BR Tripcock-fitted locos

Some of the ER London Area class 24s were certainly tripcock fitted. This included the, now preserved, D5054. In the OPC book 'Profile of the 24s/25s' there are a couple of pictures that show the fitting. The obvious one is a semi-circular air pipe fitted ahead of the leading edge of the bogie on the secondmans side leading to the tripcock itself. It is the outermost pipe on that side. The ER class 21s and 26s do not appear to have had tripcocks.

I don't think the Co-Bos would have been fitted as they were banned from Moorgate and cross-London work. Whether this was due to their smoking habit or weight distribution I am not sure. Smoke was certainly a factor in the banning of the 'Baby Deltics' from Moorgate work although this may have been a retrospective ban. I did read somewhere of one that had made the trip on commuter train though. Having looked carefully at what pictures I do have I cannot find any evidence of a tripcock on either type.

The same is true of the class 15. I have looked carefully and cannot see one on any of the pictures I have. One picture has what might be one under the battery box/fuel tank and just left of centre. However, I have a picture of a class 16 D8402 at Stratford when new and the tripcock is just visible inside the trailing end of the bogie on the secondmans side. Another picture however shows no such fitting on D8400.

Although I have looked I cannot find out whether the London based 20s had tripcocks. However Stratford had 20s until at least 1970 so it is not beyond the realms of fantasy.

The conclusion that I have come to, probably incorrectly, is that any Diesels that would have had tripcocks would have belonged to the Eastern region, specifically, the GE lines. Having said that, the pictures of 24s with tripcocks include GN allocated ones.

One aside with class 15s may be to examine a Heljan OO scale one. You never know.......

I recall reading that some GW locos had tripcocks fitted for through workings via Paddington suburban. They also needed the ATC equipment locked up to avoid contact with the negative rail. (GW ATC was a contact suystem, unlike the inductive BR AWS)

I was surprised to read that the stock working the City Widened Lines in the 60s and 70s needed tripcocks as, so far as I am aware, they were by then entirely separate from the LT tracks. The CWL are certainly signalled to NR standards now? When was the changeover done - was it as late as the Bed-Pan electrification?

Having modelled one in OO scale I can confirm that the 97XX panniers had tripcocks. 8700 was rebuilt with condensing gear in the early thirties. The pannier water tanks were shortened to make room for the condensing pipe but the reduction in water capacity proved a problem. The loco was then rebuilt further with the pannier tanks extended downwards to the running plate and, renumbered 9700, was joined by new-build 9701-10 Although 8700 originally had the original 57XX low cab the second rebuild saw her receive a Collett 8751 style high cab. 9701-10 were built with the later cab. Had they all had the low cab it is odds on that LT would have acquired them instead of the 57XX locos they did get.

The tripcock equipment was fitted behind the footstep on the running plate ahead of the tanks. There is a downward connection from the pipe that runs along the running plate at this point. Before those who know me ask, no, the model isn't finished yet.......

I never managed to see any trains at Kings X suburban, out of the CWL. It must have taken a supreme effort to restart the train on that incline.

This page has a shot of the York Road starter:
www.roscalen.com/signals/London/KXFP.htm#KingsX

;D ;D ;D Sorry. I'm still laughing at the line 'the 31s were quite powerful'! ;D ;D ;D When they arrived on the Southern they quickly became known as 'rice pudding engines' due to their inability to pull the skin off one! Suburban short-frame Mk1s would have been approx. 30-32 tons so seven of them would have been no more than 224 tons. A 73 on Diesel would move that!

With the class 28 Co-Bos size wouldn't have been the major issue. They were shorter than a 31 and less than two inches taller. Part of the problem was that the BR Civil Engineers got windy with the uneven spread of weight. They were banned on quite a few lines (including Southampton to Portsmouth.... I've never figured out why as the chances of one making it that far south before blowing up woud have been remote in the extreme!). More relevant was their ability to smoke! Two stroke Diesels were smoky beasts on BR in the 60s. The 23s, 28s and 'Deltics' are all evidence of this. Having said that, a cold 31 would give them a run for their money!

It is also evident that not all of the relevant classes were fitted. I have only seen one picture of a class 16 with tripcocks and I am sure that all 263 class 31s would not have them. There must have been a list at depots with the relevant numbers.

Not sure if the LM locos used on the Kenny coal trains were trip cock fitted. I reckon they were Cricklewood locos, so probably yes.

As for the 31's, only the FP and Hitchin fleet were tripcock fitted.

I've made some postings on the RMweb about their exploits, including a run of 102mph on a Cambridge buffet train, and lifting a 900ton ballast train out of Kings Cross one Sunday.