International Railroad Discussion > Class 381, The Japanese Talgo

Another historically significant train set was retired recently, the Class 381 Limited Express EMU.

Despite being famous for the Shinkansen, the world's first HSR system, Japan's railroading is still mostly non-HSR. Biggest contribution to profits outside the HSR are limited express trains, connecting populous areas and skipping low patronage stations. This applies to both JR group of railroads (JNR pre-1987) and the private railroads that compete with JR.

Limited Express trains emphasize seating, and most services provide reserved seating at additional cost. Furthermore, many (but not all) have limited express surcharges which can double the fare. Pay for comfort, and pay for speed. A logical application of supply and demand, not petty and greedy "yield pricing" which is mostly unheard of with Japan's railroading.

In order to lure people out of other modes of transportation, especially highway buses, the railroads go through great lengths to make the limited express trains look "good." Japan's "better appearance era" started in the late 1950s, and we already had discussions of that in other threads. JNR's Class 181/183, Odakyu Railway's NSE 3000s, Meitetsu 7000s... there are other examples not discussed, of course.

Class 381 is a direct descendant of the Class 181/183 in terms of looks, but that's where the similarity ends. JNR (government-run Japan National Railway) was already concerned with highway competition, so they wanted to increase the speeds of limited express trains traversing mountain territories. They decided to implement tilt technology (like the Talgos).

Those interested in more detail can research JNR's experimental Class 591 EMU, which was tested extensively in the 1960s, including the use of tilt technology.

(more next)

---

You must be a registered subscriber to watch videos. Join Today!

Class 381 started revenue service in 1973, and as intended, targeted mountain territory. JNR took advantage of the recently electrified Chuo Line between Nagoya and Nagano, where 45.2% of the ~157 mile line had curves. That's the Chuo West Line where the Limited Express Shinano Service was started.

Class 381 did not serve the Chuo East Line (Matsumoto to Tokyo), which was also in mountain territory. I'll post a report later on a more modern implementation of tilt technology on that segment, Limited Express Super Azusa.

As time passed, Class 381s served other mountain territories, including JR West's Hakubi Line out of Okayama. The video above was my impromptu catch of Limited Express Yakumo that runs on the Hakubi Line. I was hiking ~2 miles to catch Shinkansen Evangelion, which was in 2016. A year before that, I rode Class 381 and Yakumo while doing a marathon trip of Japan with my brother:

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?6,3779571

In the link above, the video has Class 381 arriving into Okayama (deadhead), starting at 1:17.

Off topic, but Stenzeit asked a question on the catenary portals in the link above, and I might have an answer. The "sheet metal" is actually netting to prevent birds nesting. Not all catenary portals need them, especially those with triangular cross sections with the "corner" on the bottom. Those with rectangular cross sections have enough "support" and area on the bottom where birds can get too comfortable.

Last of the Class 381 were officially retired from revenue service on June 15th of this year. They were replaced by Class 273s, which continue the use of tilt technology:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/273_series

That's it for the report, although I may post more details as necessary.

Well, there's a lot of "food for thought" in your two posts above on the 381's:

-  I was confused at first to your Talgo reference;  then I realized you were referring just to the Talgo Pendular.  The original Talgo concept relied upon articulation for body / axle steering through curves;  as I recall the 591 was articulated, but interestingly the production 381's were not.

-  I don't think the 591 made its debut until late in 1970.  The full size passive tilt experiments JNR conducted in the late '60's used modified older stock;  I think the details were in the issue of Japan Railfan Magazine  that had the 591 as its "cover girl";  I''ll have to find that issue.

-  I missed my only two chances to photograph the 591:  In February 1971 I was traveling into Sendai, and saw the 591 -- but I was seated on the wrong side of the train.  Later that day leaving the same way I made sure to sit on that side -- not realizing the the layover tracks were between the two main tracks, so I was still on the wrong side.   Grrr.

-  Yes, I think the styling with the elevated cab atop the "nose" was strictly for the image, rather than safety.  JNR wanted a complete new image when it introduced its new Kodama service in 1958 on the now fully electrified Tokyo - Osaka run, and what better way than to emulate the look of the finest and fastest trains in the world, the USA [ How times have changed...]  And the coincidental appearance of the first generation German and Dutch/Swiss TEE's didn't hurt.  [ 1958 also saw Kinki's initial Vista Cars, which had a much more US dome-car-look, unlike its later ones which were more bilevels.]  The 151 class nose was also replicated, though less successfully, on the initial batch of Class 80 dmu's, but never reappeared on additional tranches.  I think the 151-look for the top rank expresses was kept for marketing and political reasons, so that other lines radiating from Tokyo could be seen to be receiving equal equipment and expenditures -- yet the 157 reverted to a more typical cab end, though nicely done.

-  I thought the high water mark for the Kodama-look were the all First / Green Car control trailers of 1960, complete with the 'conference room';  see photo.  I am amazed that none of these seem to have been preserved (?).

-  I think it might be better to say ( opinion ) the the elevated cab styling of the 591 and 381 stemmed from the 581 day or night sets, which were MU'd.  This seems to have been the intent for the 381's;  how often was it used ?  And what were the meal arrangements on the longer versions of those sets -- was there a car with food service ?
   The 591 actually had the elevated cab at one end only;  the other had a low level cab, non-vestibuled. but quite attractive I thought.

-  Speaking of cabs:  Many or all of the 181 / 481 sets appeared to have intermediate cabs, usually in one end of a Green Car or restaurant trailer, based on provision of the headlight and tail lights -- or were there no controls other than perhaps a brake valve/horn, for backup moves in shop areas ?  What was I seeing there ?

Best regards, SZ

---

Steinzeit2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> -  I don't think the 591 made its debut until
> late in 1970.  The full size passive tilt
> experiments JNR conducted in the late '60's used
> modified older stock;  I think the details were
> in the issue of Japan Railfan Magazine  that had
> the 591 as its "cover girl";  I''ll have to find
> that issue.

Always appreciate your accurate input, since you lived your era (Steinzeit Era) and I didn't. Tough to find good photos of 591, but further digging based on your post seems to confirm that 591 did debut in 1970, and that it had high cab on one end, and low cab on the other. I am still looking for a photo of the train set before 591 that tilting technology was tested on.

> -  Yes, I think the styling with the elevated cab
> atop the "nose" was strictly for the image, rather
> than safety.

For the first generation "Bonnet Tokkyu" like Class 151, I agree that the looks was a factor. But the dual-ended 591 (high cab one end, low cab the other end) was a test bed for whether engineer was willing to sacrifice visibility for safety, is what I read somewhere. I'll have to find that article if I still can.

I know that safety from collison was a big concern in the 1960s and 1970s - look how from Class 101 EMU to Class 103 EMU, the front cab windows got smaller and higher, with the second generation Class 103 being obvious compared to the first generation. So that must have been a factor to pick 591's high cab end as a basis for the 183 and 581 limited express train sets.

Apperance-wise, the high cab would have made the top of the cab cars "flush" with the high roof from the triple-decker sleeper beds of the 581s/583s. So for that train set, the design choice makes sense. I might post a quick report on the 581/583, which I rode in revenue service about two decades ago before they were retired.

> This seems to have been the intent for the
> 381's;  how often was it used ?  And what were
> the meal arrangements on the longer versions of
> those sets -- was there a car with food service ?

I found one nostalgia blog that mentions the Kiha 181 DMU with a food car, which was going to disappear due to electrification (July 1982) and replacement of 181 DMUs with 381 EMUs. This is on the Hakubi Line. So far, there's no hint that 381s came with a meal car like on 151s... but I'm still looking for more info.

> -  Speaking of cabs:  Many or all of the 181 /
> 481 sets appeared to have intermediate cabs,
> usually in one end of a Green Car or restaurant
> trailer, based on provision of the headlight and
> tail lights -- or were there no controls other
> than perhaps a brake valve/horn, for backup moves
> in shop areas ?  What was I seeing there ?
>
> Best regards, SZ

Seems the 581s also had an intermediate cab car. Having to move the Green Car or restaurant car around in a consist might make sense, if a train set was assigned to different services and the schedule had posted different positions for those cars for each service. That's just my speculation.

cchan006 Wrote:

........... I know that safety from collison was a big concern
> in the 1960s and 1970s - look how from Class 101
> EMU to Class 103 EMU, the front cab windows got
> smaller and higher, with the second generation
> Class 103 being obvious compared to the first
> generation. So that must have been a factor to
> pick 591's high cab end as a basis for the 183 and
> 581 limited express train sets........

I didn't recall the 101 and 103 cab ends being much different, so I looked at photos of the 103 class online, and I see what you mean about second generation 103's.  Apparently the higher and smaller front windows were due to raising the engineer's position to a higher level to allow ATC equipment to be placed there;  I presume this means under the floor, but it might also mean along the inside front wall, or a combination.  Some of the newer builds did not have the ATC equipment, but the configuration was  retained to permit eventual installation as well as production commonality.  [  It was also a surprise to see  some 103 cab cars with front doors ! ]  I imagine the ATC equipment installation still had good access for maintainability;  I was impressed with that feature of JNR emu's compared with contemporary US practice, especially the Metroliners.

While the elevated cab did increase safety on one hand, it also decreased it on another:  visibility immediately in front of the vehicle was impaired.  I know the Nagoya Rwy on their elevated cab cars installed a TV camera with a small screen in the cab to cover that blind spot,  and perhaps other private roads did too [ NSE ? ];  I think JNR was at least considering it for the 581's, but that's strictly from memory.  In my opinion I believe JNR continued with some high cab vehicles for two reasons:  It permitted the intercommunication between sets, and/or it was the "new LEX look".

Best, SZ