Operations of the Waterloo-Exeter 50s (and loco diagramming in general)

[Big Jumby 74]

I photo'd 50007 leading D400 on a 1Zxx (time?) Waterloo to Exeter on 28-6-92, although can't see much of D400 as a 442 was keeping pace on the DSL!

Must have been the extra weight of all that green paint!

Nope, guess again....
Also snapped a drag in early March 92, 6X55, 22//00 (9th) from Laira to St Leonards, 47361 hauling 027+031 in to the world of preservation.

 

[D6130]

Nope, guess again....

....the not so triumphant 50 042, currently of Bodmin Parish?

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Try the not so 'Gloxxxxx' !

 

[D6130]

Try the not so 'Gloxxxxx' !

Ah yes....send her Victorious, happy and Gloxxxxx! According to several retired Salisbury drivers of my acquaintance, the 'green machine' was not the best either. 'All noise and no action' was one way to describe her apparently....which is rather ironic for a machine that was formerly named 'Hercules'.

 

[nw1]

The 1983 TT is interesting: the papers is extended to Exeter (unadvertised, which is why I never realised it existed) and forms the 0623 up (VB, 2 spades in the WTT header, so clearly the papers set. With the revised timings it can't form the 1010 down.
0640 off Sarum is clearly a WR set (D350 100mph) forming the 0910 - discussed in another thread as it happens).
0715 is hauled, but will be a 4TC anyway I think.
0802 is propelled (having arrived from Basingstoke, doubtless berthed in the down bay).

Thanks for that. The "AIR" on the 0715 and 0802 confused me, I thought that would indicate non-TC.

The papers didn't form the 1010 in 1981 or 1982, it went to Clapham and then came back out for the 1410. The 1010 was formed off the 0755 Salisbury (33+8TC) so presumably the 0802 did the same in 1983.

If the papers formed the 0623, I wonder what happened to the 1638 once it got to Exeter? Perhaps it formed the 2100 up, and the "Barnstaple" set was no longer used?

The 0640 had the same diagram in 1981 and 1982 (and presumably 1980) also, forming the 0910 - replacing the former 73-hauled Chertsey-Waterloo in that respect.

Interesting to note that by 1983, as many as three morning peak services off Salisbury called at Fleet and Farnborough (including the presumably 50-hauled 0640) and two of the three also called at Hook and Winchfield. The combination with VEPs only occurred in the evening peak, though.

Try the not so 'Gloxxxxx' !

One of the first 50s I saw, though never got haulage.

In fact the only 50 haulage I ever had was 007, on (I think) 15/12/89 (if not, another day during that week) on a Basingstoke to Woking service mid-afternoon (perhaps around 1500 or 1530, it was still daylight).

I saw them all the time, but I ended up only ever seeing 49 out of 50 ("Illustrious", 037 I think, being the missing one).

 

[Gloster]

In 1983 the 20.20 Exeter-Basingstoke was formed off the 15.10.

 

[nw1]

In 1983 the 20.20 Exeter-Basingstoke was formed off the 15.10.

Looks like there was no 2020 Exeter-Basingstoke in 1983, it was retimed at 2100 (and terminated Salisbury Mon-Thurs). There was a new 1934 to Waterloo: I'd presume this was the up working of the 1510.

The 0632 Salisbury-Exeter is retimed at 0605 and now marked D350 which I presume indicates 50 + WR set. So at a guess the 2100 was indeed the up working of the 1638, and the presence of the "Barnstaple" set on the line was no more.

 

[Gloster]

Looks like there was no 2020 Exeter-Basingstoke in 1983

Sorry, I skipped to Saturdays. The 15.10 Waterloo stock went back as the 19.34 to Waterloo. The 06.02 Salisbury formed the 09.38 Exeter. (The minutes might be a touch out as these were early timings.

 

[30907]

....the presence of the "Barnstaple" set on the line was no more.

By then the Torrington milk traffic from Barnstaple (the reason for using a L/H set) was gone, so the set itself had lost its purpose.

 

[nw1]

By then the Torrington milk traffic from Barnstaple (the reason for using a L/H set) was gone, so the set itself had lost its purpose.

Ah ok, I probably assumed the set was to provide a peak extra on the Barnstaple line due to no DMUs being available.

 

[MichaelAMW]

Looks like there was no 2020 Exeter-Basingstoke in 1983, it was retimed at 2100 (and terminated Salisbury Mon-Thurs). There was a new 1934 to Waterloo: I'd presume this was the up working of the 1510.

The 0632 Salisbury-Exeter is retimed at 0605 and now marked D350 which I presume indicates 50 + WR set. So at a guess the 2100 was indeed the up working of the 1638, and the presence of the "Barnstaple" set on the line was no more.

That's all correct. The 1500 Barnstaple returned as a through train to Paignton at 1725 off Exeter and then made the 1830 Paignton - Cardiff.

 

[Cowley]

....the not so triumphant 50 042, currently of Bodmin Parish?

Triumph was an absolute weapon I’ll have you know!

 

[D6130]

Triumph was an absolute weapon I’ll have you know!

She certainly was a weapon (napalm bomb?) when she exploded at Milborne Port on my last scheduled Hoover trip in the Autumn of 1991. More than two hours delay awaiting the arrival of 50 050 from Exeter to hook onto the front and drag us away. My planned couple of pints in the Great Western rapidly evaporated, as I had to go straight back to Salisbury - where I was staying overnight at my late mother's house - with 'Fearless' again.

 

[paul1609]

She certainly was a weapon (napalm bomb?) when she exploded at Milborne Port on my last scheduled Hoover trip in the Autumn of 1991. More than two hours delay awaiting the arrival of 50 050 from Exeter to hook onto the front and drag us away. My planned couple of pints in the Great Western rapidly evaporated, as I had to go straight back to Salisbury - where I was staying overnight at my late mother's house - with 'Fearless' again.

Indeed that's what's usually forgotten in these nostalgic posts. The service during the last few years of loco haulage was absolutely dire. I was regularly travelling from the Sussex coast to Plymouth and there were periods when just to arrive at Exeter was considered an achievement let alone an on time arrival. I can recall one occasion where the loco failed somewhere near yeovil junction and we just stood for over three hours with no news on a rescue. Most able bodied passengers eventually just abandoned the train climbed over the fence and fields to the A30. I remember having to hitch-hike down the A30 in the dark to Plymouth arriving just before dawn. No mobile phones in those days!

 

[Cowley]

Indeed that's what's usually forgotten in these nostalgic posts. The service during the last few years of loco haulage was absolutely dire. I was regularly travelling from the Sussex coast to Plymouth and there were periods when just to arrive at Exeter was considered an achievement let alone an on time arrival. I can recall one occasion where the loco failed somewhere near yeovil junction and we just stood for over three hours with no news on a rescue. Most able bodied passengers eventually just abandoned the train climbed over the fence and fields to the A30. I remember having to hitch-hike down the A30 in the dark to Plymouth arriving just before dawn. No mobile phones in those days!

That is of course absolutely correct. It must have been an absolute nightmare for the general passenger on the route and if a train had an issue on a single line section then that was most of the rest of the day stuffed.

She certainly was a weapon (napalm bomb?) when she exploded at Milborne Port on my last scheduled Hoover trip in the Autumn of 1991. More than two hours delay awaiting the arrival of 50 050 from Exeter to hook onto the front and drag us away. My planned couple of pints in the Great Western rapidly evaporated, as I had to go straight back to Salisbury - where I was staying overnight at my late mother's house - with 'Fearless' again.

She must have been having trouble with her nerves that day.

 

[Richard Scott]

Triumph was an absolute weapon I’ll have you know!

Used to keep records of performance in latter years, didn't get a chance to time 50042 but, despite a lot of slagging off by enthusiasts, 50050 put in some of the best performances.

 

[Cowley]

Ah yes....send her Victorious, happy and Gloxxxxx! According to several retired Salisbury drivers of my acquaintance, the 'green machine' was not the best either. 'All noise and no action' was one way to describe her apparently....which is rather ironic for a machine that was formerly named 'Hercules'.

Which was the one that was constantly puffing blue smoke out of one of the exhaust ports back then due to worn valve sleeves or seals? Was that Hood or Glorious?
I don’t imagine that helped its performance too much.

Used to keep records of performance in latter years, didn't get a chance to time 50042 but, despite a lot of slagging off by enthusiasts, 50050 put in some of the best performances.

I had a bit of a soft spot for the old departmental (DCWA) ones because they’d occasionally be sent up to Barnstaple on DMU replacement runs. 50050 from my memory seemed to fairly reliable too. Hazy memories at this distance though!

 

[nw1]

That's all correct. The 1500 Barnstaple returned as a through train to Paignton at 1725 off Exeter and then made the 1830 Paignton - Cardiff.

OK, thanks for confirming that.

Indeed that's what's usually forgotten in these nostalgic posts. The service during the last few years of loco haulage was absolutely dire. I was regularly travelling from the Sussex coast to Plymouth and there were periods when just to arrive at Exeter was considered an achievement let alone an on time arrival. I can recall one occasion where the loco failed somewhere near yeovil junction and we just stood for over three hours with no news on a rescue. Most able bodied passengers eventually just abandoned the train climbed over the fence and fields to the A30. I remember having to hitch-hike down the A30 in the dark to Plymouth arriving just before dawn. No mobile phones in those days!

When did it start to "go wrong"? I only regularly observed workings on the line from 1983 to 1985, though I do remember noting what looked like a good timetable in 1989 and a deterioration in the timetable in 1991.

 

[Cowley]

When did it start to "go wrong"? I only regularly observed workings on the line from 1983 to 1985, though I do remember noting what looked like a good timetable in 1989 and a deterioration in the timetable in 1991.

From my memories of the line back then things seemed to be reasonably stable up to about 1988. I seem to recall that 47s only started to appear on the line around then on Brighton turns (having taken over from the 33s) but in the summer of 1988 a whole load of 47/4s (some of which were quite tired ex Scottish region ones) suddenly appeared on the line and with the class 50s becoming more and more unreliable it just seemed to go downhill from there.

The 47/7s when they arrived (and despite their shiny new paint jobs) were also pretty worn out, although some were definitely more reliable than others. I guess with much of the route being single line though it was just a lot more obvious when something had gone wrong.

 

[D6130]

OK, thanks for confirming that.



When did it start to "go wrong"? I only regularly observed workings on the line from 1983 to 1985, though I do remember noting what looked like a good timetable in 1989 and a deterioration in the timetable in 1991.

I strongly suspect that @paul1609 is referring to a deterioration in performance, rather than a deterioration in the timetable.

 

[nw1]

I strongly suspect that @paul1609 is referring to a deterioration in performance, rather than a deterioration in the timetable.

I realise that, though was just interested in noting when the performance deterioration began!

 

[paul1609]

I strongly suspect that @paul1609 is referring to a deterioration in performance, rather than a deterioration in the timetable.

i don't think in the period from 1989 until the 159s were introduced in 1992 there actually was a timetable. It was more a case of if there's a locomotive that nobody else wants 50s, 47/7s lets try running it from Waterloo and see if it can get to Exeter. Even the 159s only turned up because the recession at that time meant that regional railways couldn't justify using all the 158s they'd ordered. I think the original plan was that the locos were to hang on until they were replaced by an express networker Turbo sometime in the mid to late 90s.

 

[randyrippley]

i don't think in the period from 1989 until the 159s were introduced in 1992 there actually was a timetable. It was more a case of if there's a locomotive that nobody else wants 50s, 47/7s lets try running it from Waterloo and see if it can get to Exeter. Even the 159s only turned up because the recession at that time meant that regional railways couldn't justify using all the 158s they'd ordered. I think the original plan was that the locos were to hang on until they were replaced by an express networker Turbo sometime in the mid to late 90s.

What is so ironic is that this is virtually a repeat of what happened with the Warships
In those days if you saw a 42 appearing the question was always "where is it going to break down (or run out of fuel)?"
If you saw a replacement Hymek or 33 approaching you knew you'd be late......but at least the train would get there

 

[nw1]

i don't think in the period from 1989 until the 159s were introduced in 1992 there actually was a timetable. It was more a case of if there's a locomotive that nobody else wants 50s, 47/7s lets try running it from Waterloo and see if it can get to Exeter. Even the 159s only turned up because the recession at that time meant that regional railways couldn't justify using all the 158s they'd ordered. I think the original plan was that the locos were to hang on until they were replaced by an express networker Turbo sometime in the mid to late 90s.

Thanks. I realise this is OT but, as a user of frequently overcrowded single two-car 158s on the Cardiff-Portsmouth service a little bit later in the 90s, this was of course a monumentally bad decision. More 158s were needed, not less, and if they needed to replace the Exeter stock they should have ordered the 159s as additional units rather than divert stock intended for RR.

Given the hourly 33-hauled Portsmouth-Bristol/Cardiff appeared to be 6-car (I never really saw these; I'm going off the 1981 CWN), replacing an hourly 6-car service with an hourly 2-car was a huge drop in capacity, particularly for the passenger boom in the mid-to-late 90s. If they wanted a like-for-like replacement, arguably they should have used 3 two-car 158s coupled together!

On the subject of the new generation of stock on the line (which I realise is also going OT), does anyone remember 2 out of the 4 Waterloo-Southampton short diagrams (departed WAT xx10, returned from SOU xx55) being operated by 159s for most of the 90s? This was obviously "diesel under the wires", so to speak, and CIGs were available between the peaks to operate these services. I presume there was a desire to run the entire service with new stock (the other 2 diagrams were 442s) and this trumped the "diesel under the wires" issue. (One or two shoulder peak services were CIGs, the 0855 ex-SOU and 1610 ex-WAT spring to mind, but they were in the minority).

 

[Big Jumby 74]

On the subject of the new generation of stock on the line (which I realise is also going OT), does anyone remember 2 out of the 4 Waterloo-Southampton short diagrams (departed WAT xx10, returned from SOU xx55) being operated by 159s for most of the 90s?

Don't actually remember that, but it may have been a convenient way of keeping diversionary traction/route knowledge up to date for 159 trained people, for when the Andover route was closed for engineering works.

50050 put in some of the best performances.

Without wishing to upset anyone, that is why I was loathe to mention the identity of one (poorly performing loco at the time concerned) above. People get very attached to certain things (not just railway related) but the hard truth about railway loco performance is down to a number of factors, the least of which is the painted number/name of a given locomotive.

What is so ironic is that this is virtually a repeat of what happened with the Warships
In those days if you saw a 42 appearing the question was always "where is it going to break down (or run out of fuel)?"

They were before my time, but what you say is exactly what the railway doesn't need as far as the majority of the fare passengers are concerned. Just one example which I was caught up in was 50018 on the morning of 7-11-88, when it worked the 07.04 Salisbury to Waterloo. Just after pulling away from Woking, it died and came to a stand. The driver was able to restart it, but then on passing Clapham Jn it shut down again, and from there it was a gradual coast to Vauxhall station where the driver declared it a failure. The driver did the right thing in bringing it to a stand in a platform, but this was, unfortunately, just before the Up Main Fast and Up Main Relief lines diverged back then, so with no way for those following UMF trains already having passed the Wimbledon area to get around the failure they were stuck behind, and the morning peak on the Main side from that moment on went down the U bend.

 

[QJ]

12 December 1988. IIRC I caught a Salisbury to London Waterloo service departing Basingstoke around 08:26. Anyone able to confirm what time the train departed from Salisbury assuming it started from there. It was one of those trains that called at Fleet and Farnborough on the way to London (sadly it didn't get to Waterloo that day but terminated at Wimbledon). The number of the class 50 would be appreciated too. I've been trying to find out more details of that day ever since my wife ditched my note books during a house move.

 

[Clarence Yard]

i don't think in the period from 1989 until the 159s were introduced in 1992 there actually was a timetable. It was more a case of if there's a locomotive that nobody else wants 50s, 47/7s lets try running it from Waterloo and see if it can get to Exeter. Even the 159s only turned up because the recession at that time meant that regional railways couldn't justify using all the 158s they'd ordered. I think the original plan was that the locos were to hang on until they were replaced by an express networker Turbo sometime in the mid to late 90s.

Actually the original plan was to have the cl.171 units all in service by May 1992. 60 vehicles were supposed to be delivered by March 1992 and all 78 should have been delivered by May 1992. When the 1990 Railplan process started, that was still the plan. Wessex were also going to have 6 additional cl.165/1 vehicles for local services.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

I've been trying to find out more details of that day ever since my wife ditched my note books during a house move.

50048 worked the 0704 Salisbury UP, but was terminated Surbiton. Too busy beyond that to note anything else that day!

 

[nw1]

Actually the original plan was to have the cl.171 units all in service by May 1992. 60 vehicles were supposed to be delivered by March 1992 and all 78 should have been delivered by May 1992. When the 1990 Railplan process started, that was still the plan. Wessex were also going to have 6 additional cl.165/1 vehicles for local services.

Class 171, is that definitely correct? Or was 171 intended for some other class originally?

 

[JonathanH]

Class 171, is that definitely correct? Or was 171 intended for some other class originally?

Yes, correct, but a different type of class 171 from the one which came 14 years later. The corresponding Kent Coast electric units would have been class 471.

Might have looked a little like this
https://www.flickr.com/photos/103688802@N02/26090441157

Taken from https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:British_Rail_Class_471