Talk:British Rail Class 09

Trains: in UK / Locomotives Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

Technical data[edit]

The main text says the higher speed was obtained by a change of gearing and hence reduced the tractive effort, while the infobox gave the same tractive effort as an 08 (35,000lbf). I have changed this to 25,000lbf as given at [1], which fits with an increase in speed from 20mph to 27.5mph.

This source also disagrees with the power (see Talk:British Rail Class 08#Power), minimum curve and build year, but I have left these unaltered as I do not know which is right.

Also, the figures around 50 in the subclasses section are presumably weights, but are they in metric or imperial tons? --QuantumEngineer (talk) 15:10, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a mess, isn't it? I know of no unit abbreviated to "te"; but the metric equivalents shown in kN (kilonewtons) suggest a measure force, which in imperial units would be lbf. If it's a weight, the only valid metric measures are kg or tonnes.

Various publications over the years have disagreed with each other as regards the true figures for various characteristics of D3000-D4192, and also disagree on the "real" distinction that merits a loco being assigned to Class 09 instead of 08. For instance,

Strickland, D.C. (1983). D+EG Locomotive Directory. Camberley: Diesel & Electric Group. p. 53. ISBN 0 906375 10 X. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

which, if you piece together disjoint data, gives

Class 08 (D3127 up only): 350 bhp (later 400 bhp by increased rpm) weight 48t, tractive effort 35,000 lbf, max speed 20 mph (later reduced to 15 mph except for SR locos)

D3665-71,D3719-21,D4099-114 (ie Class 09) 271⁄2 mph

that is, the same power, weight and tractive effort are given for class 09 as 08. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Build year. Same book as above has 1959 for D3665-71, D3719-21; 1961 for D4099-4112; 1962 for D4113/4. This is corroborated by

Marsden, Colin J. (1984). BR Locomotive Numbering. Shepperton: Ian Allan. pp. 144, 146, 162. ISBN 0 7110 1445 0. EX/1184. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

--Redrose64 (talk) 20:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I access to refs 'Locomotives & coaching stock 1985' (and 2005 version). Quoted data for all 09 /0/1/2: weight '50 t' (I assume t=tonnes and T=tons), RA of 5, engine power 400hp/298kW, tractive effort: max 25000lb (111kN), cont. 8800lb (39kN), max speed 27mph. Build date for originals 1959-62. I'm not saying these are THE figures but does back up some of the details under question? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.244.99 (talk) 10:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible change to the title of this article[edit]

This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome.

Merge with Class 08 Article?[edit]

Should this be merged with the Class 08 article? They are, after all, essentially the same type of loco just with minor differences for operational reasons. 157.203.254.1 (talk) 09:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tables[edit]

I am adding some tables to match the British Rail Class 08 article. They may look untidy to begin with but please be patient. I will tidy up as soon as possible. Mock wurzel soup (talk) 21:44, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have finished adding the tables. The layout may not be ideal so suggestions for improvement are invited. Mock wurzel soup (talk) 23:27, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]