What If.......?

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Also, would the Woodhead route have remained open if it connected into an electrified ECML at the east end that was also 1500V DC? (I assume an electrified infill from Sheffield/Wath to Doncaster would have been rational for the LNER in this instance)

If the Woodhead tunnel had remained open, now that the AC power is as far as Hadfield, it would fit in well with an electrified ECML. Just think of the routes that electric EMU from Liverpool and Manchester could go via this route via Sheffield and Doncaster, besides having this as a fast stand-alone service.

I have always liked the idea of a MANCHESTER - DONCASTER - NEWCASTLE route using this line, which would better service capacity.

 

[yorksrob]

That said, the CIG, VEP and CEP stock were a lot more simple in their construction, maintenance and operation that the stock that replaced them.

(plus a whole lot better, but lets not let nostalgia and experience get in the way)

Indeed

 

[LE Greys]

If the Woodhead tunnel had remained open, now that the AC power is as far as Hadfield, it would fit in well with an electrified ECML. Just think of the routes that electric EMU from Liverpool and Manchester could go via this route via Sheffield and Doncaster, besides having this as a fast stand-alone service.

I have always liked the idea of a MANCHESTER - DONCASTER - NEWCASTLE route using this line, which would better service capacity.

Also a good reason to electrify to Cleethorpes for South Trans-Pennine. Dore, Chinley and Stockport would lose out, but there is no reason why trains from the Midland routes can't go that way, and they would still have Liverpool-Norwich expresses. Actually, this might be a reason to run Norwich-Manchester-Glasgow as a route. Another possibility might be Manchester-Woodhead-Sheffield-Hull, providing a good reason to electrify the Goole and Selby routes, and perhaps by extension the lines through Cross Gates and Church Fenton. In general, an electrified trans-Pennine line would be a very good idea.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Also a good reason to electrify to Cleethorpes for South Trans-Pennine. Dore, Chinley and Stockport would lose out, but there is no reason why trains from the Midland routes can't go that way, and they would still have Liverpool-Norwich expresses. Actually, this might be a reason to run Norwich-Manchester-Glasgow as a route. Another possibility might be Manchester-Woodhead-Sheffield-Hull, providing a good reason to electrify the Goole and Selby routes, and perhaps by extension the lines through Cross Gates and Church Fenton. In general, an electrified trans-Pennine line would be a very good idea.

You have read my mind as to SOME of these possibilities. I only quoted the Manchester-Doncaster- Newcastle as a fast ROUTE just to test the water and was not forgetting stations such as Sheffield and York that would obviously be on the service route as run. The line to Hull should most certainly be considered, but Selby with its very special circumstance does pose a problem that I most certainly do not have the technical knowledge of electricity to discuss on this forum, but there will be those who do have this ability.

 

[LE Greys]

You have read my mind as to SOME of these possibilities. I only quoted the Manchester-Doncaster- Newcastle as a fast ROUTE just to test the water and was not forgetting stations such as Sheffield and York that would obviously be on the service route as run. The line to Hull should most certainly be considered, but Selby with its very special circumstance does pose a problem that I most certainly do not have the technical knowledge of electricity to discuss on this forum, but there will be those who do have this ability.

If you mean the swing bridge, then a Trowse-style solution of an electrified bar running over the top seems quite likely. Just have to hope that it opens more regularly.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If you mean the swing bridge, then a Trowse-style solution of an electrified bar running over the top seems quite likely. Just have to hope that it opens more regularly.

Well, that does appear to be the point...how to get it to open without any problems on a regular basis.:cry:

Thank you for quoting the correct name for the problem solver

 

[yorksrob]

Actually, I'm sure I remember reading in a railway industry publication in around 2004-5 that the VEP's CIG's had a very good reliability record in comparison to more modern units. Alas they don't appear to publish their back issues on the internet but maybe someone could set my mind at ease.

The MPC figures attached are from an article called "Passenger train reliability improves" in a publication called Entrain from August 2005 (Got the wrong publication originally ).

 

[Yew]

Wasnt it assumed that the 9F's had another 40 years of working life in them when they where scrapped in '68? We could have been seeing steam services into this millenium. (I would guess on XC routes assuming they where used for passanger services?

 

[ainsworth74]

Wasnt it assumed that the 9F's had another 40 years of working life in them when they where scrapped in '68? We could have been seeing steam services into this millenium. (I would guess on XC routes assuming they where used for passanger services?

Not sure if it would have been through to the millennium but I don't see why we couldn't have seen 9Fs working into the late 70s or early 80s on certain routes. As for what work, 9Fs were built for hauling heavy freight trains but they did appear on summer specials from time to time where they proved themselves to be equally effective. Indeed it has been suggested that they could well have been named 9MT (Mixed Traffic) rather than 9F.

I've heard a story (which I suspect is an urban legend) which tells of a BR manager who was running late, thankfully for him so was his train he arrived at the station boarded his train which was about 20 minutes or so late by this point. After a brilliant run through to the terminus the train arrived only a few minutes down (this before extensive timetable padding), the manager suitably impressed went to thank the crew for the brilliant run. He expected to find something like an A4 or Castle class but was instead confronted with a 9F, to make up time as it did the crew had clearly driven the locomotive at high speed (90mph or so). Nothing was done at the time but a few weeks later all depots which had 9Fs revived a memo from senior management reminding them that 9Fs were not intended for high speed running and should not regularly exceed 75mph. At least that's how the story goes, I suspect it's bogus but I like it nonetheless.

 

[Class172]

What if Class 151s were built as well as 150s?

Now the big one:
What if Beeching never got his way and railways remained open?!

 

[ainsworth74]

Now the big one:
What if Beeching never got his way and railways remained open?!

Then either BR would have gone broke in the mid-70s and ended up cutting routes anyway or BR would have closed routes on its own the only significant difference being that perhaps some trunk routes would have stayed open but many branch lines would certainly have still gone.

 

[LE Greys]

Then either BR would have gone broke in the mid-70s and ended up cutting routes anyway or BR would have closed routes on its own the only significant difference being that perhaps some trunk routes would have stayed open but many branch lines would certainly have still gone.

The Railway Magazine did a really good article on that in their BR Special. "Dr Beeching, Axeman or Surgeon?" Maybe if he had done his research better, looking at contributory revenue and over a longer time period, then some branches would have stayed open. Many of the seaside lines contributed a lot in tourist revenue, not obvious by a cursory study of tickets sold at their stations and only in high summer.

Of course, it's possible we might have had Serpall without Beeching.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What if Class 151s were built as well as 150s?

We wouldn't have had 156s, which Met-Camm built instead.

 

[Class172]

We wouldn't have had 156s, which Met-Camm built instead.

Would we have been able to get rid of pacers any earlier?

 

[ainsworth74]

The Railway Magazine did a really good article on that in their BR Special. "Dr Beeching, Axeman or Surgeon?" Maybe if he had done his research better, looking at contributory revenue and over a longer time period, then some branches would have stayed open. Many of the seaside lines contributed a lot in tourist revenue, not obvious by a cursory study of tickets sold at their stations and only in high summer.

I would tend to agree that some routes would have stayed open. Out of the two options I suggested I suspect the second (that BR would have closed routes itself) would be the most likely. But seeing as BR had access to years worth of data it would have been able to make more informed decisions over which routes were 'expendable' and which needed to stay open. Certainly I think even if we hadn't had Beeching there were going to be fairly significant closures nonetheless just perhaps not on the same scale.

Would we have been able to get rid of pacers any earlier?

I don't see why we would be able to do that. Sprinters and Pacers were built at the same time for different reasons. If we had had a mythical 151 build instead of 156 build we would be in the same situation today mostly just with a different type of unit in the mix.

 

[sprinterguy]

What if Class 151s were built as well as 150s?

It was a case of having either 150s or 151s: If the 151s had proved to have been the more successful unit, we would have had a larger build of those units and just the two prototype 150 as the 151s were intended for the same commuter and suburban duties as the 150s, rather than a 151 build taking the place of the 156s. It is of course tantalising to think of what could have been if BR had been experiencing a period of growth in the 1980s and funding for new trains had been more forthcoming: Perhaps the Sprinter build would have taken place as it did indeed pan out, but we’d have 151s instead of Pacers.

 

[Yew]

What If 151's had entered service alongside150's instead of pacers, built to a price point in the middle of sprinters and pacers?

 

[sprinterguy]

I've heard a story (which I suspect is an urban legend) which tells of a BR manager who was running late, thankfully for him so was his train he arrived at the station boarded his train which was about 20 minutes or so late by this point. After a brilliant run through to the terminus the train arrived only a few minutes down (this before extensive timetable padding), the manager suitably impressed went to thank the crew for the brilliant run. He expected to find something like an A4 or Castle class but was instead confronted with a 9F, to make up time as it did the crew had clearly driven the locomotive at high speed (90mph or so). Nothing was done at the time but a few weeks later all depots which had 9Fs revived a memo from senior management reminding them that 9Fs were not intended for high speed running and should not regularly exceed 75mph. At least that's how the story goes, I suspect it's bogus but I like it nonetheless.

The Western Region regularly used to turn out “Evening Star” for the “Red Dragon” Cardiff to Paddington express in its’ early days, where it was known to achieve some impressive speeds in the region of 80-90mph. It is most likely workings such as this that gave rise to that story, and there could be some truth in it. The 9Fs were certainly capable of reaching high speeds as they were fitted with the same boiler as the Britannias, but the hammer blow from their small 5 foot coupled wheels would bash the hell out of the track at high speed compared to the 6’ 8” drivers on the Britannias.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What If 151's had entered service alongside150's instead of pacers, built to a price point in the middle of sprinters and pacers?

Exactly; as I say, if BR had been experiencing a period of growth in the eighties, perhaps it would have been feasible to build 151s as well as 150s rather than develop the Pacer railbuses. However as things were, the Pacers were an essential economy measure needed in a time of decline in passenger numbers.

 

[Yew]

Exactly; as I say, if BR had been experiencing a period of growth in the eighties, perhaps it would have been feasible to build 151s as well as 150s rather than develop the Pacer railbuses. However as things were, the Pacers were an essential economy measure needed in a time of decline in passenger numbers.

Maybe If the 151 design had been adapted to use some more bus parts and cosntruction techniques (like a 153, Its broadly Mk3 derived, but uses a lot of bus components)

 

[LE Greys]

I've heard a story (which I suspect is an urban legend) which tells of a BR manager who was running late, thankfully for him so was his train he arrived at the station boarded his train which was about 20 minutes or so late by this point. After a brilliant run through to the terminus the train arrived only a few minutes down (this before extensive timetable padding), the manager suitably impressed went to thank the crew for the brilliant run. He expected to find something like an A4 or Castle class but was instead confronted with a 9F, to make up time as it did the crew had clearly driven the locomotive at high speed (90mph or so). Nothing was done at the time but a few weeks later all depots which had 9Fs revived a memo from senior management reminding them that 9Fs were not intended for high speed running and should not regularly exceed 75mph. At least that's how the story goes, I suspect it's bogus but I like it nonetheless.

Didn't notice this before, but the story is quite credible, since I believe it was reported by none other than OS Nock. He was travelling south from Scotland aboard the Flying Scotsman when his A4 had a big-end failure on Stoke Bank. Seeing the high running plates and smoke deflectors, he initially mistook the 9F for one of the GEML Britannias that had been on-shed at New England. Somewhere further on, he recorded a 40-second mile, so 90 mph. At King's Cross, he discovered the 9F's driver (who may have been a certain Bill Hoole) being told by a manager who had been on board that he was "... supposed to keep time, not break the b***** sound barrier!"

I wouldn't put such a performance past Mr Hoole. On one occasion, he had to stop a fitted van train at New England to put off a cripple (hotbox) only to be told that he had to wait not only for the following ¿Leeds? express, but also the Tailsman, resulting in a delay of over half an hour. When he finally got the right-away, he set off in pursuit, eventually catching up with the A1-hauled express at Selby. He was in charge of a 9F there as well. It is known as the "Flying Freight" incident. Firing for him must have been hard work.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

71000 was the only member of its class to have been built. It would have been interesting to have seen how a fleet of these, incorporating any improvements in technology, would have performed from 1960 onwards.

The Southern Region "Leader" class suffered from many technical problems but if these could have been resolved, it would have been interesting to have seen their performance statiststics.

 

[Class172]

What if none of the class 155s had not been converted into class 153s

 

[Yew]

What if none of the class 155s had not been converted into class 153s

I would guess that pacers would take on the roll of 153's with the 155's replacing a some pacer routes

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What if Stanier had never joined the L.M.S.

 

[Welshman]

What if Brunel had said, whilst sucking air through his teeth, "Oooh, no, mate, I don't think I can do that"?

 

[krus_aragon]

What if Brunel had said, whilst sucking air through his teeth, "Oooh, no, mate, I don't think I can do that"?

Then he'd never have tried to build an atmospheric railway! :P

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What if Chat Moss could never had been filled under the trackwork base....no Liverpool to Manchester Railway!

 

[LE Greys]

What if none of the class 155s had not been converted into class 153s

Conversely, what if all the 155s had been converted to 153s? Fewer Pacers on branch lines, more on commuter routes perhaps.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What if Stanier had never joined the L.M.S.

And taken over from Collett instead of Hawksworth. I'd imagine that the L.M.S. would have carried on down the parallel-boiler route, with lots more Patriots followed by Pacifics, probably some form of stretched Royal Scot. Mixed-traffic would have to cope with steadily-improved forms of Crab, and freight might first get an 0-8-0 version of the 4F, followed by an extended version with a leading pony truck. Perhaps the Garratts would have been modified and loads more would have appeared. Coaches would have stuck to the older pattern, at least for the time being. If Fairbairn eventually took over, we would have to see if he finally introduced taper boilers.

As for the G.W.R., we would have to wait for a while to find out. There might well have been something County-like later on, with a design for a Pacific on the board just before nationalisation.

Finally, the 8F/O6 design would not have been chosen as the standard WWII heavy freight engine, but something else would. The 28XX is a bit complicated, but a reasonably good candidate. I've often wondered why the WWII engines did not have locally-designed tenders, but that's beside the point.

Speaking of tenders, I'd imagine that the expanded Fowler type originally designed for The King's Dragoon Guardsman (alias Royal Scot) to go to America with would have become the standard design for big engines.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What if Broad Gauge had been the British gauge.

 

[OxtedL]

What if Broad Gauge had been the British gauge.

There would be no Channel Tunnel.

 

[ainsworth74]

What if Broad Gauge had been the British gauge.

Hmm that's an interesting thought. I would say one thing that would be different is that commuter stock would have 3+3 seating and maybe even 4+3 for really high density stock. I also wonder if we might not still have more compartment based rolling stock especially in first class. The other thing that would be different is that we would have got higher line speeds sooner as broad gauge was known for giving good running characteristics at high speed. We might still be stuck at 125mph (as that's a signalling issue not a track issue) but we might have been seeing those speeds in the 50s or 60s rather than the mid 70s.