A Visual History of Railway Rolling Stock in Great Britain

[Gaelan]

Put this together over the past few days: https://gaelan.me/br-stock/

It's an attempt to draw a timeline of rolling stock since the beginning of the TOPS era, charting out the relationships between different classes. Feedback highly welcome, though (as I note on the about page) the nature of this format is that I'll never be able to capture every nuance.

(An apology in advance to any screen-reader users: I've done my best to ensure all the information is accessible with a screen reader, but ultimately it's a very visual format and hard to convey through text alone.)

 

[Deepgreen]

Good work. I think Mk2 coaches date from 1964 rather than 1963, but I'm being picky. Also, class 432 had three units built in 1974, being the last mk1 stock built.

 

[SWFreight]

Brilliant! I like it. It's interesting to see development connections through the use of arrows. Some thoughts that occur to me:

• Is there a way to zoom in and out, or to add this functionality? It might just be my browser, but I can't zoom.
• Is there any interest in making a locomotive version?
• Is there any interest in making an active service version? Rather than showing years which they were being built, showing years in service?

Thanks for making this!

 

[Gaelan]

Good work. I think Mk2 coaches date from 1964 rather than 1963, but I'm being picky. Also, class 432 had three units built in 1974, being the last mk1 stock built.

Good catches both. I was a little inconsistent with classes like the 432 with a small amount built much later; in some cases showing things properly would make other parts much harder to draw. But in this case it's easy enough, so I've fixed it, along with the Mk2s.

• Is there a way to zoom in and out, or to add this functionality? It might just be my browser, but I can't zoom.

Huh - I just tried Safari, Firefox, and Chrome, and the standard browser zoom functionality seems to work fine. What browser (and OS) are you using?

• Is there any interest in making a locomotive version?

Possibly, though it's an area I'm less familiar with. (If anyone else would be interested in taking this on, I'd be happy to share the code I used to generate it - though it's not particularly pretty!)

• Is there any interest in making an active service version? Rather than showing years which they were being built, showing years in service?

I considered this, but the layout would likely be a fair bit trickier - minimizing overlap of classes and arrows is hard enough as it is, and making the boxes decades instead of years long wouldn't help! There'd also be some weirdness around things like the 730, which I'm showing as a 701 derivative (as both seem to have the flatter cab), despite the 730 being introduced into service first!

(Years in service are already shown as tooltips on the operator icons, but I appreciate this isn't a particularly useful way to show that information.)

And thanks for the kind words! It was fun to make, even if it took a little more time than I'd like to admit.

 

[Mikey C]

Thanks. Is there a reason why you have a line from the 458 to the 220 and 390, as they have little connection? While they are similar looking, are the 323s that similar to the Networkers?

 

[Gaelan]

Thanks. Is there a reason why you have a line from the 458 to the 220 and 390, as they have little connection?

Same traction system (Alstom ONIX) - though to be honest I'm marginal on whether this is worth showing.

While they are similar looking, are the 323s that similar to the Networkers?

I believe I'd been going off this statement from Wikipedia, in combination with the obvious visual similarities:

The units are known for a distinctive whine made during acceleration or deceleration, rising/falling through multiple phases falsely suggestive of a motor connected to a gearbox with a great many ratios, caused by use of a gate turn-off thyristor-based inverter as part of the traction control circuitry that drives the 3-phase AC motors, a common setup in the early to mid 1990s which is notably also present in the Networker family of electric multiple units.

Which is admittedly fairly flimsy. On a further look just now, I found this Institution of Mechanical Engineers paper which goes into some detail on the design and opens by describing them as a "regional equivalent of the BRB Class 465 Networker units". So I think it's safe to say at least some connection exists?

If I were to do this again, I'd come up with some way to indicate degree of relationship - currently there's no way to tell from the diagram alone whether units are substantially identical (eg 800/802) or share a few parts, eg 458/220, or 220/172 (same bogies). (Or indeed whether they were directly converted from existing units, eg 769 or the Isle of Wight tube trains!) But I haven't got time, at least in the short term, to go back and classify all the connections unfortunately.

 

[Gloster]

It may be my usual incompetence with anything technical, but I can’t see the Derby and Met-Camm. Lightweights, the Battery set and the original Edinburg-Glasgow sets. Nor the original 50000/56000, but that was a prototype. (Or maybe I have misunderstood the purpose.)

 

[Gaelan]

It may be my usual incompetence with anything technical, but I can’t see the Derby and Met-Camm. Lightweights, the Battery set and the original Edinburg-Glasgow sets. Nor the original 50000/56000, but that was a prototype. (Or maybe I have misunderstood the purpose.)

Yes - having to draw the line somewhere, I’ve only shown things that got TOPS classes.

 

[contrex]

Good work. I think Mk2 coaches date from 1964 rather than 1963, but I'm being picky.

The prototype Mark 2, FK 13252, was completed at Swindon in 1963, and is now preserved by and located at the Mid-Norfolk Railway. Agreed that the first production Mark 2 coaches entered service in 1964. I gather that the first Mark 2 coach type, produced up to 1966 had no letter suffix, and was simply 'Mark 2' but has lately been called 'Mark 2z'. I don't know how official that is. I've often heard people talk about 'early Mark 2'.

 

[hexagon789]

Good work. I think Mk2 coaches date from 1964 rather than 1963, but I'm being picky.

But in this case it's easy enough, so I've fixed it, along with the Mk2s.

The prototype FKs date from 1963.

So depends how precise you want to be.

 

[Gaelan]

The prototype Mark 2, FK 13252, was completed at Swindon in 1963, and is now preserved by and located at the Mid-Norfolk Railway. Agreed that the first production Mark 2 coaches entered service in 1964. I gather that the first Mark 2 coach type, produced up to 1966 had no letter suffix, and was simply 'Mark 2' but has lately been called 'Mark 2z'. I don't know how official that is. I've often heard people talk about 'early Mark 2'.

Did the prototype run in passenger service? If so it counts, in my opinion.

 

[hexagon789]

The prototype Mark 2, FK 13252, was completed at Swindon in 1963, and is now preserved by and located at the Mid-Norfolk Railway. Agreed that the first production Mark 2 coaches entered service in 1964. I gather that the first Mark 2 coach type, produced up to 1966 had no letter suffix, and was simply 'Mark 2' but has lately been called 'Mark 2z'. I don't know how official that is. I've often heard people talk about 'early Mark 2'.

BR used 2Z in official documents, including carriage diagram books. The 2Z designation came in when POIS codes were implemented I believe.

Did the prototype run in passenger service? If so it counts, in my opinion.

Yes, it did on both the WR and ER.

 

[contrex]

Some sources on the web give a build year of 1962 for the prototype Mark 2, FK 13252. I saw in one place an order date for Lot 30550 of 11/1958, and a completion date of 01/1963. I have a feeling that the question of when Mark 2s 'date from' could fill many pages of enthusiast's forums, much as debates about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin kept mediaeval theologians busy.

 

[etr221]

A few comments:

Overall the inter-mixture of Underground and Mainline/BR/National Rail stock I find a bit confusing... And for many of the earlier types, especially things like the SR emus, I know them by their pre TOPS designations, not TOPS class numbers.

Would including thumb nail images be useful

How should 'groups' be shown? - e.g. for the many dmmus which followed from the inital 'Derby lightweights' of 1954, with different manufacturers producing their own designs to BR specifications - for the various 'twins', then major variants - the WR suburban and cross country triples; and the Swindon InterCity units, which combined took coach style from Mark 1s, and power trains fom other dmmus

And what about what, to all intents and purposes, the same - the 506 & 306 classes, the later being those converted to ac? the Underground Standard and 1938 stock to the Isle of White, which gained TOPS classifications, but weren't really changed?

And how the major strands of development following through one to another inter-related: would different sorts of arrow be useful?
Should the timelines reflect building dates or service dates? What about rebuilding/major changes to a type?

How far back should you be going? As an example of this, the BR Mark 1 coaches drew a lot from the late pre-nationalisation designs of all the Big four for style and detailing, with basic steel body on chassis design from Mr Bulleid's all steel 4-SUBs...
The various SR dc emus all followed a definite development from the original LSWR 3 car suburban units - the Southern suburban units of the 1920s all followed from these, branching out in the 1930s to the 'outer suburban' 4-LAVs/2-NOL/BIL/HALs and the main line 6-PUL/PAN/5-BEL/4-COR etc strand - all of which devloped and influenced each other, culminating in the all steel designs of 1940s, which in some sense inspired the Mark 1 coaches, which led to the 'BR standard' variants of SR emus - and in turn to the Southend dc emus (which became class 307), and in turn the other ac emus of the early 1960s...

It was only the 2/4-PEP (445/446) that broke the mould to give something very different.

On the London Underground:
To my mind, there was a definite link from the District G (Q23) stock to K (Q27), and on. And the G was a follow on from the B, C, D, E stock sequence (which in turn probably drew from the MDR A, but I am less sure of this). The F stock was very different (but not unrelated, methinks): one thing I wonder about is whether it in someway inspired the much later A for Amersham stock.
Then came the O/P (all new) and Q38 (same body style, but to work with the older District stocks)

 

[birchesgreen]

Interesting website and concept! There are some early tube stock types missing though like 1914 and 1920 Stock.

 

[Gloster]

I would have thought that the Swindon Inter-City lead on to the Class 120 and 126, but that the Class 119, and 123 and 124 were different strands.

 

[SWFreight]

Huh - I just tried Safari, Firefox, and Chrome, and the standard browser zoom functionality seems to work fine. What browser (and OS) are you using?

Possibly, though it's an area I'm less familiar with. (If anyone else would be interested in taking this on, I'd be happy to share the code I used to generate it - though it's not particularly pretty!)

(Years in service are already shown as tooltips on the operator icons, but I appreciate this isn't a particularly useful way to show that information.)

And thanks for the kind words! It was fun to make, even if it took a little more time than I'd like to admit.

That's fair enough. I was using Chrome on Windows 10. I've just tried using Chrome on Android and it zooms as expected. I can find the version number of my desktop Chrome if it helps?

 

[DarloRich]

wow - that looks like a bit of a labour of love!

Perhaps have the links pop out in a new window so you don't lose the initial web page

 

[Mikey C]

I believe I'd been going off this statement from Wikipedia, in combination with the obvious visual similarities:

Which is admittedly fairly flimsy. On a further look just now, I found this Institution of Mechanical Engineers paper which goes into some detail on the design and opens by describing them as a "regional equivalent of the BRB Class 465 Networker units". So I think it's safe to say at least some connection exists?

If I were to do this again, I'd come up with some way to indicate degree of relationship - currently there's no way to tell from the diagram alone whether units are substantially identical (eg 800/802) or share a few parts, eg 458/220, or 220/172 (same bogies). (Or indeed whether they were directly converted from existing units, eg 769 or the Isle of Wight tube trains!) But I haven't got time, at least in the short term, to go back and classify all the connections unfortunately.

To me while the 323s are of the same generation as the Networkers, having different manufacturers for both their bodywork and traction equipment makes them similar in the way a 377, 458 and 450 are "similar"...

Being picky, there probably should be a line between the 508 and 455, as the 455/7 have a trailer unit from the 508s.

 

[EIKN]

Good work. I think Mk2 coaches date from 1964 rather than 1963, but I'm being picky. Also, class 432 had three units built in 1974, being the last mk1 stock built.

I was interested in this reply about the Mark1's being built as late as 1975, but didn't they build some later with the same window design if the mark2A-C for ' pullman' coaches ? I've seen them in photos also have the 00 gauge Bachmann models and with Bachmann they occasionally have a description of each model and it's history I thought it said 1976 for these ?.