Off The Rails: British Rail Class 17

[@ReprievedSoul]

I recall the attempt to 'fix' the Class using RollsRoyce engines led to an appearance on BBC Tomorrow's World in the days of Raymond Baxter and James Burke.

[@nigelmitchell351]

Yes, remember the days when we had science programmes that weren't too dumbed down, or just about climate change........?

[@NJPurling]

I recall that 'Tomorrows World also featured the Barclay O-4-0 Fireless 'GLAXO' at Ulverston, Cumbria. Definitely environmentally friendly.

[@tooleyheadbang4239]

@@NJPurling That would rather depend on where the steam came from!

[@Isochest]

Yes. When everything was about making things not all this brain addling mind control nonsense of today's TV

[@SynchroScore]

@@nigelmitchell351 Well, climate change _is_ science, whether or not you believe in it.

[@NJPurling]

D8568 first went to the North Yorkshire Moors Railway. The horn had a haunting echo in the Newtondale valley. I remember it in the full 'Ribble Cement' livery & being less than clean. Apparently the works manager at Ribble Cement was aware he had a sole survivor & had no intention of allowing it to go for scrap.

[@georgewilson119]

We had these at Tyne yard, we loved them on local goods, they were a fitters nightmare. Always a comfortable and draught free loco.

[@zenersmytok3619]

I remember them well. They ran on a line in the north of Edinburgh, which was at the back of my house. My neighbour drove them. He referred to them as "900 Claytons". I wonder if that was a reference to brake horse power ?. Happy days.

[@andyhinds542]

Yes it was. Old era drivers refer to locos based on their horsepower. Class 37s were known as "1750s" to eastern regions drivers. Class 31s and 47s were known as Brush 2s or brush 4s.

[@mikeuk4130]

I was invited onto the footplate of D8568 at Grosmont works on the NYMR, on 26th April 1986, the day of the Chernobyl disaster. The engineers there had recently worked out the reason for the unreliability of the Paxman engines, being a lack of oil pressure which they cured temporarily by mounting a huge oil barrel above one bonnet to help boost the pressure of the oil-feed by gravity! Thirty-eight years later, I have again found myself in the spacious cab of D8568, now fully restored and working very nicely on the Great Central Railway. Well done, all who thought it worthwhile to save and restore this oddly- interesting loco.

[@Mariazellerbahn]

4:54 the class 17 had neither steam heat or ETH. They did however have a through steam pipe. Also, they had Paxman engines, not Paxton.

[@stinkyroadhog1347]

That's the same mistake Thomas and Friends made lol. In a script, they had wanted to use Derek in a scene but they wrote "Paxman" down which the animators mistook as "Paxton" who made the appearance instead

[@kitspackman3994]

The 17s had space in the cab for a vertical steam heating boiler, but none were ever fitted. We had three 17s at the RTC in 70s, one of which was converted to a semi-mobile power station, and two were used on various test trains. Notably one, 8512, was the first loco to haul the APT POP-Train on the Old Dalby Test Track, but it caught fire when I was milepost spotting in the cab and was eventually returned to Derby, towed by a Class 25.

[@borderlands6606]

@@kitspackman3994 Was the Class 17 ever used as a passenger loco in revenue earning service? The photograph in this video looks like a special or demo of some kind.

[@kitspackman3994]

@@borderlands6606 Not that I know of, but I only worked with the three of them at the RTC Derby.

[@paulnolan1352]

@@kitspackman3994kit, you legend!! Many thanks for you and your teams efforts on APT.

[@williamgeorgefraser]

4:20 I wonder if this photo was taken at Ardrossan shed. I took a similar photo back in the early 70s when the last members of the class were being stored there. As a lover of steam, I used to hate seeing them pour out their thick smoke in Fife during the 60s but by the 70s I was feeling sorry that we were losing the mix of designs as standardisation began to take over. Thankfully, one of them has been preserved and probably runs in better condition than it ever did under BR. One my uncles was a driver at Dunfermline shed (62C) and I actually got to visit the cab of one of them. Never travelled in one of them though I did get to drive a Class 37 from Alloa to Dunfermline one evening when I was supposed to be revising for a French test the next day.

[@alistaircoulson1106]

Nice looking loco. Used to see them on the main line hauling product from Jarrow Steel works. Shame they were unsuccessful.

[@JLfromEdinburgh1951]

Are you sure they had train heating boilers? For one summer season in the mid 1960s the 16:10 stopping train from Edinburgh Waverley to Hawick was regularly hauled by a Clayton diesel (not yet designated Class 17) but in the winter the train reverted to steam haulage by B1s. I (a schoolboy at the time) assumed this was due to the absence of a train heating boiler. I also can't see how the fireman/secondman could have attended such to such a boiler with the "bonnet" design. The need for the secondman to attend to the boiler was the reason why loco-hauled passenger trains had to be double-manned when I worked on the railway in the 1970s. Due to their short working life, I was only once on the footplate of a Class 17, when I had to pass on a message to a Millerhill driver in Cadder Yard. (The engine was about to work a train back to Millerhill.) I was struck then by the cab seats facing in opposite directions. I was told that this was because this was because the locomotives were designed for single manning. Presumably, with such good all-round visibility, it was felt there was no need for a secondman when working a train. By that way of thinking, a secondman would only be necessary when running light on the main line between the engine sheds and the yard where the train started/finished. Presumably the management thought it didn't matter in these circumstances that the secondman (who would often be a guard acting as secondman) was facing in the wrong direction! Personally I think they should have had two seats facing in each direction; there was certainly room for four seats in that large cab. But management were always looking for ways to save money, and in the 1960s they were trying to force single-manning on a workforce that didn't want it. It would certainly be easier for the driver to change driving positions than in a double-cabbed locomotive, but it wouldn't be possible when the locomotive was moving. If you've ever gone through the engine room of a Class 47 when it was working a train, you'll know what I mean. Or indeed any diesel when it was working hard uphill! Unlike a lot of people, I was sorry to see these quite distinctive locomotives go. I felt that the good visibility made them ideally suited for the sort of local freight trains where more time was spent shunting, than actually hauling trains on the main line. From about 1972 I was working as a goods guard, working many such trains, mainly with double-cabbed locomotives of classes 27, 26, 24 and 25 (and sometimes an English Electric Class 20). I sometimes thought it would have been easier for the driver and I too see each other had we had a Class 17. I think the real reason for their rapid withdrawal was the enormous loss of freight traffic in the late '60s / early '70s, when the freight management simply threw in the towel in the face of competition from road hauliers. Had BR been committed to retaining this traffic, then solutions to the operating problems of the Claytons could surely have been found. But, with the traffic they had been built to work largely lost, it was cheaper just to scrap them. It was depressing working of the freight side of the railways in the 1970s. Most of the depots I worked trains to and from are now closed. By restricting itself to block trainload traffic, the railway tied itself to heavy industry, failing to foresee how quickly heavy industry itself would decline. I personally think the biggest loss was the premature closure of the modern computerised hump marshalling yards built in the 1960s. I think they could and should have provided the backbone of British freight transport well into the 21st century.

[@simonaltham9054]

No boilers were ever fitted.

[@markwalker2627]

What an excellent post 👏

[@tintriangledriver210]

Surely hump shunting was only applicable to loose coupled stock where brakesmen were running around manually applying brakes on singles and small batches of small wagons.

[@srfurley]

@@simonaltham9054it looks like they had a steam pipe in one of the pictures. Did they have a through pipe as did several other classes of small Diesel locomotives so they could work between a boiler fitted locomotive and the train.

[@simonaltham9054]

@@srfurley Every Class of mainline diesels had a through steam pipe back then.

[@EM-yk1dw]

Great video, the class used to haul freight over the Waverley route

[@ianjones4116]

2x08.5 sharing one cab lol. Oh no, that was the class 13 Master and Slave at Tinsley . 😁👍😎

[@clivesoper8864]

I remember these locomotives in their afterlife at Hemelite, and went on an enthusiast trip from their Cupid Green base to the outskirts of Harpenden and back. There were actually two Hemelite locomotives although one failed early on and then became a spares donor.

[@peteryoung4957]

An interesting video. I went to school very near the Hemelite works, so I saw this loco quite a few times plodding around. Many years later it was nice to be hauled by her.

[@Nailhead401]

@2:52 south bound train on the Waverley Route, Lady Vic pit box on left, entrance to pit on right

[@frankrogowski5608]

I recall seeing D8509 on a test train through Millers Dale station on the now closed line to Matlock from Buxton, back in 1962.

[@EuroScot2023]

Small centre-cab classes are almost ubiquitous among the railways of the world. However there were certain British companies who should never have been let near design and construction of non-steam locomotives. Clayton and North British spring to mind.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

BR has to take the blame for the engine choice. They indeed tested the ZH engine with all its cast aluminium parts. They had tested a pair of these engines undervalued pair of coaches built in 1926 and due for scrapping. Paxman was after a contract for DMU engines but these went to AEC and Leyland with their 150hp engines. When BR wanted to built the Class 17 they selected the Paxman ZH as the engine of choice. BR wanted engines with the aluminium parts, butbapaxman warned them that these were proving to be unreliable in service with other users and offered the engines with cast iron parts replacing the aluminium ones. BR Insisted that these engines were fine on the test unit with the aluminium parts. BR got what it wanted and soon the engines started to fail. Paxman replaced the aluminium engine blocks with cast iron ones and it solved the problems being had for that reason. These aluminium engines also caused braking issues on heavy coal trains due to their low weight.

[@mandywithell]

Why Clayton? They produced successful mines locomotives and the design itself was basically sound. The main problems arose because the specification was flawed - branch line and trip workings disappearing, and BR's insistence (BR knew best) in specifying Aluminium parts, as already noted. (Also worth mentioning that the Class 15,16 and 29s also suffered from BR's insistence on Aluminium engine parts) BR wanted a centre cab loco with low hood profile, for visibility, when yard working (also seen with the class 14s) and that determined a horizontal engine. Paxman were pioneers in Diesel engine technology and were quite capable of sorting engine problems that arose - time and politics meant that the 17s were doomed. Outside of rail traction in Britain, Paxman had many thousands of diesel engines running around the world in many applications. Paxman had very valuable experience producing diesels, with very exacting specifications, for the Admiralty. Paxman of course went on to produce the Valentia engines for HSTs and later replacements the VP185. An interesting fact is that once Paxman came under the GEC orbit they also produced "Deltic" engines for admiralty use and, I believe, refurbished some Deltic engines for rail traction! Clayton? Still going doing what they do best- mining equipment, although now based in Burton. It is easy to Blame BR for all the unsuccessful Diesels produced but, for BR at least, they were entering a transition phase and the pilot scheme was meant to be a testing phase, but again politics (the desire to oust steam when steam still had years of useful life) clouded clear thinking. Additionally, BR's financial loses created a panic that dictated that any Diesel design , from multifarious producers, however flawed would produce cheaper running costs than steam, so as a result many designs were signed off without proper due diligence! As an aside, a few years back was talking to a technician on the preserved class 17 who opined that a very basic, and solvable, flaw existed in the cooling system. The solution? A header tank moved to a higher position above the engines - dunno about the veracity but sure someone can confirm!

[@HeavyRayne]

Excellent video I can't believe I'm only just now discovering this channel

[@petesplasticplayground7791]

Well Done for including Derek, the diesel from Thomas. You avoided the major oversight there. Well done.

[@joshuaW5621]

Pity the Class 17 was so terrible. You can’t help but feel pity for the failed diesel classes of British Railways.

[@stephencope7178]

A total waste of taxpayer's money! As were the type 2 that had to run in tandem. In the meantime, the Riddles 9f locos were cut up prematurely!!

[@joshuaW5621]

@@stephencope7178 it really is a crime that the highly successful 9Fs were withdrawn so early in favour of this piece of crap.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

@@stephencope7178 those steam engines believed of many were in the clean air zones of the Clean Air Act 1956 were mobile liabilities for the BTC/BR. If anyone if them made too much smoke in a clean air zone the BTC/BR was going to be fined. This was one of the reasons the Modernisation Plan was rushed leading to so many less than ideal locomotives. Most locomotives were fitted with multiple working equipment. This meant you could have a Type 1 operating with a Type 4.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

@@joshuaW5621 those 9Fs couldn't handle every load by themselves. I see plenty of photographs of them needing bankers.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

Are you aware than Paxman told BR/BTC that the aluminium alloy components in their 6ZHXL would not stand the strain and that would be better to use steel components instead? Well they did after this engine had been tested on a diesel-electric multiple unit. BR/BTC decided to go ahead with the original engine...

[@mandywithell]

Re train heating. at 3:48 the general arrangement diagram of the cab shows where the steam heat boiler would be located, if fitted. #37 It would be the task of the secondman to oversee the operation of said heating.

[@philiprufus4427]

Yeah, One old driver said to me many years ago on being queried about, 'Cold Passenger Coaches,compared to past experience, 'some of those characters,don't know how the train heating boiler works,its a black art,thats why you are frozen son.'

[@NealBosher]

I love this unusual loco and my n gauge model runs superbly and gets a lot of use on my layout.

[@Samstrainsofficially]

Really when you look at what they were replacing and indeed where they were put, for all the bad mouthing we give them 60% availability wasn't overly terrible. There was a lot of very outdated motive power lurking around the central belt of scotland which probably didn't manage significantly better availability. These not overly powerful locomotives took on a lot of smaller frieght work and a working in multiple took on other tasks. They provided even in their short lives experience to drivers and workshop staff on how to work with and on diesels(maybe a little more experience than wholly intended re that availability figure but still a positive) When looked at from the perspective of a systemic change they were good, they about matched a lot of the aging stuff they replaced, they gave everyone a taste of things to come and I'm sure they made more than a few drivers and second men very happy on a cold day up north having an enclosed cab where before they may have been rostered onto some old 0-6-0 from decades ago with an open cab. Dunno if you've been on a loco in winter but even with that fire going it's not exactly a nice work place, with an open cab with maybe a sheet slung up for some protection it would be even worse. Think we need a rethink on these locos not from the enthusiast angry at steam going perspective but from a more real, more railway perspective. The visibility thing is also a real strange hang up because again, if you've been on a steam loco, lets just say visibility even in these is a world different with those big cab windows and less of a bulky vision obstruction in the form of a boiler. They may have some visibility issues compared to the cab end of a class 20 running cab forward but they are still a step up from many steam locos in this regard

[@richardmarshall4322]

I have got a fascination and liking for all the unreliable classes. 14 15 16 17 21 23 28 29 41 43.

[@namechangedawyep]

Me too

[@makingmemesat3AM]

What’s 43 doing there?

[@johno4521]

History In The Dark does a great series of videos entitled 'The Worst Trains Ever'. Mostly American but he deals with a lot of British Rail locos.

[@welshtrainspottingchannel]

@@makingmemesat3AM its the other 4, not the HST

[@makingmemesat3AM]

@@welshtrainspottingchannel the huh

[@CarbonC50]

Another topper of a video!

[@ronaldweir712]

My dad did a training course on them as a fitter. Some were shedded at Leith Central in Edinburgh.

[@pikachuthebananasplit9061]

I'm guessing that had teething troubles!

[@ronaldweir712]

@ what had teething troubles?

[@pikachuthebananasplit9061]

@@ronaldweir712 Derek! From Thomas the tank engine He was based off this diesel

[@Nailhead401]

@1:55 south bound train just north of Beattock Station, Moffat branch off to the right.

[@Renownvidz]

The unique Clayton Type 3 (a totally different animal), also features in the photographs.

[@jantokarski1623]

yeah, known also as the DHP1

[@Nailhead401]

@3:58 north bound demolition train(?) passing through Galashiels, grey and white building is the only thing in this picture remaining....

[@SimonWallwork]

In about 1975, there was a long line of these at Polmadie- and another load of them at St.Rollox Works. And D8539 was ever-present at Eastfield.

[@duncancurtis5108]

Most finished up at King's yard in Norwich.

[@philiprufus4427]

One of the drivers at Eastfield said to me at Eastfield during a conversation regarding them,'those things, fickle,but good visibility,you get to see on those b - - - - - - how far you would fall down the hillside into Loch Long,on a West Highland Freight !

[@jimmcwhinnie3225]

We had quite a few on Shed in 66B Motherwell

[@keith800]

Thank you for an interesting video on a short lived loco , even the unsuccessful loco's are all part of the rich tapestry of our railway history.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

You keep showing a photograph of Class 17 D8589 crossing the River Wear bridge at Monkwearmouth. This was taken by Brian Stephenson on 6th July 1970 and was featured on the cover of MLI no. 186.

[@jimihendrix991]

''Brian Stephenson'' is/was a UK Railway Photography MESSIAH. (...and occasionally railways abroad too) 😉

[@martinforester3471]

Monkwearmouth not Monkseaton!

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

@@martinforester3471 thank you, got my Monks mixed up.

[@ZephyrKnight76]

Always loved how these locos looked. Reminds me of the early Swiss electrics.

[@musicgarryj]

I've always thought that visually the Claytons were quite pleasing to the eye. Certainly a lot better than the new godawful class18 battery locos that Clayton produced recently! Destined for permanent storage so it seems. The class 17s were a very common sight around the Newcastle-upon-Tyne area in the late 1960s.

[@edgein7892]

Great video. Very odd locomotive that certainly had its flawes in design, performance and handling but I like the look of it somehow. I guess every railway had one or two mistakes like this one.

[@TheCiller10]

There’s still one in the steel works in Scunthorpe

[@lnerrules-iw6ry]

It looks like a Class 17 Clayton. But it's not.

[@TheCiller10]

@@lnerrules-iw6ry you’re right, they’re Siemens locos built in the mid to late 90’s that work in the steelworks in Scunthorpe. They do look similar

[@Thornaby37]

The Di8 locos at Scunthorpe almost look like Claytons made from Lego

[@OliverWoodphotography]

I think they were an interesting design. I have a very vague memory of seeing one in action in Glasgow in the mid 60s. I think I can also remember the single 17 that was stabled at Longsight in the early 70s. There is footage of it moving in green at the end of this video. I think the Longsight loco was used as a power source or static coach heater? These were duties also assigned to the few remaining class 15/16s and I Think Chester and Lime Street had one each?

[@fouloleron2002]

8598 if I remember correctly.

[@BigBenOnion]

this is the first video i got recommended by you and i really liked it, thank you

[@kevintucker8564]

Just beautiful

[@COMMANDANT699]

I love the class 17 it is a perfect engine in my eyes

[@johannessilver8653]

This body shape has been pretty much used in European locos both mainline and yards. One major central cab and seats for both directions for two engineers. Typically the body has only one main diesel and auxiliary engine on the other end. Therefore they are not necessary symmetrical and the other end is longer. Those have typically hydraulic transmission like in 1:04 drawing.

[@gunnardannehl372]

Interesting and quite good looking engine. Real pity it failed in service. In Germany on the other hand we had (have) with the class V100 a mid cab design that was hugely successful, starting service in 1958 (over 750 build) and being decommisioned by the Bundesbahn only in 2004. Many of them are now still in service with private companies - and will reach surely service life of over 70 years. Similar engine design was built by the east german Reichsbahn in vast numbers too.

[@mikethecabbie8476]

At 1:07, that ain't a Class 17; that's DHP1!

[@greigs9384]

A regular on the Waverley track recovery trains, drivers always used to wave as they passed under the Bonnyrigg Rd bridge when I was very young. Then the track came back over 30 yrs later!

[@ngaugefouroaksstreetstatio6932]

Very interesting and very enjoyable, was considering buying one for my N gauge layout.

[@clangerbasher]

Always reminds me of many of the Continental centre cab diesels like the German V100; most of which were (are!) still successful.

[@darylcheshire1618]

Were they the electrics? I recall a German centre-cab electric loco which was very long and had unusual motion gear. They were Swiss crocodiles.

[@clangerbasher]

@@darylcheshire1618 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB_Class_V_100 Lots of cab centre designs over there. These are the closest to what the Class 17 should have been,

[@darylcheshire1618]

@@clangerbasher Thank you for that.

[@clangerbasher]

@@darylcheshire1618 No probs! I remember my first exposure to 'foreign stuff' was in advert in Railway Modeller for Marklin products back in 1976. It all looked very exotic. There is some fantastic stuff out there truly there is a prototype for everything. It is a shame the Class 17 weren't a success. It isn't hard to imagine a less stringent Beeching Report that left some of the large branches and cross country routes open; the sort of lines where Bo-Bo's would be found. (Just like in Ireland!) 🙃

[@darylcheshire1618]

@@clangerbasher I remember some of Ireland’s western side trains used some sort of rail-tractor pulling 1-3 carriages. Claire, I think.

[@geoffreylee5199]

ALCo, in North America, also had a centre cab; not a great seller either.

[@paulkornbluh6303]

Indeed, the C415.

[@robertgift]

Well done! Thank you. Robert. USA

[@bobtahoma]

Looks so good though

[@dominicbarden4436]

I rode behind D8568 on the Severn Valley Railway last year (she's now based there rather than at Chinnor). She's a funny little thing, in my opinion her engine sounded like it was from a railbus. Thankfully, she didn't fail!

[@1258-Eckhart]

*engines

[@Mounhas]

Interesting looking loco.

[@dragonfly7308]

This and co-bo are my favorite British diesels

[@LMSProductions2003]

Would like the clarify that the Clayton isn’t owned by the chinnor railway but a private group called the diesel traction group, located at the Severn Valley Railway

[@beeurd]

Came to the comments to mention this myself.

[@AllenORourke1954]

These were tried on the steeply graded Consett branch in County Durham from Tyne Dock shed after the mighty 9F's were withdrawn in 1966, they failed miserably with the 900 ton iron ore trains, as did other diesels to be fair before double headed class 37's came to the rescue...

[@Roy-gi5ul]

Which bright spark decided that a pair of Claytons would be equal to a 9F? Must have had Angel Dust on his Cornflakes...

[@billybuckleymusic8766]

Absolute insanity. The 9F being a very successful design but hastily withdrawn because BR wanted to be seen as 'modern'. Meanwhile countries like Germany carried on using the steam locos until the mid 1970's giving them ample time to design effective replacements.

[@1258-Eckhart]

So what was the problem with the centrecab? German railways have hundreds of centrecab locos of different classes on the network, which have worked for decades perfectly well. There's the Class 211 and 212 B-B and the 260 and 261 C locos for instance.

[@LionFace]

It didn't solve the problem of better visibility. The Class 20 had very poor visibility one way, and excellent visibility the other, where the 17 had average in both directions. As the class 20's began being used in pairs nose to nose effectively eliminating the visibility problem and they didn't suffer the performance or reliability problems of the 17, the design wasn't worth putting up with. I think the class 17 is also quite deceptive, where it doesn't look like a long locomotive, however they are similar in length to the type 2 diesel locos, and when sat in the middle of one, there is little visibility directly in front of the loco, which is the same issue the class 15 and 16s have, albeit not as bad as those examples.

[@meme2287]

I'm no rail expert, but it seems a crazy solution to address a visibilty issue by having one central cab and two engines, restricting the allowable height of each engine, rather the one engine and two cabs (one at each end), which is much more common.

[@rilyboothe832]

I can't help but feel bad for the Class 17's, I also like how their designed, despite their troubles.

[@bertmeinders6758]

In 1957, New Zealand Railways bought twenty centre cab diesel-electric heavy shunters from BTH. They liked the design and performance, but not the workmanship, so they built another 52 units themselves, 26 each at Addington and Hillside, up to 1970. Some are in preservation, some in industrial use, and significant number are still with KiwiRail. They are the only diesel-electric locos made in New Zealand, and very good ones at that.

[@Eric_Hunt194]

At 01:38 are those the Cuban 47-alikes under construction?

[@TenShine1productions]

I live up the road from Hatton. Didn't know the 17s came from there

[@wacojones8062]

In the late 40’s through the 50’s into the early 60's the EJ&E relied on the 2000 HP Baldwin center-cab transfer locomotives as the mainstay of the locomotive fleet. Big monsters with high hoods I would see them every day as I lived a short bike ride from the EJ&E and SOO line transfer yard in what is now Vernon Hills Illinois area. 2 x 1000 HP Engines. Last units with other railroads lasted into the 1990's.

[@Mariazellerbahn]

5:22 I'm sure that some of Classes 14, 21, 22 and 29 had shorter lives.

[@jimgough8603]

D6127 Less than 3 years, all the 14s less than 5 years

[@mandywithell]

@@jimgough8603 But , with the class 14s, only because their work disappeared. Many went on to successfully be used by the NCB, BSC and other industrial users. They could not believe their luck as almost brand new locos became available at almost bargain basement prices

[@joshuaeaton9073]

Great video. Just to clarify the preserved Clayton is owned by the diesel traction group and is based at the Severn valley railway not the princess Risborough and chinnor railway

[@foxstrangler]

That's Princes Risborough - not princess.

[@grahambloxsome3226]

I remember often seeing a Clayton in the early 70s around south Manchester, hauling test coach Hermes.

[@burgegerm7878]

Interestingly, this center cab setup seems to be a common design in Japan, such as the DD51 and DE10, though it seems those were diesel-hydraulic.

[@davidmccall2897]

I liked the Class 17 they were not too common in the North East, but 66A had many stabled on the MPD.

[@teeny61]

Not paged down all comments but noted the Cuban version of the class 47 can be seen in build too

[@garrymartin6474]

The one initially allocated to Barrow Hill used to leak exhaust into the cab, a problem that couldn't be over come at the depot. ( This from a former neighbour who was second man on it ) I don't know if this was a common fault .

[@Thornaby37]

Ironically the Scottish Region had just sorted out the reliability problems when they were being withdrawn I believe it was the shed master at Polmadie who questioned the decision to withdraw them early

[@peterelvery]

So conceptually similar to the 1950s Deutche Bahn V100 which remained in service for 40 years, yet so incredibly unsuccessful.

[@wondermenel2811]

the 17s remind me of SM42s in terms of looks of course, the SM42s were a massive succsess, they are still in service to this day

[@malcolmclements5120]

Steam heating?? I understood boilers were never fitted. They would have been in the centre of the cab. I remember, with affection, tripe-headed 17s hauling mineral trains from the Edinburgh suburban line onto the Caley main line- what noise!

[@EE12CSVT]

They had no heating boiler only a through pipe

[@bobwillis8731]

I worked on these locos on the maintenance side all the time they were in the North east, there's to many errors in this video to write down.. I know the drivers i dealt with loved them when they worked okay

[@jimgough8603]

I'm sick to death of people who think they're clever perpetuating bull shite. This has to be the worst video ever for errors!

[@michaeljohnson4636]

I know they used to come off the track at gosforth east junction at the catch points with the morning goods from ponteland and rowntree's factory at fawdon

[@marksmith334]

Got aboard some at Gateshead shed where my dad was based. Weird contraption

[@johno4521]

1.37 Anyone know what those class 47-shape locomotives are under construction in the background? Clearly an export order...

[@christophermatthews6972]

I think they were for Cuba.

[@johno4521]

@@christophermatthews6972 cheers

[@robinkey4499]

I like class 17 they look nice l remember them at Barrow Hill D 8607 1966

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

Sorry, but on all mainline locomotives there is a zone directly ahead of the locomotive were nothing can be seen from the driver's seat.

[@markh.6687]

Love the "But the replacement motors were worse than what they replaced" line he said. Sounds typically British. :) I'm in America, where Baldwin and General Electric both built center-cab locomotives; the GE 44-tonner (~39 metric tonnes) is famous, as are the Pennsylvania Railroad's GG-1 center-cab electric locomotives.

[@foxstrangler]

Rolls-Royce just couldn't make a successful diesel engine.

[@markh.6687]

@@foxstrangler Heh heh heh...but they made nice paperweights.

[@gainsbourg66]

What do they sound like?

[@MyVikinglife]

I think the West Somerset Railway has one of these.

[@pfflyer3381]

It's pretty !

[@pilottruck1288]

I don't know why, but there's something I like about center cab diesels and electrics.

[@michaelemery5219]

I saw the sole surviving class 17 at Swanage last year

[@chorlton4]

There is a shot of the very rare hydraulic Clayton DHP1 in the footage. The 17s were a tragedy rather than a disaster; all the problems were fixable, not least the use of a Rolls Royce engine used in 2 of the Beyer Peacock batch. Alas the traffic they were designed for was disappearing, as rail freights market share collapsed in the 1960s, which also meant the demise of the class 14s too, along with all those white elephant marshalling yards. Shame.

[@johnny5805]

That cement loco with the indicator box 'NOB' ! 😆

[@johnoneill5661]

To be regarded as probably the worst BR diesel ever is very impressive when looking at how bad the competition was 😂😂

[@chrisdavies3913]

What is the preserved one like? Has it been improved? If so, how?

[@adder3597]

Hilariously, Clayton's shunters these days are pretty decent.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

What train heating equipment? No steam heating boilers or electric train heating generators were ever fitted to this class, just like all the other Type 1 locomotives. The only train heating equipment they were fitted with was a through steam pipe allowing then to be coupled between the coaches and a locomotive with an operating steam heating boiler.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

​@@JackStackhouse it may have been your intention but that's not what you said. You said they could heat all the coaches BR had in service, when they couldn't heat any. You stated that fitting of steam heating equipment alongside the electric heating equipment. They never had boilers or ETH equipment.

[@JackStackhouse]

@@neiloflongbeck5705 With reference to Electric heating, this was refering to the original BTC paperwork provided by Clayton that notes that there is provision for heating equipment to be fitted, running from the Paxman. A train heating boiler was also listed as optional equipment to be fitted to the loco itself alongside the steam heating pipe underneath. www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/Clayton_Type11962.pdf

[@alanrobertson9790]

5.8 Train Heating. The design provided for the installation of a Spanner train-heating boiler and although it was proposed that about twenty locomotives were to receive boilers, in practice no locomotive ever carried such equipment. A section of the cab roof was removable to allow the boiler to be installed or removed if so required. The space allotted for the boiler in the centre of the cab explains the large dimensions of the centre-cab and the extra length of the Claytons (50ft 7½in, compared with 42ft 0in and 46ft 9⅜in for the BTH and English Electric Type 1 locomotives respectively). The first batch of Claytons, D8500-87, were fitted with through train heating steam pipes. Of the second batch only the Yorkshire-allocated locomotives were fitted with through steam pipes (D8604-16). The Beyer Peacock ‘Maintenance Instructions’ specifically state: ‘Carriage Heating Train Pipe fitted to Locomotive Nos. D8604 to D8616 only’. Sayer, Anthony P. The Clayton Type 1 Bo-Bo Diesel-Electric Locomotives - British Railways Class 17 (Locomotive Portfolio Diesel and Electric) (p. 51). Pen and Sword. Kindle Edition.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

@@alanrobertson9790 but where was the boiler water tank to be fitted? Everything I've seen points to them being for freight only with occasional summer only uneven passenger trains but I've not seen everything about this Class, so I look forward to being educated

[@alanrobertson9790]

@@neiloflongbeck5705 Using same book as referenced before get additional extracts. 1) When a steam heating boiler is required, a position inside the cab enables its functioning to be under the control of the driver, thereby avoiding the necessity of a second man for this purpose (i.e. empty stock working into terminals). 2) Although the Glasgow South and Fife schemes for which these locomotives are required, indicate freight duties only, the General Manager, Scottish Region, should be asked to indicate which, if any, of these locomotives should have boilers for empty stock working. 3) ‘There is a technical reason why the roof height of the above locomotives should be made as high as possible. Because the [train-heating] boiler is enclosed in the casing inside the cab, as much space above it as can be arranged is necessary for the adequate operation of the ventilation arrangements, and for clearing away the pocket of hot air which will tend to linger above the boiler during operation. 4) A train-heating boiler was never actually fitted to any locomotive, but this component still managed to exert a very strong influence the final design. Having given so many extracts I feel obliged to recommend. Sayer, Anthony P. The Clayton Type 1 Bo-Bo Diesel-Electric Locomotives - British Railways Class 17 (Locomotive Portfolio Diesel and Electric) (p. 57). Pen and Sword. Kindle Edition. Author has also written books on Classes 14, 15, 16, 21/29 & 28. Available as books or Kindle.

[@Guitar6ty]

For a Diesel it was quite good looking.

[@cannadineboxill-harris2983]

I needed to know why they don’t dig a tunnel and do an extension for the main line Train so that they can extend the unused abandoned underground train stations. Why couldn’t they use the part D78 Stock train doors on the sides and also restructure the front face of the A60 and A62 stock and that includes the class 313, class 314 and class 315 remix and make them all together and also redesign them an overhead line and also make them into Five cars per units and also having three Disabled Toilets on those Five cars per units A60 and A62 stock trains and also convert the A60 and A62 stock trains into a Scania N112, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Engines and also put the Loud 7-Speed Voith Gearboxes even Loud 8-Speed Leyland Hydra cyclic Gearboxes in the A60 and A62 stock, class 313, class 314, and class 315 and also modernise the A60 and A62 stock and make it into an 11 car per unit so it could have fewer doors, more tables, computers and mobile phone chargers. A Stock Trains and also having 8 Disabled Toilets on those A stock trains. why couldn’t we refurbish and modernise the Waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel and make it more Larger and extend it to the bank station, making it into a Triple-Track Railway Line so those Five countries such as Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden to convert the waterloo and city line Triple-Track Railway tunnel into a High-Speed Railway lines? The Third Euro tunnel Triple-Track Railway line to make it 11 times better for passengers so they could go from A to B. Then put the modernised 11 car per unit A Stock and put them on a bigger modernised Waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel so it could go to bank station to those Five countries such as Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. The modernised refurbished 11 cars per unit A stock could be a High Speed The Third Triple-Track Euro Tunnel Train So it is promising and 47 times a lot more possible to do this kind of project if that will be OK for London Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. oh by the way, could they also tunnel the Triple-Track Railway Line so it will stop from Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex so that the Passengers will go to Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden and also extend the Triple-Track Railway Line from the Bank to Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex Stations so that more people from there could go to Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden more Easily. Why couldn't they extend the Piccadilly line and also build a brand-new underground train station so it could go even further right up to Clapton, Wood Street can they also make another brand new underground train stations in Chingford and could they extend the Piccadilly Line and the DLR right up to Chingford? All of the classes 150, 155, 154, 117, 114, 105, and 106, will be replaced by all of the Scania N112, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Five carriages three disabled toilets are air conditioning trains including Highams Park for extended roots which is the Piccadilly line and the DLR trains. Could you also convert all of the 1973 stock trains into an air-conditioned maximum speed 78 km/hours (48 MPH) re-refurbished and make it into a 8 cars per unit if that will be alright, and also extend all of the Piccadilly train stations to make more space for all of the extended 8 car per unit 1973 stock air condition trains and can you also build another Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive Companies and can they order Every 37 Octagon and Every 17 Hexagon shape LNER diagram unique small no.13 and unique small no.11 Boilers from those Countries such as Greece, Italy, Poland, and Sweden, can they make Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive speeds by up to 142MPH so you can try and test it on the Original Mainline so it will be much more safer for the Passengers to enjoy the 142MPH speed Limit only for HS2 and Channel Tunnel mainline services, if they needed 16 Carriages Per units, can they use those class 55’s, class 44’s, class 40’s and class 43HST Diesel Locomotive’s right at the Back of those 18 Carriages Per Units so they can take over at the Back to let those Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s have a rest for those interesting Journeys Please!!!!!, oh can you make all of those Coal Boxes’s 17 Tonnes for all of those 142MPH Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s so the Companies will Understand us PASSENGER’S!! so please make sure that the Builders can do as they are told!!!!! And please do something about these very very important Professional ideas Please? Prime Minister of England, Prime Minister of Australia, Prime Minister of Sweden, Prime Minister of Germany, Prime Minister of Italy, Prime Minister of Poland and that Includes the Mayor of London.

[@mrbluesky2050]

I need a nose-full of what you're taking......

[@andrewoverton5170]

Not you again popping up on people's KZbin channels blathering on with your utter bollocks. Go away!

[@stephensmith4480]

@@mrbluesky2050 A sure case for electric shock therapy if ever there was one.

[@paulnolan1352]

I think he dictated this to his Warder while strapped tight in a giggle jacket sat in a padded cell.

[@RogerMurkin]

The Class 17 locomotives were originally designed as pick up locomotives, not for heavy freight hauling locomotives

[@natehill8069]

reminds me of a DB V-100

[@ciaranburke3243]

Cool looking loco, pity it flopped ☹

[@LeslieGilpinRailways]

As a kid seeing them pass for a short period, usually in pairs, that there could be a grand piano in the cab!

[@philiprufus4427]

In Scotland it, was a bar !

[@alanrobertson9790]

Fortunately as a railway modeller it just has to look. Good video. I had been watching another diesel type video series by someone who shows photographs and then blots out his photos using text. Presumably he lacks the confidence to speak. Your format far better.

[@levidarling5107]

I may prefer Steam most of the time, but I take pity on this class of diesel, yes mainly because of Derek. Lol 😂

[@mandywithell]

Clayton also built a version that possessed hydraulic transmission!

[@sockstarnik]

A grand effort

[@spiderbetz806]

Nice I’ve subed

[@MisterTea74]

Particularly enjoyed the N08 headcode 😂😂

[@jeremypreece870]

The picture at 5:32 is of true justice. A Black Five and a class 17. One is saved and one is scrapped! That is not ironic! Would you save the iconic Black 5 or the useless failure that was the Class 17?