A French-built Beyer-Garratt locomotive

September 2018

Please have a look at this rather curious machine. It is a member of the well-known Beyer-Garratt family. Yet for a change it was not built in the UK but in France, for service in Algeria. Obviously, Africa was the stomping ground for the mightiest of the Beyer-Garratt’s and in that respect this machine is clearly right at home there. However, the machine wasn’t designed to be a powerful slogger with heavy freight trains, but a 120 km/u (75 mph) express locomotive in mountainous landscape. The book that describes them best is John R. Day’s Railways of Northern Africa. As it was published in 1964 by Ebenezer, Baylis & Son in London, it is unlikely you’ll find it anywhere else but in charity and second hand bookshops, as indeed that is where my copy was found.
The machine was a pre-war trial to have the power of a type of “double locomotive” on the Oran-Algiers section of the line through the Atlas mountains. Sections of this line have 1 in 38 gradients with sharp uncompensated curves and it crosses the Atlas plateau at well over 3,000 ft – 1 km, the summit at Setif being at 3,570 ft – 1,100 metres height from sea level. Therefore the choice for an easy-curving double Pacific (4-6-2/2-6-4 or 2’C1’/1’C2′) Beyer-Garratt for the heavy passenger trains on this line was eminently justified. The machine was built by a French Beyer-Peacock associate, the well known Societe Franco-Belge at Raismes in Northern France.The locomotive had no peer in its family as far as speed was concerned: Tasmanian Railways had run a Beyer-Garratt at 55 mph – 88 km/h on its 3 ft 6 inch – 1067 mm Cape gauge route in 1912 and South African Railways were known to flog their Garratt’s up to similar speeds if the need was there, but such machines to be used at scheduled 75 mph – 120 km/h duties was rather novel. Following the prototype trials in France between Paris and Calais -crossing the Caffiers hill- in 1937 29 further machines were ordered and built between 1936 and early 1941. The power of these machines with xx cylindres and their Cossart valve-motion gear may be judged from the fact that with a 803 tonnes passenger train at the drawhook the machines reached 60 mph – 100 km/h within 5 miles-8 km from a standing start. The fastest top speed recorded was 81 mph – 132 km/h, surely a record for an articulated steam locomotive. Whilst the machines were actually conceived as assisting machines on the most difficult section of the Algiers to Oran line, in fact they found themselves being used as the high-speed train engines all the way from Oran to Constantine, even if Oran to Algiers and back was their usual employment.
What did these powerhouses in was the bad quality of the water with which they had to work as well as the lack of boiler maintenance and the serious damage that was inflicted during the war. By the end of the war their boilers were practically worn out and the obvious and economically most attractive solution to the problems was electrification. Messrs Alsthom were happy to supply the traction for the 3 kV dc lines and the unique Garratt’s were rather quickly scrapped from 1951 in the post-WWII world of renewal and rebuilding, never mind the Algerian independence. In a way it once again is proven, however, that in pre-WWII days European nations were far more adventurous with railways in their colonies than they were at home.
And to finish, something that came as a complete surprise when searching the internet: a New York Central “Niagara” 2’D2′ (4-8-4) dressed up by Henry Dreyfuss in full 20th Century Limited regalia, complete with non-standard Scullin disc driving wheels. Strange that the massive Pt14 tender wasn’t used but the standard 12 wheel version that the J3a “Hudsons” used. Given that a few bits parts of the full streamline shroud have been removed already (or were perhaps never fitted going by mounting experience with the Hudsons) I would think this is a post-war picture. But what a machine; definitely looks better that the Hudsons.

Kattensloot Drawbridge

Hi all, show this picture really enlarged on your screens,
Just another nice picture of the old Kattensloot railway drawbridges in Amsterdam. As can be seen the railway lines are not yet electrified, which puts this photograph in the years before 1927. The clothing of people on the streets as well as the lack of motorised vehicles (one bus, probably the one from Centraal Station to Sloterdijk, coming our way) bear out this date as well. Notice the electric tramlines with the rather fancy masts that carry the wires. These days this is the terminating point at the Prinseneiland of tram number 3, which for the 16 years I lived in the city I could see (and hear) coming past from my third floor apartment in Bosboom Toussaintstraat. The Amsterdam tram had been electrified between 1900 and 1906, which puts the year of this picture having been made between 1906 and 1927. Going by that modernist Art Deco building, however, but also by the lack of any sign of the coming electrification of the railway, my bet is the second half of the 1910’s to the first half of the 1920’s. I don’t actually know what that rather nice Art Deco building next to the railway line is, to the left of the viaduct across the road; for all I know it might still be there, as the city was not much damaged during WWII. It did, however, suffer from a few crass “modernisation” urges by those in charge during the fifties and sixties, which might have cut short its happy life into the 21st Century.
Turn left after the viaduct ahead of you and you’re heading for the Prins Hendrikkade and Centraal Station. On a boat one could take a starboard turn just after the bridge (you can actually see the entrance under the drawbridge) and then enter the Haarlemmer trekvaart, the old canal towards the city of Haarlem from the long gone days when the inter-city public transport was provided by (in this case frequent) horse-drawn barges (to draw = trekken in Dutch. A vaart is a navigable stretch of water, usually a canal). Passed the bit under this bridge quite a few times in my days as tourist guide on those glass-topped tourist launches, invariably doing specials. The Kattensloot and the Singelgracht following from it were not on the normal one-hour routes. If, incidentally, you’d still sail on and then bear right into the Kostverlorenvaart and then the Schinkel you’d pass A) the Western end of the Vondelpark and then you are well on your way to the Nieuwe Meer and Ringvaart, along which you’d B) get close to Schiphol Airport. On turning into the Nieuwe Meer toward the Ringvaart there was, unfortunately, a very low bridge that could only be passed on the condition that no-one would lift his or her head higher than the roof of the boat, for which reason standard practice was to use the public address system for some stringent advice on the subject. We once had a job taking a group of US visitors to the airport this way and one gent unfortunately started his long flight home with a rather an interesting collection of bandaging and sticking plasters covering his pate. And, I would imagine, quite a lively headache as well. In the sunny and warm weather the two sliding roof hatches had been opened and he had been just that bit too eager to take a picture of the undoubtedly scenic stretch of the Nieuwe Meer through the Amsterdam Forest (well, forest) ahead. I still am singularly grateful his head did not end up between the roof of the boat and the underside of the bridge. Can’t stand blood, let alone someone’s brain matter to be inspected by all and sundry.
And oh yes, there is a steam locomotive with a gleaming brass steam dome (without the formerly officially prescribed Ramsbottom safety valve on top, but with a just visible Coale safety valve in front of the cab) approaching from the right along the Northern inbound track. Spotting something shiny against the smokebox under the chimney (the steam bell for use on branch lines) and looking at the proportions of the machine, it is a 1915 vintage, Werkspoor Amsterdam built, 2’B2′ (4-4-4) tank locomotive (tenderlocomotief), formerly HSM Holland Railway 806-812 but from 1917 onward NS Netherlands Railways series 5806-5812, doing its last miles with a local from Zaandam to Amsterdam Centraal and maybe beyond. After the 1917 merger all six were based at Amsterdam Centraal and Amsterdam Weesperpoort sheds only, and that would put this picture after 1917 but before 1927. Also because, following electrification, they all were farmed out to depots well away from Amsterdam. Funny to see that thin ragged cloud of rising smoke from the funnel, as if the fireman is putting coal on before the stop at CS. Maybe that is what is happening, to ensure the coal is burning hot and fairly free of smoke before stopping under the train shed at CS. This ensures there’s enough pressure available to get away, without filling the station with dense and acrid smoke before departure. Enjoyed watching the fireman on a Great Western “Castle” class 2’C (ten-wheeler or 4-6-0) go wrong at Temple Meads on this issue and smoke out the train shed whilst doing some shunting. That was either bad coal or a bad fireman.
I am intrigued by the why and what of those shapes protruding from the left margin. And no graffiti; what a relief! Just what looks like remains of posters against the bridge.

Drawbridges

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Netherlands Railways has never been known for throwing money to obtain equipment if that wasn’t strictly necessary. And a massive three track drawbridge that I have the temerity to try and build across a somewhat minor waterway would precisely be what any Dutch railwayman would get the hiccups from trying to suppress scathing laughter. If opening bridges were already required in those circumstances they’d very likely would put in a lifting bridge hoisted by four rather unobtrusive pillars. Many are the examples around the country, and a three-track bridge would in that case not really a problem. Yet I’d like a bascule bridge. I found these pictures of a smaller-double track example, The Spoorbrug Alkmaar that spans the ancient North Holland canal, seems about the right one to go for. It would not unduly tax my (lately badly under-used) skills as a modeller and I could actually decide to put in that Panama-wheel drive as shown on the one in Medemblik in my previous mail on the subject, instead of the cogged diagonals driven by a cog-wheel inside the uprights of the bridge as shown here. There are examples of that on bridges that were taken out.

Pic number 1 shows the bridge being used by a Plan V EMU, a type of electric train introduced in fairly large numbers as two-car units between the 60’s and the 80’s (in fact, the oldest ones appeared in the then de-rigueur green livery and were painted yellow later in their lives). They are all out of use now.

Pic 2 gives us a view across the bridge-deck showing various details.

Pic 3 shows a VIRM double deck unit from Nijmegen and Arnhem via Utrecht to Amsterdam, Alkmaar and Den Helder crossing. This is a bit of history for me: A friend who was a Dutch tutor-driver and who passed away earlier this year shortly after retirement took me on a nine-hour job in 2005, on just this service along this route and I passed that bridge. It was the last time ever that I drove a train.
As you can see the bridge has no catenary: like we did on the Southern here in the UK the driver shuts off and his train takes this gap un-powered. Like on the Southern, there is a risk that the train gets stopped with its pantograph (third rail shoes) in the gap: it happened and in that case the train is gapped, as the term is on the Southern. Another issue is that Dutch electric rolling stock had limiters on the reach of the pan: a driver did not have to lower the pantograph but rolled through the gap with the pan up and would therewith find his line-light light up when his pan got juiced-up again and he could open up. The appearance of foreign rolling stock without those limiters on the Dutch network soon showed the use of fitting electrified catenary on the bridge: a French TGV high speed train lost its pantographs on the original Amsterdam to Leiden airport line on such a drawbridge. Which brings us to the why of nu such equipment having been fitted here? The answer is that the height of the portal across the tracks is insufficient as well as the tail of the balance being too long in case of this bridge. I know that the line from Alkmaar to Amsterdam was electrified in 1931 but that the section from Alkmaar to Den Helder, in which this bridge is located, was only electrified in 1958. Which is when this bridge was built to replace the old revolving bridge. Given that this bridge is very close to Alkmaar station it does make you wonder why no measures were taken to ensure that trains never got stuck. In this case one thing that obstructs an upgrade of electrification across the bridge is the tail end of the balance with the counterweight, which would touch the wires and push them to the ground. So in my case I’d make the portal of the bridge higher and possibly redesign the balance to fall beside or in-between the tracks. There is a video on the internet that shows an electric train crossing this bridge with its pan raised, incidentally (type in Spoorbrug Alkmaar). Notice furthermore the red lights for the pedestrians/ bicyclists crossing, the closed barriers as the bridge is about to be opened, the Automatic Half Barrier just beyond the bridge and the obligatory stop boards for trains that popped up from somewhere below. One hopes that the covering signals are showing red aspects and that Automatic Train Protection catches out those drivers who missed them. No joke, read US railway history about a few high-casualty accidents with trains on lifting bridges.

Visitor on the West Somerset Railway

August 2018

I saw this absolutely gleaming US Army S-160 steam locomotive on the West Somerset at Minehead station a few weeks ago. Nice little pic of a machine that saw a good deal of the world. This one was built in the USA, came to the UK and after D-Day strayed through much of Europe, certainly after the US-Army passed them on to relieve the acute shortage of motive power post WW-2. This one was brought back to Blighty from Greece for a thorough restoration and looks most unlike an Army loco. Her colleagues throughout Europe were the UK austerities and the German “Kriegsloks”.

Ophaalbruggen / Drawbridges

August 2018

Ben schrijven een beetje zat en wil een N-spoor ophaalbrug voor m’n treintjes bouwen. Ben aan het lezen en er is eigenlijk maar een type brug die aan m’n wensen voldoet: de oer-Hollandse balansbrug voor de spoorwegen met een groot Panamawiel als aandrijving tegen de buitenzijde van de stijlen ( zie Muyen). Voorbeelden: Katteslootbrug in AMS en de brug in Zaandam. Interessant: het balanseinde is langer dan de optrekzijde en de contragewichten verplaatsen zich vanaf de draaipunten van de balans naar de uiteinden bij het openen en sluiten van de brug. Dat werd gedaan om de trek van de hangstangen af te halen als de brug bereden werd en trillingen zich via de gespannen hangstangen van de rijvloer naar de balansen zouden kunnen voortplanten. Echter niet zeker of dat allemaal in 1:160 uit te voeren is. Een moderne ophaalbrug is ook mogelijk en veel minder gedetailleerd. Of een hefbrug. Maar zo’n balansbrug uit de dertiger jaren is een stuk indrukwekkender.

Here are three nice pictures of nice trains on nice railway drawbridges.
1) Loco 1216 coming from Haarlem and heading toward Amsterdam Central Station with a typical latter day Heerlen/Maastricht, Eindhoven, Den Bosch, Utrecht, Amsterdam, Haarlem, Zandvoort aan Zee v.v. train composed of the comfortable 1980’s ICR hauled stock. These vehicles are now assigned to the Amsterdam, Rotterdam Breda/Antwerp high speed line awaiting the arrival of the new Alstom 250 km/h (156 mph) M.U sets and then to be retired. Obviously, 1216 already went the way of old steel. This bridge is my favourite for my little 1200’s, the drawbridge across the Kattensloot West of Central Station. These were two double track bridges serving four tracks. Because two extra tracks had to be accommodated new bridges had to be put in, three double track examples. I need one three-track or three single track bridges. A feature of these old bridges was the moving counterweight on the tail of the bascule balance when opening the bridge. In the closed and locked position it sits over the two uprights. This was done to take all stress off the rods connecting the balance to the bridge deck, to thus prevent vibrations from passing trains to reach the ironwork aloft and cause damage or keep the neighbourhood awake. For the same reason the hinge between the connecting rods and the bridge deck is not engaged when in rest. When the balance starts to move up to open the bridge it first connects the rods and the bridge deck in this hinge, which can be made out by the somewhat extended look of the end beside the bridge deck. Love the details of all those railings everywhere. All that knowledge about the secrets of this bridge, incidentally, comes from a very informative book about moving bridges in The Netherlands. Just like to show off occasionally.
2) A cute little single track drawbridge at Medemblik on the Hoorn to Medemblik steam railway. The not actually very much smoking locomotive hauls two Rotterdam Tramway teak coaches, one even having an almost prehistoric Gooische Tramway background. All were 1067 mm/ 3 ft 6 ins Cape gauge in their former working days and have been re-gauged for their leisurely standard gauge life in retirement. Hard to imagine this once having been a serious mode of passenger transport, actually. This bridge I could use in threefold, and it has one item that really would draw attention: the Panama wheels to actuate the opening gear. The name comes from the fact that their first use was by the French to work the lock doors for the Panama Canal. Have a good look how the simple contraption opens this drawbridge. The idea is that it works in such a way that it prevents the bridge deck ever slamming down on its seats. Three of those together in a somewhat bigger size?
3) Two of the brand spanking new drawbridges across the Kattensloot, they replaced the two bridges on the first picture. As you can see there is a rather strapping floating derrick at the other side, in use to build the third bridge. Too modern and clean lined to my liking, even if I do admire the architecture. Silencing technology did away with the moving counterweights and slotted hinges

The 1200 and 278 book

August 2018

I found the attached picture and think it shows a lot of what the book is about. Anyone who worked trains will probably recognise the situation: waiting for the time that you are required to move into the yard/ station to pick up a train. In this case the Chilean National Railways in one of its guises after privatisation over there once more didn’t deliver the foreseen benefits. It clearly is cold, the Andes mountains are near and beyond the trees we look down into some sort of valley. The electric locomotives, the US and Europe meet in Chile, is what we are interested in, though:Number 2903, a Ferrocarriles Del Estado (FF CC DEL E) E29 on the right hand side, is a very American 3 kV DC 2’Co’Co’2′ delivered in the early post-war 1940’s. In fact it is the Chilean version of the General Electric Ep-4 as delivered to the New Haven Railroad in the North-eastern United States. These were the machines that, together with their Ep-3 forefathers, impressed Pennsylvania Railroad so much in the 1930’s that they used it as the template for their iconic GG1 11 kV 25 Hz AC electric locomotives and therewith finally obtained a decent all-round electric that they craved ever since their commencement of AC electrification in the 1920’s.Number 3001 is an Italian (GAI) built Bo’Bo’, delivered in the early 1960’s. There is no doubt any longer that these machines were based on US technology (i.e. Baldwin/ Westinghouse and/or General Electric), together with the equally Italian built series E17 Bo’Bo’ and E32 Co’Co’. None of the US builders of electric traction were much interested in small series of exotic electric locomotives for export any longer and the Italian Lira of those days must have made this a nice proposition in comparison with the US Dollar anyway, so licence building it was. We can see the stairway to heaven next to the cab-door that the E29 also sports, albeit barely visible in this picture. The E30 also shows the fact that maintenance is not what is used to be by the fact that its wind-shield wipers are out of use and missing and it shows its family likeness with the New Haven Ep-5 Co’Co’ electric locomotives as well as the Dutch 1200 electric loco’s (I am quite sure that the 1200 in fact influenced the design of the Ep-5). This is one of these pictures I would very much liked to have made myself. Railways as were, I find, are somehow rather more interesting than railways that are or will be. That probably proves I’m getting long in the tooth, but never mind. I have also added a nice portrait of an E29 as well as that of an E24. The E24 is a US General Electric built Bo’Bo’ shunting/ local freight machine that the Italians copied as the E17. No doubt whatever that that machine has US heritage, which makes the case for the E30 and the E32 having a US heritage an almost dead cert. In the meantime none of these machines are in daily service any longer. Plenty of scrapyard pictures around on the internet.

In Memory of Stanley Hall

July 7th, 2018

First ATP fact finding trip to the Netherlands with Stanley Hall (3rd from the left) post Ladbroke Grove.

A sad issue is that yet another of my railway mentors, Stanley Hall, passed away at age 92 whilst I was in NL. He is in fact the man who steered me on to the path of research and of writing after the very violent Ladbroke Grove crash on the 5th of December 1999, in the days just after the crash when I couldn’t sleep and decided to put my thoughts about what happened on paper and look for someone who wasn’t tied to the railways by a job, but who knew what he (or she) talked about. I wanted that person to go through it and tell me whether what i had written made sense or not. At that time Stan happened to have co-incidentally put an advertisement in the BR staff newspaper to obtain information about a picture and, since I had read virtually all of his books and was impressed by the sense they made, used the address provided to send my writings and have him read them. His friendly and courteous answer was all I could have wished for and from then on Stan and I worked together, Stan pushing hard to get me to dedicate myself to further study on safety as a phenomenon as much as on the interface between line-side signalling and the people working with it, from the operating floors of signal boxes as well as from behind the train-windscreens. I am ever so glad that Stan still was there when “An Unexpected End to the Journey” was published in 2016, for me to travel to Yorkshire to show him. Despite the fact that his keen brain was ravaged by several serious strokes, he was well aware what was the matter and he clearly was truly happy with it. I am so glad to have known this brilliant railwayman from long and close personal experience. In the book is a picture of the signal gantry where the local train driver passed signal SN109 during the Ladbroke Grove collision, my train being under way controlled by signal SN107 with its green and Main Line showing aspect to the left of it. The thing is that I took that picture because Stan was in the cab with me, having a look at the signalling here in the light of the troubles experienced with it before everything was to change following the accident. Funny thing is that my train is running “wrong line” on that picture; it should have been on the track to the left. Which is clearly out of use and under possession for engineering work that day. In the photo-pages of the book you can find those pages in the middle, it starts with the picture of the wooden Great Northern Railway coach, under which you can find the picture I just discussed. To the right of it is a page-sized picture of the actual collision point with an inbound HST just passing the place where the impact took place: that train is in fact on the track that in the previous picture I travelled on in the opposite direction. The offending local came off the left track towards the turnout in front of that HST. My train, a set of empties from Old Oak Common depot to Paddington to make up an evening rush-hour departure for Gloucester and Cheltenham, sits at the only too visible red light. The connecting feature in both pictures is that pink-coloured over-bridge in the background, the first with the SPAD site looking westbound and the other, with the collision site, looking eastbound. Just for information; would I have attempted to pass this signal at danger, no less than three different Automatic train stop systems would have stopped me from doing that. AWS, the nearest magnet in the track, TPWS, the double grid in the track next to the signal, and ATP. From no serious system (AWS only) to three systems, all working at all time. Later problems with unwarranted stops demonstrated that three working systems constitutes overkill and on the Continent this situation is avoided. Never mind the derailer turnout closer to the junction. The fresh white ballast to the right of the nearest track toward the grey fence of the North Pole Eurostar depot, incidentally, was dumped when clearing up the fire damage on the HST and repairing the track after the accident. At present this track lay-out has been thoroughly altered again: North Pole is now the Hitachi Rail depot for the new Great Western Main Line trains, the HST’s are now on their way out here.

Pennsy Electric Years Book

Arie Reedijk, not only a man with a heart that beats warmly for all things railway, but one who did me the incredible favour of selling me Bill Volkmer’s “Pennsy Electric Years” for 17 Euro’s rather than me ordering a copy from the US for minimally 50 US dollars including postage.

Bill Volkmer’s book constitutes no less than one of those missing links in my story about the pre-history of Baldwin, Westinghouse and General Electric locomotives after WW2. It was written by a man who was involved as a Pennsylvania Railroad electrical traction engineer, actually dealing with the E2b, E2c and E3b electric loco’s, and that makes it rather revealing at times. Mr. Volkmer reminds me strongly of my friend Jim Vine, who was electrical traction engineer at British Rail (Southern Region) and who occasionally took time for trips behind the windscreen with me when, I think, British Rail in its death throes during the run-up to privatisation in 1994 just thoroughly bored him. Jim made me do things that (in all honesty) were not actually permitted to train drivers by those in charge, but in doing so Jim did teach me an incredible lot about the ins and outs of DC electric traction, what things look like, the way it works and how to keep it moving in times of trouble. One of the things possible on the class 73 ED locomotives as e.g. used on Gatwick Express, to mention but one thing, was bypassing the entire low-voltage traction control system in case of faults, through manually working the camshaft. For that purpose these absolutely wonderful 1960’s machines had been kitted out with a special tool, kept stored in the relevant control cabinet for that purpose. Opening that cabinet at floor level you were looking down at the actual camshaft and also at bits carrying 800 volts DC, raw from the juice rail. You had to insert that tool into notches on the camshaft to work it manually. After taking his time to explain the requirements, Jim established himself in the nearest cab, rear-bulkhead door open, to ensure the loco and its train would be stopped in time before hitting the buffer-stops and telling me to not drop the tool as that would short out 800 volts DC between the camshaft and the loco frame and that no doubt would be noticed at least by the various local control centres, if not throughout Kent and East Sussex, which would do our careers no good. Seriously exciting minutes in Gatwick Airport sidings, I tell you, awaiting return to London Victoria on a rainy Sunday afternoon. The conductor asked what was going on because of the unexpected move in the sidings that the train made. Bill Volkmer, going by the picture on the rear end of the dust jacket, even looks like Jim. In any case, I’m afraid his text causes a few issues in my book to have to be adjusted and in all frankness I still have hope to one day find something similar about the Spanish class 278 Tri-Bo’ electrics, those little-known cousins of the Dutch class 1200.

Het boek over de familie van de 1200 krijgt vorm

Electrische Baldwin/Westinghouse locomotieven in Europa en Zuid Amerika na de 2de Wereldoorlog.

De voorgeschiedenis van de Nederlandse serie 1200

Gedurende de vele jaren dat ik de NS serie 1200 regelmatig voor treinen zag, realiseerde ik me eigenlijk nooit dat zo’n machine omtrent 1950 niet op een mooie dag zomaar bij iemand met goede smaak uit de tekenpen vloeide. Dit inzicht kwam pas nadat ik in een Britse Charity Shop, zeg maar een soort kringloopwinkel, een Engelstalig boek over electrische locomotieven vond dat beschreef hoe reeds ten behoeve van de bouw van Indonesische electrische locomotieven er in de twintiger jaren er contact was tussen de Nederlandse licentiebouwers Werkspoor en Heemaf en de Amerikaanse leveranciers Baldwin Locomotive Works en de Westinghouse Electric Corporation. Verder nazoekend bleek tevens (hoe logisch eigenlijk) dat er in de USA en elders in de wereld een nogal fascinerende geschiedenis aan het ontwerp en de bouw van deze locomotieven voorafging en dat de NS 1200 deel van een grotere familie bleek te zijn. Een bezoek aan het Catalaanse spoorwegmuseum te Vilanova i le Geltrú toonde de familietrekken tussen de Spaanse Panchorga’s en de Nederlandse Amerikanen, hetgeen werd bevestigd door de fabrikantenplaten op de neuzen. Wat ook naar voren kwam was dat Baldwin en Westinghouse (samen met General Electric, GE) vanaf 1945 betrokken waren bij de hoogst noodzakelijke modernisering van de electrische tractie bij de Pennsylvania Railroad, die al sinds de jaren dertig geen nieuwe electrische tractie meer ontvangen had. De karakteristieke ontwerpen van die electrische (en diesel-electrische) PRR locomotieven vormden de basis voor de andere machines. Iets anders was dat zowel Baldwin als Westinghouse, voorafgaand aan beider medewerking bij de na-oorlogse Europese locomotieven, al sinds de jaren twintig door het verlenen van licenties aan lokale bouwers betrokken waren bij de bouw van Europese en Zuidamerikaanse electrische locomotieven. In 1923 waren Werkspoor en Heemaf op de beschreven wijze met gebruik van Baldwin en Westinghouse licenties bezig met de bouw van 1Bo’ Bo1’ e-locs serie 3200 voor de Electrische Staats Spoorwegmaatschappij op Java, zowel als bij leverantie van 1,5 kV gelijkstroominstallaties voor de ombouw van de Hofpleintreinen en voor het materieel ‘24, de “blokkendozen”. In 1945 nam Heemaf weer contact op met Westinghouse en kwam er daarna vanuit Nederland een order voor 25 locomotieven (aanvankelijk 75) serie 1200, gebouwd door Werkspoor met draaistellen van Baldwin en General Castings. Baldwin leverde de hoofdlijnen voor het ontwerp, die verder door Werkspoor en NS werden uitgewerkt; in 1951 kwam de eerste machine in dienst. Op hun beurt: in Spanje electrificeerde de Norte in 1922 de voor zware ertstransporten gebruikte berglijn over de Pajeres pas in Asturia tussen Ujo en Busdongo met 3 kV gelijkstroom en bestelde daarvoor naast zes General Electric boxcab Co’Co’s in 1923 zes onder licentie gebouwde Baldwin-Westinghouse Co’Co’ e-locs (met neuzen!) van de serie 6101-6106 in 1924 bij SECN. Na de vernielingen tijdens de Spaanse burgeroorlog en de 2de wereldoorlog kwamen er in 1954 via SECN orders voor 20 Bo’Bo’Bo’ machines voor de goederendienst van de serie 7800 (later 278), in 1960 gevolgd door 9 iets gemoderniseerde extra exemplaren. De verbindende factor was de toepassing van vol-adhesie principes op draaistellen, in de USA en Spanje voor de goederendienst en in Nederland voor de gemengde dienst. In Argentinië en Chili, zie hieronder, werden de machines ook in de gemengde dienst gebruikt.

Er is overigens niet sprake van een lineair traject bij de ontwikkeling van deze na-oorlogse machines; de bouw vond, gebaseerd op ontwerpen voor de PRR locomotieven, min of meer in dezelfde tijd plaats tussen ruwweg 1943 en 1960. Het betrof de Pennsylvania Railroad types E2c en E3b, de NS serie 1200 en de RENFE serie 7800/278. Aan het einde zult u in dit boek tevens de volgende locomotieven nog treffen: een in 1953 voor de Ferrocarriles Nacional General Roca spoorwegmaatschappij in Argentinië gebouwde serie 5000, 41 stuks Baldwin diesel-electrische A1A’A1A’ locomotief type RF-615E, omdat de ontwikkeling vanuit de Baldwin/Pennsylvania Railroad stoom- en diesellocomotieven met de door vormgever Raymond Loewy ontwikkelde “sharknose” (haaieneus), via dat van de PRR E2c en E3b electrische locomotieven, naar het ontwerp met de brede neus voor de 1200 en de 278 (vanwege de bufferbalk) in de vormgeving van juist deze machine goed te zien is. Verder zijn daar de in Italië voor de Ferrocarriles Nacionales Del Estado in Chili gebouwde series E-30 Bo’Bo’ en E-32 Co’Co’. Met argumenten die in een Brits gerechtshof voor wat betreft hun sterkte waarschijnlijk als “circumstantial evidence” uit de bewijsvoering verwijderd zouden zijn, meen ik deze machines toch te moeten noemen. Vanzelfsprekend heeft u de vrijheid dit naar gelieven te aanvaarden of te verwerpen.

Peter van der Mark studeerde tussen 1977 en 1981 museumkunde met nadruk op de geschiedenis van het vervoer aan de Reinwardt Academie in Leiden, en werkte na afsluiting van die periode aanvankelijk in business to business advertising vanuit Montfoort. Hij verhuisde in 1989 naar Engeland en werkte daar bij de spoorwegen van 1990 tot aan zijn pensionering in maart 2013. Aanvankelijk reed hij treinen als machinist vanuit London Victoria op de Brighton lijn en later op de Great Western lijn tussen Bristol, Hereford, Swansea, Plymouth en London Paddington. Na afkeuring als machinist in 2002, op grond van niet langer voldoen aan gezondheidseisen, werkte hij bij het depotmanagement voor treinbemanning te Bristol Temple Meads zowel als bij regionale verkeersleiding in Swindon. Samen met Stanley Hall publiceerde hij artikelen over ATB na het ongeluk te Ladbroke Grove op 5 October 1999 en over de veiligheid van overwegen na het ongeluk door zelfmoord in een auto op een AHOB overweg te Ufton Nervet op 6 november 2004, hetgeen resulteerde in het boek Level Crossings in 2008. In 2016 publiceerde hij zijn eerste eigen boek, An Unexpected End to the Journey: An introduction to international accidents on and around the railways. Verder schreef hij Engelstalige artikelen, onder andere ten behoeve van ProRail voor publicatie in de UK over ontwikkelingen rond spoorwegovergangen in Nederland, en Engelstalige blogs voor een aantal internationale spoorwegmagazines.

Baldwin, Westinghouse & General Electric built electric locomotives

March 2018

Freshly back from a stay in an initially icy cold south-eastern Cornwall, in fact in an old ferry-landing pub with single pane glazed windows at the Cremyll landing at the opposite side of Plymouth across that wild stretch of water called the Hamoaze, to celebrate my turning 65 years of age and now being officially classed as an old codger, I restarted my research into the pre-history of the Dutch class 1200 and the Spanish class 7800/278 electric locomotives. As I explained before, my biggest stumbling block at the time were Chilean broad gauge 3 kV DC electric locomotives of the E-30 Bo’Bo’ and E-32 Co’Co’ classes. Even though they were built in Italy by a consortium called GAI, they had no link whatever to contemporary Italian 3 kV DC practice and were in fact machines that would look fine on US tracks like, well, say the New Haven. Putting an E-32 on one screen and a New Haven EP-5 on the other suddenly brought it all out. EP-5’s, the “Jets”, gave it all away in a flash. Point is not to look at the difference between Westinghouse and General Electric, but to realise that General Electric picked up where Westinghouse left off in 1954 after PRR decided not to proceed with their ignitron rectifier electrics. In fact, PRR also did not proceed with the GE E2b AC Bo’Bo’ electrics. But soon after Westinghouse shut their traction shop in 1953 to concentrate notably on high voltage power generation and distribution as well as aerospace jet engines, Baldwin went to GE for electrical kit and probably took a few now unemployed Westinghouse traction engineers with them. Besides, GE as well as Baldwin had a lot of experience with Westinghouse kit because of the fact that PRR had wanted and organised it that way. So, realistically, it no longer really mattered who you went to, you would get what had been developed by both GE and Westinghouse in the previous years. Baldwin then shut shop entirely in 1954 after missing out on PRR diesel orders (see below), so GE was now the only serious purveyor of full electric traction in the US and as a result all such traction had the same genes after the early 1950’s. We now talk about the PRR E2c (1945), the PRR E3b (1945), the NS 1200 (1951), the RENFE 7800/278 (1954-60), the New Haven EP-5 (1955), the Virginian EL-C/3300 (1956), the PRR 4400 (1960) and the FF CC Del E classes E-30 and E-32 (1960). The pieces finally fell into place.
So, in 1943 we see the development of the RF series diesel-electrics, called sharknoses as far as the look of their head-end design is concerned. They were related with the streamlining of the Raymond Loewy (externally) dressed up massive PRR steam locomotives from 1939 onwards, and brought about a realisation that PRR, Westinghouse, GE and Baldwin all had missed the boat as far as serious development of diesel-electric traction was concerned. in fact, the RF series diesels didn’t sell that remarkably well and one of the reasons was that they were expensive to maintain and not terribly reliable. Only one order was received for export to Argentina, the 50 General Roca class 5000 A1A’A1A’ machines in 1954. Probably the last job Baldwin did in-house before they shut shop. The sharknoses, however, very much determined what the electric locomotives would look like.
In 1945 Baldwin, Westinghouse and GE told PRR that they should look at all-adhesion traction on bogies (trucks) as that appeared to have remarkable results everywhere else going by the speed with which steam traction disappeared off the main lines and was supplanted with diesel-electric traction. Alco, Fairbanks-Morse, Lima and GM-EMD, notably the latter, cranked out thousands of locomotives burning heavily subsidized fuel oil and Baldwin hardly made headway against that flood. What was interesting though, was that a diesel electric in the end was an electric with its own power plant and that economies could be obtained in the region of spares and artisan training and skills if the steam loco’s could be discarded as fast as possible. Unfortunately, Baldwin and Westinghouse could no longer stem the tide coming from other manufacturers and there hardly was interest in further electrification in the US, as explained before. Nevertheless, PRR placed orders for test locomotives on bogies. They wanted AC-DC rectifier units as DC traction had a number of advantages in the way of sheer slow-speed hauling power over full AC locomotives, never mind the interchangeability of kit with DE loco’s. But AC electrification had proven to be the way for the longer distance, both New Haven and PRR (and Virginian) used the high-voltage AC electrification.
The full AC locomotives that GE delivered were not the machines PRR had asked for and did not actually do that well in the heavy haul department (9,800 tons by two units back-to-back). An advantage was that they could be multipled with older PRR units, but that was also not something that would please the PRR financial and operating departments. The Baldwin Westinghouse AC-DC ignitron rectifiers, however, showed that DC traction had it. Two units coupled back-to-back sure-footedly moved 12,000 tons of train with commendable ease. Their downfall was that Baldwin and Westinghouse had not really built the machines as series machines but as test machines, with the idea that they could be changed to full AC loco’s in case the ignitrons didn’t do the job. As a result, they soon became less than satisfactory reliable and in fact within about one and a half year tended to end up on the tracks behind sheds awaiting repairs. One PRR electrical engineer called the machines akin to hardware stores on the inside, despite the niceties of high speed machine-like doors over the front couplers. PRR went to GM-EMD for about 600 diesel electric units and only rather later in the 1960’s came back to GE for further electric locomotives. That were the 4400 series AC-DC solid state rectifier Co’Co’s, based on earlier machines EL-C machines delivered to Virginian Railroad.
The two types of AC to DC test machines, the two-truck 6-axle E2c and the later three-truck six-axle E3b, machines that both had 65 mph as their top speed and were really built as freight sloggers, were used as the templates for the 1200 in the Netherlands and the 7800/278 in Spain. Whilst the template worked absolutely fine for mixed traffic and services up to 150 km/h in The Netherlands (in reality not faster than 135 km/h, 85 mph), the Spanish Bo’Bo’Bo’ machines in Spain were reliable but were heavy on the still often rickety track and, much to the surprise of the US designers, turned out to wear out the curvy mountain track across the Pajeres pass faster than was acceptable. The 278’s ended up on faster lowland stretches where their treatment of the track at about 65 mph also didn’t make the local permanent way people spontaneously break out in songs of praise. That’s why they ended up doing fairly slow local freights, hence my observation that they always appeared to be at the head of short freights.
As far as the Chilean electrics is concerned, the Italian consortium (of which Breda and Ansaldo were members, the Dutch take note) building the loco’s from GE (Westinghouse) licenses, did a very clever thing. They built handsome and reliable machines this way that in fact ended up doing much that the remaining Dutch 1200’s do; hauling specials. They should in their AnsaldoBreda guise perhaps have remembered this when taking on the orders from Norway, Denmark and The Netherlands and really making a bad job of all through sheer bad work.