FGW 57/6 (and DRS 57/3)s Unreliability

[Ash Bridge]

Perhaps DBS should do some stealth marketing by positioning some 67s in suitable locations to act as thunderbirds. With current 57 reliability, it should only take a few days before the opportunity presents itself for them to prove their suitability via rescuing, with the extra weight of a dead 57 to demonstrate that their locos could cope with ease.

Do you work for The DBS marketing team by any chance?(Good idea btw)

 

[alexl92]

Semi-serious question: With at least 6 Class 50s in service (and at least 4 of those currently mainline certified but with little work) what are the stumbling blocks to hiring 50s as an interim measure, aside from Driver knowledge?
Is it an entirely stupid and inconceivable plan or could there be some mileage in it if there was the appetite from FGW?

 

[83G/84D]

Semi-serious question: With at least 6 Class 50s in service (and at least 4 of those currently mainline certified but with little work) what are the stumbling blocks to hiring 50s as an interim measure, aside from Driver knowledge?
Is it an entirely stupid and inconceivable plan or could there be some mileage in it if there was the appetite from FGW?

From what I recall about the Class 50's when they were in service, they were rather prone to main generator and traction motor flashovers.

 

[221129]

From what I recall about the Class 50's when they were in service, they were rather prone to main generator and traction motor flashovers.

Indeed I believe the class 50s were not best known for their reliability.

Also again the issues with the drivers signing them.

 

[CC 72100]

if there was the appetite from FGW?

I think this is what it all boils down to. That and £.

Unfortunately for as long as they use 57s they are in a tight spot, DRS can within reason give them whichever machine they want, and if DRS want to keep the 'good' ones back for use on their more valuable contracts then they can do. Surely any long-term contact with Network rail etc. is likely to be deemed more important than ad-hoc hire-ins.

 

[Ash Bridge]

I think this is what it all boils down to. That and £.

Unfortunately for as long as they use 57s they are in a tight spot, DRS can within reason give them whichever machine they want, and if DRS want to keep the 'good' ones back for use on their more valuable contracts then they can do. Surely any long-term contact with Network rail etc. is likely to be deemed more important than ad-hoc hire-ins.

Well, I guess that just leaves us with either a pair of 37/4s, or Deltic haulage now then

 

[221129]

Well, I guess that just leaves us with either a pair of 37/4s, or Deltic haulage now then

Not going to happen.

 

[RobShipway]

If there is a change from the class 57 haulage, it is more likely to be to back to class 47 or to Class 67 loco's.

 

[221129]

It won't be 47... It will likely be 67s or 68s but most likely 67s

 

[CosherB]

Well, I guess that just leaves us with either a pair of 37/4s, or Deltic haulage now then

Time to look forward, not back. The options as I see them for FGW (plenty of blue-sky thinking here):

1) Status quo, with FGW using their 57/6's with hire-in 57/3's as required (doesn't have to be DRS....)
2) FGW sell their 57/6's (to a ROSCO?) and lease in all locos - be that 57/3 or /6, 67, 68 etc.
3) Once the GW line is electrified, 90's or 92's can be used for the electrified part of the route (in a similar manner to the Caledonian Sleeper) with diesels for the remainder.
4) Purchase / lease bi-mode locos (although Class 88's might be short of power in diesel mode)
5) Form a micro-fleet of converted HST power cars, once cascaded by IEP, to top-and-tail suitable for use with Mk3 stock (i.e. loco electrical system changes).
6) FGW procure generator cars (either as carriages or converted Mk 3 DVTs) for each set and can then use pretty much anything to haul the trains.
7) Procure new trains (long term).

Using stock even older than the 57's is not a credible solution. How hard can it be to find 4 reliable locos??!!

 

[Ash Bridge]

Time to look forward, not back. The options as I see them for FGW (plenty of blue-sky thinking here):

1) Status quo, with FGW using their 57/6's with hire-in 57/3's as required (doesn't have to be DRS....)
2) FGW sell their 57/6's (to a ROSCO?) and lease in all locos - be that 57/3 or /6, 67, 68 etc.
3) Once the GW line is electrified, 90's or 92's can be used for the electrified part of the route (in a similar manner to the Caledonian Sleeper) with diesels for the remainder.
4) Purchase / lease bi-mode locos (although Class 88's might be short of power in diesel mode)
5) Form a micro-fleet of converted HST power cars, once cascaded by IEP, to top-and-tail suitable for use with Mk3 stock (i.e. loco electrical system changes).
6) FGW procure generator cars (either as carriages or converted Mk 3 DVTs) for each set and can then use pretty much anything to haul the trains.
7) Procure new trains (long term).

Using stock even older than the 57's is not a credible solution. How hard can it be to find 4 reliable locos??!!

I do agree of course, the comment about heritage traction was in jest. Option 6 seems like a very sensible suggestion, especially given the advantage that the train retains its ETS should there be a traction failure etc. and obviously like you say anything could haul it, subject to driver knowledge of course.

 

[RobShipway]

I do agree of course, the comment about heritage traction was in jest. Option 6 seems like a very sensible suggestion, especially given the advantage that the train retains its ETS should there be a traction failure etc. and obviously like you say anything could haul it, subject to driver knowledge of course.

Option 6 is best in the short term.

In the long term, I think that the Night Riviera coaching is probably going to be replaced, What would be the best options currently to do this?

 

[crewmeal]

I don't see the problem with 67's. Don't forget the NR is only 6 coaches long similar to the Cally Sleeper portions. Surely there should be no problems over the banks of Devon?

 

[CC 72100]

I don't see the problem with 67's. Don't forget the NR is only 6 coaches long similar to the Cally Sleeper portions. Surely there should be no problems over the banks of Devon?

7 coaches long is the standard formation (2 seated, 1 buffet, 4 sleepers) although it goes up to 8 at peak times - there is spare seated coaches and a spare sleeper IIRC.

 

[PHILIPE]

1A40 failed Thatcham last night due to hot axle on 57306, which then crawled at reduced speed to Reading where train was terminated.

 

[CC 72100]

1A40 failed Thatcham last night due to hot axle on 57306, which then crawled at reduced speed to Reading where train was terminated.

And so it continues.... :roll:

 

[trac]

I think this is what it all boils down to. That and £.

Unfortunately for as long as they use 57s they are in a tight spot, DRS can within reason give them whichever machine they want, and if DRS want to keep the 'good' ones back for use on their more valuable contracts then they can do. Surely any long-term contact with Network rail etc. is likely to be deemed more important than ad-hoc hire-ins.

It seems that the initial faults with these locos doesn't get fully resolved so that the same problem keeps causing repeat failures. If we don't include normal wear and tear issues then surely the regular inspections will allow them to anticipate faults as these locos should be a known quantity by now. Is this a case of sweating the assests to keep costs down? Speaking hypothetically, I would be quite embarrased if my locos kept failing!

 

[fgwrich]

7 coaches long is the standard formation (2 seated, 1 buffet, 4 sleepers) although it goes up to 8 at peak times - there is spare seated coaches and a spare sleeper IIRC.

Which is soon about to go up again with an additional MK3 SLEP & TSO joining the fleet and returning to traffic within the next few months. The first DfT led spec one is to return in March which should be DfT led in livery only and not in Interior. Once the additional coaches have joined the fleet, the spares will be in use more as well to bolster both rakes, leaving only a BFO as the spare open coach.

 

[PHILIPE]

57306 ran at 10mph max to Kennet Loop and appears to be waiting for a wheel skate movement.

 

[CC 72100]

Which is soon about to go up again with an additional MK3 SLEP & TSO joining the fleet and returning to traffic within the next few months. The first DfT led spec one is to return in March which should be DfT led in livery only and not in Interior. Once the additional coaches have joined the fleet, the spares will be in use more as well to bolster both rakes, leaving only a BFO as the spare open coach.

Is that to take it up to 3 seated, 1 buffet and 5 sleeping then?

 

[matchmaker]

7 coaches long is the standard formation (2 seated, 1 buffet, 4 sleepers) although it goes up to 8 at peak times - there is spare seated coaches and a spare sleeper IIRC.

The Inverness and Aberdeen portions go up to 8 coaches. A 67 seems to manage ok over Slochd and Drumochter!

 

[PHILIPE]

57602 ran from Old Oak Common to collect the Sleeper Stock and 57306 left where it was assuming a wheel skate job.

 

[Blaahh]

I was impressed watching 57602, it ran for at least two hours without failing!

 

[PHILIPE]

57306 apparently at Reading Traincare Depot.

 

[richw]

They might go ok tonight. FGWs own locos on both the up and down tonight.
It seems looking back to only be the hire ins that are failing. Fgw only locos when they are fit to be sent out seem to perform ok.
57604 is on the up 57602 on the down. 57604 even had a day out to Laira complete with all the coaches as a penzance to Laira and back ECS today.

 

[CosherB]

They might go ok tonight. FGWs own locos on both the up and down tonight.
It seems looking back to only be the hire ins that are failing. Fgw only locos when they are fit to be sent out seem to perform ok.
57604 is on the up 57602 on the down. 57604 even had a day out to Laira complete with all the coaches as a penzance to Laira and back ECS today.

So the upshot is that the reputation of the Night Riviera has been dented with the paying public, and the reputation of DRS for supplying hire-in locos has been badly affected (considering that this is one of their core businesses). I hope DRS have been shamed into letting FGW have their 57's on the cheap for all of the aggro that they've given, when the whole point of getting DRS locos was the complete opposite.

Can you imagine thre response by a TOC manager wanting to hire in a DRS loco in future, to the offer "We have a 57/3 you can have at short notice ....."

 

[Ash Bridge]

All gone very quiet from FGWland regarding the 57s, is it right to assume the FGW 57/6 fleet are back to full strength and running reliably, and therefore no need for unreliable DRS hire ins?

 

[fgwrich]

As far as I'm aware of 605 is still in Derby, but the fleet is running reliably with 602/603 & 604. 604 Being the most reliable of the fleet anyway.

 

[Ash Bridge]

As far as I'm aware of 605 is still in Derby, but the fleet is running reliably with 602/603 & 604. 604 Being the most reliable of the fleet anyway.

That's good! Carry like this and those (rumoured) 67 replacements won't be necessary then thanks for the update Rich.

 

[87015]

As far as I'm aware of 605 is still in Derby, but the fleet is running reliably with 602/603 & 604. 604 Being the most reliable of the fleet anyway.

Apart from 604 throwing a fit last Wednesday night, obviously