Latest Class 83?

Learn the finer points of making your own engines and wagons!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
thestoat
Been on the forums for a while
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2002 12:00 am

Latest Class 83?

Post by thestoat »

Hi all,

I plan to make my way through the years with my Class 83 models. I've done the as-built locos, then with small yellow warning panels. I'm now onto the BR blue era. I've seen many pictures of Class 81, 82 etc in BR blue colours with pre-tops numbering but I haven't seen any Class 83s in this state. Here's a model I've almost finished:



Should I upload this model although I can't guarantee it's 100% accurate. Should it have the second pantograph? Should it be air braked (with air resevoirs on roof)? Any help or opinions would be appreciated.

I'll be working my way through the BR blue years and finshing off with the ECS locos - here's a sneak preview (not finished yet):



TheStoat
User avatar
jbilton
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 19267
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:08 pm
Location: At home ..waiting to go to Work.
Contact:

Post by jbilton »

Hi
I think the numbers fine...but if only has one pantograph..it needs air cylinders..as this was done at the same time.
The second panto being for 6.25KV...which wasn't used.
They were all stored 1969-1970...then refurbished...but I would guess they still came out with their E numbers for a couple of years...until 1973 say.
What I'm not sure is whether any received BR blue/ full yellow ...before refurbishment.
Hope that makes sense.
User avatar
markw
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 3353
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2001 12:00 am

Post by markw »

I'm not sure if any ran between 1968 and their being stored in 1970, in Rail Blue with E-numbers. There is a picture of four of the AL3 locos in store at Bury in 1970 in the Ian Allan Rail Portfolio on the AC electrics, one of which does seem to have a blue roof indicating a rail blue repaint, but there is no number visible. When they were bought out of store and refurbished in 1972-4, they would have had air brake bottles on the roof in place of the second pan, and were given TOPS numbers. I think it is safe to assume most of the class went from electric blue with either half or full yellow ends into store, then were refurbished.

Of course you should upload them, not everyone will have the Blue Arrow collection and in any case the more numbers and models available the better for AI services.
mickoo
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:03 pm

Post by mickoo »

The 2nd panto is not for 6.25Kv, both pantos are connected to a common 25Kv bus bar on the roof which leads to the primary connection on the ABB, and thus to the transformer, there is a secondary tap off the 25Kv bus but right now l dont have acces to the drawings to find out where it goes.

6.25Kv was designed for stations and such, mind most of the GE London section was 6.25Kv and only changed over past Shenfield and on towards Colchester.

To change from 6.25 from 25Kv was done on the fly, upto 100mph at line speed, the panto takes 20-30 seconds to raise and lower to do this several times in the suburbs is prohibitive, thus there is no 6.25Kv Panto, if there were ?, where is it on EMUs ?, simple logic Holmes :).

The 2nd panto was removed when all locos were converted to run with train air brakes ( locos had been running with loco air and train vac since inception ), the reservoirs are quite large so logic dictated the roof and the removal of the 2nd panto.

Note the pantos were fitted so that the knuckles were facing inwards at there respective ends, early tests found that the rear panto, knuckle facing fwd gave a better contact.

Drivers prefered to run with the aft panto at night as well, arching was near the rear of the loco and didnt effect vision as much as it did with the front panto up, few trains ran with both, maybe only on heavy trains where extra wire contact was required to take the higer current under load.

Switching is done internally and requires the use of the ABB, track side magnets are placed at the section gap and cause's the ABB to open, corresponding magnets, cause the loco to change over, past the section gap another magnet closes the ABB and the loco runs on 6.25Kv.

In the end even this was dispensed with and most 6.25Kv sections removed, in fact l dont belive the LMR even used them in anger, only the GE used them for awhile, on that region the change over was removed and the stock ran on reduced power in 6.25Kv sections.

Section gaps still exist, about every 20-30 miles depending on the route and station density, track magnets also exist and you can see the transducers mounted on the inner ends of the bogies to control the ABB through these gaps. Drivers are supposed to run down and during day time most do, however at night its possible to loose ones bearings and not run down in time, thus the ABB opens either under full load or partial load, the "splash" is quite effective at getting your attention.

Best run l had was on a 309 class that was late, driver never ran down for any section gap, running full power at line speed to make up for lost time ensured that the ABB worked overtime and the splash fair lit up the country side.

Colors, l have a color photo that shows AL3-4s in store at Bury in 1970, sadly the author has not annotated which members are which but it shows two class AL4s, one in BR blue and full yellow ends, the other in electric blue and small warning panel with white roof.

Class AL3 shows 3 locos all in electric blue, all with white roofs, one with white windscreen and small electric panel, the other two with full yellow fronts and red buffer beams.

Given the date l would say all carry pre tops numbers.

Hope that helps

Michael
User avatar
jbilton
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 19267
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:08 pm
Location: At home ..waiting to go to Work.
Contact:

Post by jbilton »

jbilton wrote:Hi
I think the numbers fine...but if only has one pantograph..it needs air cylinders..as this was done at the same time.
The second panto being for 6.25KV...which wasn't used.
They were all stored 1969-1970...then refurbished...but I would guess they still came out with their E numbers for a couple of years...until 1973 say.
What I'm not sure is whether any received BR blue/ full yellow ...before refurbishment.
Hope that makes sense.

Quote
"As with previous ac types, two pantographs were originally fitted - however following the installation of dual brake equipment one pantograph, that used for 6.25kV operation was removed, being replaced by additional air reservoirs."

Source
http://www.therailwaycentre.com/Pages%2 ... us_83.html

And some nice photos showing the blue for the early ACs
mickoo
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:03 pm

Post by mickoo »

That information is misguided and incorrect l'm afraid, there is no 6.25Kv panto, only two 25Kv pantos, switching is not done by magnets ( my poor memory, since refreshed from reading the AEI books ) but by a line sensor mounted on the roof ( the 2nd unknown bus tap l mentioned in the above mail ).

This sensor controls the 6.25 / 25Kv change over.

Attached an image of a class 82 transformer, note only one input at 25Kv

Image

Also a view of a class 81 transformer that shows once again the singular line input and also the 6.25 / 25Kv change over controller

Image

If you require roof images showing the single 25Kv bus between the two pantos and ABB / line sensor l'll happily supply or you can avail yourself of the following book BR Electric locos in 4mm scale...Ian Allen ISBN 0-7110-1501-5, failing that AC locomotives of British rail by David and Charles, ISBN 0-7153-7664-2 should suffice.

You may wish to debate this point as long as you wish but the end result is still the same, there is no 6.25Kv pantograph, sadly you have been ill informed.

Michael
User avatar
jbilton
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 19267
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:08 pm
Location: At home ..waiting to go to Work.
Contact:

Post by jbilton »

Micheal
I've passed your comments on to Colin J Marsden...and we will hopefully receive a reply in the next few days.
Jon
User avatar
markw
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 3353
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2001 12:00 am

Post by markw »

I'm with Mickoo on this. The intention was to have 6.25kv in the London, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester areas, as had already been installed on the GE and I think the Glasgow area, as the lower voltage would have required lower clearances in overline structures, saving rebuild costs, but by the time the LMR electrification begun in earnest two things had happened - experience had shown that BR and the HMRI was being over cautious in clearance distances required with full 25kv, and there had been a series of nasty explosions in transformers fitted to class 302 and the Glasgow Blue trains, partly due to the need to have dual windings to cope with the dual 6.25/25kv systems coming through a single pan (apparently there was some interaction between an oil vapour from the cooling oil and arcing caused by the switchover, but without checking my references I don't know much more than that), so the LMR never acquired 6.25kv, although it is probable the second pan may have been intended for the lower voltage, but never got used as such. Given the lead times to order equipment and construct locos, I expect they were probably ordered with provision for dual voltage but were redesigned internally during the production process.

It's interesting to speculate just what level of traffic the reduced 6.25kv voltage might have led to - would the lower voltage have meant less traffic in the urban areas being possible, and would we have faced a larger bill for power boosting to cope with today's traffic? In the 1960's traffic on the LMR wasn't anywhere near as frequent as now, and I've read that during the 1974 power dispute the drop in line voltage being supplied by the CEGB to the LMR did cause problems.
mickoo
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:03 pm

Post by mickoo »

Pleased to hear you are on personal terms with Colin, l look forward to his comments, however if he persists in claiming that they are 6.25Kv pantographs then he is also mis-informed.

If you wish to pit the word of Colin against AEI, GEC, Brain Web, John Duncan, R.S.Carter, Brain Morrison, CM&EE ( LMR ), please feel free, however l feel you are wasting the mans valuable time on such items.

However as an electrician l can tell you point blank that two components connected to one bus will receive the same voltage, if you wish to ignore that simple fact of physics, so be it.

You will of course note that E2001 ne E1000 does not have a 2nd pantograph yet was used to test the 25Kv and 6.25Kv change over sections on the Style loop as well as instruct drivers on how to transit these areas, nor that any 25Kv EMU is fitted with a 2nd pantograph for so called 6.25Kv operations.

John, l'm afraid you have been misinformed, there are many things l know little or nothing about but please be reassured 25Kv BR LMR operations is not one of them, l think l have just about every published book available ( l would love to be proved wrong for then l will purchase such missing items for my collection ) in addition to original BR Doncaster wiring build diagrams for AL5, sadly they are in a large format and unsuitable for scanning and there age is begining to tell.

However its your call who you wish to comprehend and align with, l merely present the facts from more than one source and come to a conclusion based on averages.

Perhaps you feel the above images are some sort of trickery ?, attached an image of an AL2 during construction showing the interconnectin bus, l have highlighted it in red for clarity.

Image

Michael

Edit, BTW, to the orignal poster...nice looking AL3 :)
Last edited by mickoo on Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
mickoo
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:03 pm

Post by mickoo »

Mark,

You are indeed correct, the explosions were caused by vented transformer gas due to the excessive current drawn whilst operation on 6.25Kv lines, Physics dictates that if you reduce the voltage for a given load then current must rise, this caused the oil to boil or near boil and give off a gas, to compiound matters the transformer was placed at passenger level behind an end wall adjacent to the guards compartment and had in adequart ventilation, apon switching back to 35Kv the vapor ignited and l belive caused the death of some passengers in one instance.

One of the main advantages of 25Kv is the cheapness of power conduction and the lightness of conductor to transmit a given power, an average would be over 1000Amps at the traction motor ( DC ), however back up the line l belive the current is only in the region of 50-60Amps at the pan head at 25Kv.

This is why the super grid runs at such high voltages 625Kv l belive, yet the conductor is reasonable small.

DC lines that run at 1500V DC require a conductor nearly 4 times in cross sectional area, indeed the Dutch actually run two wires next to each other to increase the cross sectional area available to the pan head ( so that they may draw even higher currents during operation ).

Look at SR lines and LU, they run on 750V DC , look at the size of that conductor, true most of the mass is required to support its own mass, but if gantry hung would be the thickness of a mans wrist.

What CM&EE found on the LMR was that 25Kv would not jump as far as predicted, so by lowereing track and earthing structures it was found that 25Kv could be passed in tight locations. What is more worrying is the emf field generated by 25Kv and this can stretch out as far as 20 feet from the actual overhead line, thus any poor on none earthed metal structure will have a voltage electromagnetically induced into it, in some extreme cases there is enough power to simulate a livestock electric fence, as in the case at Ipswich on the Norwich end of platform 3/4 where the iron railings used to impart a fierce jolt, adequart earthing has removed this but to this day if you place the back of your fore arm within 5mm of the railing your hairs will stand up and your arm will tingle.

What CE&EE also found was that once an arch was struck it could be pulled upto 9 feet away, ie a bolt of lightning type effect ( though unlike lightning 25Kv does not stop or flash for a mere second, it archs forever until either the arch is too big to self sustain or the power is tripped.

Having seen archs of 9 feet presented a problem for the ABBs, these switch blades are only inches apart when seperated, as you may imagine, opening under power will draw an arch, thus part way through the opening sequence very high pressure air is blown between the blades and extinguishes the arch, thus the term ABB...Air Blast Breaker or to quote GEC ABCB...Air Blast Circuit Breaker, as opposed to the normal oil immersed ones seen at sub stations and such.

So yes 6.25Kv is possible but at greater cost in power consumption, there is little degridation to loco power as you simply pull power from another transformer tapping, however there wil be extra power drawn at the pan head and increased wear on the carbon strips.

Kindest regards

Michael
User avatar
ThamesClyde
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 986
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 1:50 pm
Location: Derby,Derbyshire,Centre of the London Midland Region
Contact:

Post by ThamesClyde »

Well I'll be honest I too was off the same opinion as Mr Bilton on the 2nd pantograph, no doubt from reading the same books as him
.Mickoo I do feel that your comments make a lot of sense about the fact that the change over was done internally, as you quite rightly point out EMU's only had one pantograph ,something I had never thought about until reading your comments so I can say i've learnt something new about the AC electrics.
Simon
"Obviously not a member of the Clique"
mickoo
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:03 pm

Post by mickoo »

Hi Simon,

Yes, there has been much written on 25Kv locos, though to be fair Jons post was the first l had ever seen that called the 2nd panto 6.25Kv, all the books l have quote the panto as a secondary 25Kv one and linked by a solid bus on the roof.

To be fair these are not my views merely a synopsis of all the data l have, if l am wrong l will willingly concede but cannot for the life of me see that all other sources are wrong and this singular one is correct, mind every one thought the world was flat at one time !.

You will find that one printing house persisits in printing the same data ( wrongly ) in several publications over many years, the biggest being the brake force in tons for the 25Kv locos, Ian Allen still quotes this as a paulty 40tons or something, where as brake force is often in the region of 70-80% of the loco mass, on the AL1-5 thats around 60-65 tons, l'm at work right now so cannot quote the exact figures.

Now Ian Allen produce many books by many authors, but all have the same error, thus its not an author error but a printing house error l feel.

If it were only one source then it is open to debate and in that case would be simular to the one eyed man is king in the land of the blind, but its not and there are lots of other sources you can look up, as they say, you can never get enough info :).

l'd love to know which books you have that say the 2nd panto is 6.25Kv, none of mine do so that means you have a publication that l do not and....l want it !! LOL.

Kindest regards

Michael
Breedlings
Been on the forums for a while
Posts: 242
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2003 12:14 pm
Location: Newton-in-Furness
Contact:

Post by Breedlings »

Just jumping in on the back of this one (having been re-educated about the second panto) :)

If you take a look at the technical specs and historys of the locomotives under the care of the ac locomotive group it fully supports (though not obviously states) that both pantos were commonly 25KV and there was internal voltage sensing and change over.

More interestingly the details for 84001 surmise that due to it's Scottish allocation early in its career it may have been one of a few locomotives to acctually use the 6.25KV feature.

Alex
<IMG width="350" height="186" SRC="http://album.atomic-systems.com/showPic ... b_logo.jpg">
mickoo
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 10:03 pm

Post by mickoo »

Hi alex,

Good possibility, note, l think the Scottish region was not electrified until the early 70s ?, however the Glasgow suburbs were and from an early date, 1959 l believe with full service commencing on Nov 1960.

l'm not really upto speed on the ScR 25Kv which is a large remiss on my behalf ( something l hope to rectify in the near future ), however the Style loop in Manchester was the main 25Kv test track and all locos were tested there, including the ScR units, l am sure that section did have 6.25Kv sections but l'm dammed if l can find the 1960s railway magazine that shows the route map with the section gaps and associated voltages :).

l'm also sure the Manchester Crewe section also had 6.25Kv sections, again l need to find that old magazine article.

Having started to re read all this info I have found the report on the ScR class 303, ( AM3 in those days ) explosions, there were a few minor ones but the big one was on 13th Dec 1960, killing 7 passengers and 1 guard, another explosion on the 17th of the same month with no fatalities saw immediate cessation of services.

The cause was as quoted before, an explosion of oil vapour in the electrical cubical adjacent the guards and seating areas. The vapours were emulating from the transformer header tank, not the actual transformer itself which is located under the floor.

All MBS vehicles were modifed and the first batch tested on the Style line and full services re commenced on Mar 1961.

The same layout was also fitted to the ER LTSR and had affected that stock as well but with no explosions, just failures, the same modifications were then carried out on those EMUs as well.

The 2nd ScR order ( AM11 Class 311 ) was delivered in 1967 to the modified design and were l belive some of the first stock to carry BR corporate rail blue and yellow ends.

As an aside, all the early phase one EMUs ( 25Kv ) were fitted with Gresley bogies, the motor bogies were of rivited construction and looked like something out of a WW1 ship yard.

The only class to differ was the AM7 ( class 307 ), which were built at Ashford and thus fitted with SR style EMU bogies.

Attached an extract from the Ian Allen BR Fleet Survey...Overhead EMUs, explaing better than l can write the operation and reasons behind 6.25Kv EMU operation.

Note it does not include the Style loop or Crewe / Manchester branch so l'll have to double check that part, with more concise notes.

Image

Enjoy

Best regards

Michael
User avatar
markw
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 3353
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2001 12:00 am

Post by markw »

I think what Alex is talking about is that the AL4's were tested on the Glasgow "Blue Train" network between Singer and Milngavie, as they were built in Glasgow. As we know, the AM3/303 units were withdrawn prematurely for twelve months because of the transformer explosions and parts of the network were electrified at 6.25kv, so it is possible that the 84 did operate on 6.25kv working test trains in the Glasgow area.

Interestingly p27 of the Brian Webb and John Duncan book "AC Electric Locomotives of British Rail" published by David and Charles states that "Voltage changeover equipment was included but never used" when describing the Class 81. Also OS Knock's "Britain's New Railway" describes the intention to have dual 6.25kv and 25kv operation, but is silent as to whether the Styal line or the Manchester-Crewe section were ever electrified at the dual voltage. In fact most of the books on the subject that I've seen don't seem to clarify the situation, so perhaps the 84 was the only loco to run under 6.25kv?
Locked

Return to “[MSTS1] Building Rolling Stock”