Flying Scotsman

[philipmartin]

Flying Scotsman in steam. This should appeal to some of our British friends, it's got a look at Edinburgh in the 1920s. It's got a funny part in it of a 1929 Ray Milland, (or Alfred Jones, as he was then known,) film, "The Flying Scotsman".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgChR9aDQkA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's the youtube trailer for that film. It certainly looks made for railfans. The villain climbs the outside of the train, at speed; and the heroine does too, in high heels. She also proves that she is qualified to throw the levers of a ground frame, and reroute the free rolling cars to the right track. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrCO-9Q2DRI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A little more info on the film, and a silent clip- http://www.theartsdesk.com/film/dvd-fly ... tsman-1929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
From the Wiki article on the film- "Allegedly Sir Nigel Gresley, chief engineer of the LNER, was so concerned at the unsafe practices shown in the film, such as the decoupling of the locomotive from the train while in motion, he insisted that a disclaimer was placed in the opening credits explaining that such things could not happen on the LNER.[7] The notice stated "For the purposes of the film, dramatic licence has been taken in regard to the safety equipment used on The Flying Scotsman"
According to Re: another flying scotsman question post by Mike J on RMweb Archive, on http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29747" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;» Fri Sep 19, 2008 "Gresley was certainly annoyed with this movie and is reported to have said "It suggests that the LNER has yet to discover the vacuum brake!"". I guess uncoupling at speed would have put the cars and loco into "emergency," to use American terminology.

The last three posts on this page of the LNER Encyclopedia, discus the film. The Encyclopedia is a good source of information http://www.lner.info/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8065" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[johnthefireman]

the decoupling of the locomotive from the train while in motion

It's a common trope in films which have a train in them, but it always annoys me. I don't think film-makers realise how difficult (in fact nigh on impossible) it is to manually uncouple vehicles from a train in motion due to the tension on the couplers. British couplers of that era were chain links, stretched taut between the two vehicles. The knuckler couplers I'm used to in South Africa are also impossible to uncouple when stretched taut; in fact even when stationary one normally has to ease the loco back a fraction to give enough slack to pull the gravity pin.

The other thing, of course, is that film-makers don't seem to realise that that trains have continuous automatic braking, whether vacuum or air. Even if vehicles were uncoupled in motion (eg a broken coupler) they would not chase the loco, they would come to a halt fairly quickly.

[johnthefireman]

Flying Scotsman: Iconic steam locomotive prepares to return to the tracks after £4.2m revamp

[David Benton]

John , there must be some ways it can be done. Perhaps specially set up . Here, they test the brakes in Passenger cars, by taking them up to track speed , disconnecting car from the train, and measuring the distance to stop from then. That is Automatic type couplers though.

did didn't England have carriages that were set off a non stop train , and braked to a station stop?

[johnthefireman]

I suppose there may be ways to set it up specially in advance, but I don't think there's any way with a normal train of that era, although I don't know much about modern automatic couplers.

Yes, Britain used to have slip coaches which were released in advance of a station where the main train was not booked to stop, and the coach coasted to a halt, assisted by a handbrake application by the extra guard in the slip coach. But they had specially set up coupling and vacuum brake apparatus.

See http://mikes.railhistory.railfan.net/r134.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for details.

[philipmartin]

So hopefully the Scotsman will be flying again, between London and York, and will they have Pauline Johnson walking the outside of the train at speed again?
In this picture in the shop, she has two numbers, 502 on the cab and 60103 on the smoke box. I hope they notice that berore they take her out for trials. My suggestion for a number is 4472.
The bottom photo is of the Flying Scotsman in the good old days, (the bad old days?)
I see that she still has the double chimney. Will they give her back her elephant ears to keep the smoke away from the driver?
Where I used to work in Jersey City, NJ, we had slow moving freights going through the urban area, and the kids, ("the little angels" if anyone remembers the Katzenjammer Kids funnies,) would turn angle cocks on the brake hoses, cutting off the air to the cars behind it, and the trains would slowly drag to a halt. Then the angels would open car doors and steal freight. They particularly liked the RF&P cars - Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac, a Virginia based railroad, Virginia being a tobacco growing state.

[johnthefireman]

60103 was the post-nationalisation number (1948 onwards) that she carried under BR; maybe they are outshopping her in BR livery this time round. Her number for most of her LNER career was 4472, which is certainly the more iconic number. I think she was carrying 4472 when she went in for the current overhaul.

I believe she carried 502 and 103 for very short periods shortly before nationalisation in an LNER renumbering exercise.

[philipmartin]

This is a very good film on the Flying Scotsman engine, picked up on the LNER Encyclopedia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNak2Q3Y5RE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[philipmartin]

Flying Scotsman: Iconic steam locomotive prepares to return to the tracks after £4.2m revamp

Here are posts on the LNER Encyclopedia on the overhaul. http://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=11297" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikNwqcUqKe8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[george matthews]

John , there must be some ways it can be done. Perhaps specially set up . Here, they test the brakes in Passenger cars, by taking them up to track speed , disconnecting car from the train, and measuring the distance to stop from then. That is Automatic type couplers though.

did didn't England have carriages that were set off a non stop train , and braked to a station stop?

Yes, but they were fitted with extra couplings. It would not be possible with more recent couplings. I doubt if dropping carriages has been possible for a long time - I would guess before 1939.

[ExCon90]

According to Wikipedia, the last one was slipped at Bicester North, Western Region, on 10 September 1960, and I know they were pretty rare by then. All in all, they must have been a cumbersome and expensive (to operate) arrangement.
1. Specially equipped carriages had to be used, with couplings having hooks designed to release under tension, as mentioned above, and an arrangement to prevent application of the brakes in the rest of the train when the uncoupling was made;
2. Passengers in slip coaches had no access to the restaurant car, and were so informed in the timetable; in fact there was no access to anything coupled ahead of the slip coach;
3. Special patterns of tail lamps were required so that when the train passed a signal box it would be clear whether the correct car was on the end of the train; I think the Great Western had one train having 3 slip coaches, slipped at 3 different stations en route, each of which had to have a different tail-lamp display;
4. There had to be a guard on each coach to make the uncoupling and (hand-)brake the car to a stop at the platform;
5. The station shunter had to move the coach out of the way before the next through train was due;
6. The coach had to be returned to London on an up train making a scheduled stop at that station;
7. Some stations on the Great Western had a special semaphore arm on the home (entering) signal mast to indicate to the driver whether to go ahead and make the slip or for some reason to omit the slip and make a station stop.
Ian Allan published a book a number of years ago by Adrian Vaughn which devotes an entire chapter to the operation of slip coaches; having been a Great Western signalman he was well acquainted with the workings of the system (as well as being an interesting writer).

[philipmartin]

I read Adrian Vaughan's GWR book, "Grub Water & Relief," some years ago. In it he talks about young Daniel Gooch's experience in Tredegar when his father had a managerial job there. In the Wiki article about Tredegar I added the following which I lifted from Vaughan's book: "But all of this development came at a price. Adrian Vaughn, in his 1985 book "Grub, Water & Relief," mentions that in 1832 John Gooch took a managerial post in the Tredegar iron works:
“ Utterly remote at the head of the Sirhowy valley, the town was a man-made hell. Men and children worked killing hours in the smoke and filth of the foundries and were maimed by molten metal. Their only medical help was that administered by the 'Penny Doctor.' Wages were paid in Homfray's private coinage — banks were not allowed in the town — so workers spent their coins in Homfray's shops, buying food at Homfray's prices. Poverty and malnutrition followed and disease followed both"
Gooch's father was one of those who succumbed to disease there. Before I inserted this, the Wiki article about Tredegar was a rose colored, chamber of commerce type of thing.

Vaughan has writen a bunch books. Here's a list. https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/2 ... an_Vaughan" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's a Vaughan biography. http://www.adrianvaughan.co.uk/2010/03/05/about/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[george matthews]

Slip coaches may have developed as a consequence of poorer brakes - and the perceived costs of slowing a train down. In modern conditions there is no advantage and modern multiple unit trains can stop and start with small losses in time.

[johnthefireman]

I suspect poor acceleration would be a bigger factor than poor brakes. Once the train has stopped, apart from the station dwell time needed to disembark the passengers, it would lose a lot of time while accelerating again to line speed. As you say, modern trains don't have that problem, especially with multiple units with distributed power or electric locos, all of which usually have pretty impressive acceleration. But the reasons slip coaches fell out of favour were multiple and included the extra staff needed, the need for a station pilot to move the coach off the platform road, the need to reattach the empty coach to a train in the opposite direction, the complexity of the operation, safety factors and more.

[george matthews]

I suspect poor acceleration would be a bigger factor than poor brakes. Once the train has stopped, apart from the station dwell time needed to disembark the passengers, it would lose a lot of time while accelerating again to line speed. As you say, modern trains don't have that problem, especially with multiple units with distributed power or electric locos, all of which usually have pretty impressive acceleration. But the reasons slip coaches fell out of favour were multiple and included the extra staff needed, the need for a station pilot to move the coach off the platform road, the need to reattach the empty coach to a train in the opposite direction, the complexity of the operation, safety factors and more.

The perceived advantages only occurred when the slip coach was dropped on the outbound train. Returning trains - London-bound - had to stop at the relevant station and thus experienced no gain in time. Possibly the return trip had to reattach the slip coach which must have added even more time to the station stop. It is not at all a practical business in modern conditions.