though ( exciting! ). GWR steam railmotors arrived around the turn of the 20th century and did have a cab at each end, but that does seem a little late ( a quick browse around suggests double ended steam railcars arrived roughly the same time as electric ones ). Steam push-pull trains were pretty common by the 1920s at least.
 
Last edited:

randyrippley

Established Member
Joined
21 Feb 2016
Messages
5,083
What was the arrangement for Brunel's atmospheric system?
Presumably that just needed driving cabs, not locos?
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,689
Location
Devon
What was the arrangement for Brunel's atmospheric system?
Presumably that just needed driving cabs, not locos?

I don’t think they were reversible. Weren’t they just flat truck type things used like a locomotive with a couple of levers on top (and a seat)?
 

Rescars

Member
Joined
25 May 2021
Messages
1,120
Location
Surrey
When the London and Blackwall opened in 1840 it was cable hauled, with carriages slipped or pinned up at each intermediate station. To do this there was some sort of rudimentary driving platform at each end of each rake of carriages. Certainly no turntables!
 
Joined
3 Sep 2020
Messages
140
Location
Dublin
I don’t think they were reversible. Weren’t they just flat truck type things used like a locomotive with a couple of levers on top (and a seat)?
That was certainly what the Kingstown & Dalkey used (I think the term was "piston carriage"), so I assume Brunel's was similar. (I believe the Dalkey piston carriage wouldn't have been run around the train, so strictly speaking wasn't used like a loco - it went uphill on the front, when the train was under atmospheric power, and came downhill on the back under gravity, when it would presumably have acted as a brake van - but I'm not sure whether running round was necessary on more complex atmospheric lines or how it might have been done, other than by manhandling or horses.)

Wikipedia, incidentally, has an engraving of what looks like a passenger-carrying piston carriage from the Paris-St. Germain atmospheric line (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_railway, about halfway down), but it's not clear how it would have been used.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,689
Location
Devon
When the London and Blackwall opened in 1840 it was cable hauled, with carriages slipped or pinned up at each intermediate station. To do this there was some sort of rudimentary driving platform at each end of each rake of carriages. Certainly no turntables!

That could well be the winner!

That was certainly what the Kingstown & Dalkey used (I think the term was "piston carriage"), so I assume Brunel's was similar. (I believe the Dalkey piston carriage wouldn't have been run around the train, so strictly speaking wasn't used like a loco - it went uphill on the front, when the train was under atmospheric power, and came downhill on the back under gravity, when it would presumably have acted as a brake van - but I'm not sure whether running round was necessary on more complex atmospheric lines or how it might have been done, other than by manhandling or horses.)

Wikipedia, incidentally, has an engraving of what looks like a passenger-carrying piston carriage from the Paris-St. Germain atmospheric line (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_railway, about halfway down), but it's not clear how it would have been used.

That’s an interesting concept. I must admit I posted the above thinking that the (for want of a better word) locomotive would have run around.
 

Rescars

Member
Joined
25 May 2021
Messages
1,120
Location
Surrey
That could well be the winner!



That’s an interesting concept. I must admit I posted the above thinking that the (for want of a better word) locomotive would have run around.
Come to think of it, by definition, all funiculars are reversible (though the cars do not necessarily have cabs, as control may be managed from the winding room). Other cable haulage systems may be reversible (like the L&B) or not, like the Glasgow Subway in its original form.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
I don't get this question. Before railcars/multiple units, drivers had to learn a road both ways.
At a guess, I think the question was whether drivers would need to know the route whether running boiler-first, or tender/bunker-first with different levels of visibility, perhaps?
 

Dai Corner

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2015
Messages
6,316
At a guess, I think the question was whether drivers would need to know the route whether running boiler-first, or tender/bunker-first with different levels of visibility, perhaps?
If they knew the route well enough to drive safely with their view obstructed by a boiler, a bunker or a tender I'd have thought doing so with an unobstructed view would be a breeze?
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
If they knew the route well enough to drive safely with their view obstructed by a boiler, a bunker or a tender I'd have thought doing so with an unobstructed view would be a breeze?
Quite possibly... was just trying to make sense of the question asked as best I could!

Don't know if locos behaved differently depending on which way they were pointing, nor if any had dual controls in the cab to make it easier for drivers if going "backwards", but I do know that with modern units, a driver who signs 155s isn't automatically also cleared to drive 153s or vice-versa.
 

etr221

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2018
Messages
1,037
In steam days crews were expected to (and did) take whatever loco was on the train - even if they'd never had anything like it before.
 

Rescars

Member
Joined
25 May 2021
Messages
1,120
Location
Surrey
Quite possibly... was just trying to make sense of the question asked as best I could!

Don't know if locos behaved differently depending on which way they were pointing, nor if any had dual controls in the cab to make it easier for drivers if going "backwards", but I do know that with modern units, a driver who signs 155s isn't automatically also cleared to drive 153s or vice-versa.
Some locos had dual controls, but only to the extent that the regulator and whistle chain were duplicated on each side of the cab. Bullied's Leader had a cab at each end of course, but that's hardly mainstream.
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
1,988
Location
Dyfneint
I don’t think they were reversible. Weren’t they just flat truck type things used like a locomotive with a couple of levers on top (and a seat)?
Pretty sure they were - presumably the seat rotated or the back flipped over or something, I've never actually thought what they did at the end of the line before. I guess it was small enough to turn on a wagon turntable if they wanted, too.

The tube went below rail height, didn't it? how did they even get the driving vehicle off the train? I guess if it detached from the piston...
 

Rescars

Member
Joined
25 May 2021
Messages
1,120
Location
Surrey
Pretty sure they were - presumably the seat rotated or the back flipped over or something, I've never actually thought what they did at the end of the line before. I guess it was small enough to turn on a wagon turntable if they wanted, too.

The tube went below rail height, didn't it? how did they even get the driving vehicle off the train? I guess if it detached from the piston...
IIRC some details of working practices were set out by Charles Hadfield in his book "Atmospheric Railways" (long out of print I assume). Anyone got a copy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top