• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!

BR Standard Locomotives — How Received By BR Workforce?

Dr_Paul

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2013
Messages
1,472
Something that has intrigued me for a while is how the BR Standards locomotives were received by the workforce, in particular drivers and firemen. Prior to nationalisation the main companies had designed their own locos; were the Standard classes popular or otherwise with the workforce, in comparison with the existing locos? A couple of examples would be the BR Britannias compared to the ex-GWR Castles and Kings, or the ex-SR West Countries and Merchant Navies.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Big Jumby 74

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2022
Messages
1,464
Location
UK
I can only speak second hand, having had instructors (in varying traffic/operational aspects) in my early BR career who had worked on certain standard locos in their (the guys concerned) earlier careers; one was a chap who had worked on Britannia's on the GE, working the Norwich road - he couldn't speak highly enough of them, nothing before came close to their timekeeping and overall performance in his opinion.
Another was equally complimentary as I recall about the Standard 5's (73xxx) that worked out of 70A (Nine Elms), in so much as if a booked WC/BB had been replaced by a Standard 5, it wouldn't have worried most crews that much on most services, as the 5s were not short of power.
But as said, these were views of only a couple of guys whom I met through my early career, and as in all matters, different people will have differing views/memories on similar subjects.

EDITED:

As a PS, I have also read, with a personal interest in GE matters, that many, albeit not all, crews on the Norwich Road found the Brit's were marginally better, performance wise, than even the Type 4's (class 40s) that worked some of those services for a short period, but that may have been down to experience/familiarity of both types (or not) in the short time the 40's were working the route?
My own experience (as a railwayman at the time) of riding the Norwich road as a passenger for the most part, was in class 37/47 days, and I sometimes wonder how a Brush 4 would compare to a Britannia? IMHO, I think they are the only diesel class that would prove a match?
 
Last edited:

Sir Felix Pole

Established Member
Joined
21 Oct 2012
Messages
1,321
Location
Wilmslow
The BR Standard tanks (and their LMS antecedents) were well received on the Southern for local and branch work, for they were a significant upgrade on their hitherto ancient motive power.

Britannias had a very mixed record on the Western, naturally being regarded as inferior to any Swindon product, and only when they were concentrated at Cardiff Canton did they do good work on such trains as the 'Red Dragon' and 'Capitals United'. One issue was that they were left-hand drive, unfamiliar to WR crews and making signal sighting difficult, and another that of drifiting smoke. This allegedly contributed to the Milton (near Didcot) accident in 1955 when 'Polar Star' came to grief, but the primary cause was driver error. Plymouth Laira had batch when new in 1952/3 for taking over expresses and local work in Cornwall, but they were found to be inferior to the GWR Grange and County classes on the switch-back route with frequent stops.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,778
This is second or even third hand, but ...

Depended on the loco and on the location.

Most seem to have been well-regarded though - as already noted - there could be variations by where they were used: as with GE & GWR regarding Britannias.
The Duke was not well-regarded, but largely down to a design flaw.
Nobody seems to have rated the Clans.
The 73XXX were well regarded, though the Caprottis were eyed suspiciously by many!
I've heard it said that the 76XXX were better regarded than the 75XXX, better steamers and more sure-footed.
The 77XXX - don't know, never really had much connection to where they worked.
The 78XXX pottered around in the style of the 464XX of the LMS and seem to have been regarded as a step up from the various ancient devices they replaced!
The tank engines were largely refinements of existing ideas and - again - benefitted from replacing elderly locos.
The 9Fs were masters of pretty much everything they did BUT some crews (well, firemen) didn't appreciate their huge fireboxes when a Stanier 8F could do the job adequately.

All personal impressions gained over the years - comment welcome!
 

Big Jumby 74

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2022
Messages
1,464
Location
UK
The 9Fs were masters of pretty much everything they did BUT some crews (well, firemen) didn't appreciate their huge fireboxes when a Stanier 8F could do the job adequately.
Again second hand, but I did get to meet and talk with Messrs Beale and Smith back in the 80's, who worked 9F's as a regular crew between Dorset and Somerset, but it was so long ago now, it would be best the OP refers to one of the books Pete Smith wrote back then. I'm certain he would have mentioned the merits or otherwise of the locos they worked, and as some on here may know, Donald, as a Senior Driver was rostered to work part of the final Pines Express with Evening Star on September 8th '62, but he relinquished the turn in favour of Peter. That was the sort of trust between old hand and (relative) newbie, that to a much lessor extent I came to appreciate in my early BR career.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
11,097
Well, you asked for it ... what Taunton shed thought of the 82xxx sent there from South Wales in the early 1960s:

 

Clarence Yard

Established Member
Joined
18 Dec 2014
Messages
2,909
I always thought the allocation of the 82xxx tanks to some GWR sheds towards the end of their short careers was a little odd. The GWR large and small prairies were masters at their jobs, supremely so in a lot of cases but the 82xxx were a bit “in between” and suffered accordingly. Personally I think the GWR 45xx tanks were one of the best designs in the history of steam (economical, yet very powerful for their size and weight, and very quick off the mark too) but the 82xxx didn’t seem to match them.

My ER colleagues who worked them thought the 80xxx tanks were excellent and the 9F “spaceships” were masters of any job and a big step up from a WD. But speaking to some crew who operated 40B Britannias on the East Lincs line expresses, they really loved working them but they were a big step up from a B1!

The Standard 4 mogul was basically a very slightly modified Ivatt 4 but rode much better (the Ivatt 4’s had a real reputation for rough riding) but, in general, all the standards were well received on both the SR and ScR and the standard 5’s and 80xxx tanks seem to have been well regarded wherever they worked.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
11,097
The few 80xxx "big tanks" were not particularly well received on the Western when they arrived in 1962. In fairness it was very late in the day to find anything meaningful for them, and they were the locos from the LT&S Southend line after the electrification there, filthy and run down, in no small part from lack of fitters and general care there, and with all the issues arising from the Tilbury's bad water, which was the worst on BR and needed a high proportion of the fleet sidelined for washing out every day. Some were sent to Old Oak, not sure why, and may never have worked meaningfully again. Others went to Shrewsbury and the Cambrian, by the end of 1962 it must have been known these depots were being transferred to the LMR.

At Taunton it was likewise also a mystery why the 82xxx were sent on from Barry, where they had got early diesels. Essentially they replaced the 45xx small tanks there, which sat in a sad line west of the station alongside the Down Relief for a good while after withdrawal, like an illustration from the Rev Awdry's books, some of them getting on for 50 years old or more though still up to it, but also there were the large longstanding 41xx tanks which carried on, and top of the tree were four 61xx tanks from London, sent down displaced there by diesels. These were in excellent mechanical condition, and notably powerful and easy to run. They were even received nicely clean, at least one in lined green livery, a couple with the smokebox door hinge straps picked out in silver paint for some reason. A "London tank" 61xx is essentially to the same drawings as a 41xx, but the boiler is of a different steel alloy which allowed a higher pressure. By day they romped down the Minehead line, and at night, when most of the freight went down the main line, became the Wellington bankers. The 82xxx, see note above, were very poor in comparison, and the shed foreman had them steamed as little as possible. One does wonder if the crew on a heavy westbound freight pulling in to Wellington ever took one look at an 82xxx in the siding, said "ah, don't bother", and carried on.

The Britannias only lasted briefly in the West of England, having a trailing carrying wheel they were susceptible to weight shift to the rear when the loco tips back slightly with the drawbar pull, which is fine for adhesion with coupled wheels but wasted if they are not. They however had an even longer boiler than a King, a surprisingly compact loco, and this gave difficulties over Dainton, west of Newton Abbot, where the 1 in 36 gradient up to the summit is followed by 1 in 36 down the other side, something you don't get on the Lickey, or going up to Exeter Central, or other steep climbs. Full regulator and cutoff to blast up, water level in the boiler falls, tip over the top, water level at the rear firebox end drops right down (someone can do the calcs, I believe it is several inches), blows a fusible plug, has to come off at Totnes as it's now 1 in 40 up again over Rattery, Newton Abbot has to send a Hall pronto to take over, main line dislocated, talk with shed foreman for the driver - no thank you, Mr Riddles.
 
Last edited:

Harvester

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2020
Messages
1,544
Location
Notts
I sometimes wonder how a Brush 4 would compare to a Britannia? IMHO, I think they are the only diesel class that would prove a match?
When the Brush Type 4s took over the Norwich to Liverpool Street service in 1965 the Britannias had long gone to the LMR, so the two classes never competed on the GE. However the 2 hour schedules that the Britannias managed were not greatly reduced until the 86s took over after electrification, which suggests the 47s were only a slightly better match on this route. As for top speeds, I can‘t find any logs of Brits reaching 100mph on these trains, a few upper 90s at Diss are the highest found. In fact the only reliable log I could find of a Britannia doing a ton, was 70014 Iron Duke reaching 101mph on the Midland Main Line, on a down working between Luton and Bedford in 1959. The log appeared in O.S. Nock’s ‘Locomotive Practice and Performance (Vol 1)’.
 

Big Jumby 74

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2022
Messages
1,464
Location
UK
As for top speeds, I can‘t find any logs of Brits reaching 100mph on these trains,
Don't know what the perm speed limits were during steam days, but when on the odd '47' run the track's underlying (below sleeper) conditions South of Shenfield resulted in a 70 mph max at the London end for many years, which otherwise could have been higher.
 

Magdalia

Established Member
Joined
1 Jan 2022
Messages
4,743
Location
The Fens
When the Brush Type 4s took over the Norwich to Liverpool Street service in 1965 the Britannias had long gone to the LMR, so the two classes never competed on the GE. However the 2 hour schedules that the Britannias managed were not greatly reduced until the 86s took over after electrification, which suggests the 47s were only a slightly better match on this route.
The class 47s were a significant improvement on the Britannias.

In the Britannia era only the down Broadsman was booked 2 hours Liverpool Street-Norwich, and with only one stop at Ipswich. The down and up Norfolkman and East Anglian were booked 2 hours 10 minutes, also with only one stop at Ipswich.

In contrast, the Brush Type 4s had 6 down and 5 up trains in the level 2 hours, stopping at Colchester as well as Ipswich.
 

Clarence Yard

Established Member
Joined
18 Dec 2014
Messages
2,909
The few 80xxx "big tanks" were not particularly well received on the Western when they arrived in 1962. In fairness it was very late in the day to find anything meaningful for them, and they were the locos from the LT&S Southend line after the electrification there, filthy and run down, in no small part from lack of fitters and general care there, and with all the issues arising from the Tilbury's bad water, which was the worst on BR and needed a high proportion of the fleet sidelined for washing out every day. Some were sent to Old Oak, not sure why, and may never have worked meaningfully again. Others went to Shrewsbury and the Cambrian, by the end of 1962 it must have been known these depots were being transferred to the LMR.

Old Oak was a staging post for some of them, pending a visit to Crewe Works. 21 LTS 80xxx tanks made it to WR. 6 were for Swansea East Dock to replace LMS tanks and the rest were for the Shrewsbury Division. There was a programme of putting the ones that needed a Classified through Crewe in 1962/3. Some eventually ended up on the SR but when the LMR withdrew the class in 1965, most of those ended up at Barry and eventual preservation.

The WR also inherited 12 80xxx tanks in January 1963 as part of the takeover of former SR lines in the west. They were still maintained by Eastleigh Works and the last 3 were withdrawn when the S & D closed in 1966. Preserved 80064 was one of these 12.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,898
Location
Torbay
It is worth noting that the standards were clearly all new, fresh out of the works with no wear or damage, unlike the ragtag collections of big four and even earlier pre-grouping locos they replaced, some of which were very old by then and all of which had soldiered bravely on through the rigours of WW2 with questionable maintenance. The standards' cabs were all better designed with more attention to ergonomics and crew comfort, like some of the later big four designs.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
11,097
The standards' cabs were all better designed with more attention to ergonomics and crew comfort.
I think a few old GWR guys are raising their eyebrows here :) Just to pick out one of the litany of comments above about the 82xxx at Taunton compared to a 61xx ...

Cab noisy and both draughty and hot at the same time (difficult to achieve that one if you set out to do so).
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,928
I think a few old GWR guys are raising their eyebrows here :) Just to pick out one of the litany of comments above about the 82xxx at Taunton compared to a 61xx ...
but wasn't there an awful lot of "Old company" loyalty or "not invented here" around back then - especially from ex-GWR people?
 

Top