Class 66. Why so unpopular?

[andrewmay]

Why does everyone seem to hate the class 66's?

Biased or unbiased answers are welcome...

 

[christopher]

I think its because they got rid of all the good locos like 47s etc

 

[Craig]

Generally because they're seen to have replace 'better' traction.

Personally I don't mind them, they can look decent in a photo and the alternative would probably either be something just as bland or nothing at all.

 

[TheSlash]

I'm not a fan of the "Ying ying ying ying ying"

 

[andrewmay]

Wow, I was expecting all sorts of irrational arguments. Nice to see that some people have the sense to see the real reasons.

Anyone got anything about how sheds perform such as failure rates or if drivers prefer them to older traction?

 

[37402]

For so called 'rail enthusiasts' people ain't half funny going on about how much they hate them. OK they're not the best thing since sliced bread, but without them you'd almost certainly not have as much freight on the rails, or even the diversity in the industry that you have today (companies such as DRS, Fastline etc etc).

You could say the same about companies too. Why do 'enthusiasts' enjoy criticising EWS? Because they replaced their favourite loco's. Imagine if DRS decided to bin their 'heritage fleet'...hock:

 

[will1337]

They are far, far too many. I rarely see anything else and saw one today which seemed to make virtually no noise at all.

 

[Phoenix]

I honestly think there not all that bad yes it does get quite annoying seeing them as much as i do but you learn to appriciate them and well if people want heritage traction so bad get some gen or go to a diesel gala.

Plus although shed number's are extremly high the same used to be said about the 47's and 86's.
Finally Rat's ......why were they called that......because they were as common as them.

 

[37402]

Anyone got anything about how sheds perform such as failure rates or if drivers prefer them to older traction?

Failure rates are company sensitive, so would very much doubt if that kind of info is in the public domain. However, as a rough guide, when they were first introduced the EWS 66s replaced the older traction on a 1 in, 3 out basis such was the increase in availability they offered.

As for the second question, depends on the driver really...if it's a crank then probably not, but if its a 'normal' then probably.

 

[djw1981]

Driver's have issues with the cab noise, air conditioning, seating position and lack of seat suspension, vibrations in the cl 66s.

 

[Tom B]

I think its because they got rid of all the good locos like 47s etc

The same was said when 47s (or Brush Type 4) were introduced...!

I'm sure that in 30, 40 years or so, people will be mourning how those good locos like 66s are getting withdrawn.

 

[gingerheid]

People who hate something tend to get (and give themselves) more air time than people that just don't mind something.

One day all things pass and are missed. What do you think will have a preservation campaign in it's honour first? A Voyager or a shed?

 

[Respite]

I'm sure that in 30, 40 years or so, people will be mourning how those good locos like 66s are getting withdrawn.

66's will never last 30 years! The things rust from inside to out like 1980's datsun's. I hate them for a lot of reason's, some listed already. They are horrible to drive, noisy, cheap & feel like being sat in a freightliner container sat on a wooden stool. 66's are not a loco that is good or anything near that, they are just a result of the nature of modern railways........The kind of mentality that decides "we need a loco now, we dont care how long or short they will last as they are disposable. Besides some other company will probably buy us out before they are expired".


My parents have a nice chest of drawers that's about 100 years old, finely designed & made by craftsmen. My step father looks after it & oils the slide's & hinges & it functions perfectly. Now of course he could just run the chest of drawers into the ground, spend no time looking after it & wreck it then claim it was sh*t & life expired. He could then go out to Ikea & buy some crappy cheap plywood & formica chest of drawers because they are old & may not live for that much longer so when it's life expired in about 5 years it won't matter. Besides it's cheap & hold's clothes, after all that is it's purpose & it's disposable. But if they do live for longer than 5 years, they will have to go back to Ikea & buy another one, then maybe another one if they live that long etc etc. Or they could of just not abused & bodged the finely made old one in the first place & they would then have something valuable to show for their effort.

There thats how best to describe 66's IMHO.

 

[djw1981]

What do you think will have a preservation campaign in it's honour first? A Voyager or a shed?

It depends which fleet is withdrawn first......

Interesting the number of people who now say that they didn't take pictures of cl47, or old wagons back in the 1980's and 1990's because they were modern and dull and that the cl25, 26, Westerns etc were more interesting Yes now, the sniff of a cl47 on a tour gets the photographers out. Maybe with the coming of the project genesis loco for heavy haul, we will one rue our failure to record the cl60, 67, 90, 92's and even 66's in the same way?

 

[5872]

Class 66s are hellfire in my opinion.

 

[Jordy]

I get very bored of seeing the same old thing over and over again, where there is a bit of variety, for example if you get Freightliner, EWS and GBRF 66s, then its not half as bad, but when there is a constant stream of maroon after maroon after maroon, you get rather bored of it!

Then again, I don't like the yinging either, and I don't think they're the best train to look at! But at the end of they day, they may have saved freight to some extent, and thats good!!

Jordy

 

[P156KWJ]

Enthusiast's point of view: I hate them. They are cheap Canadian trash. I get really bored of seeing the same 2 TnT on the NR ballast cleaner

Freight hauler's POV: They are extremely reliable, are economically viable with fuel and other running costs, and their availability is extremely flexible.

By the way, I'm not a FOC owner

 

[Phoenix]

It
we will one rue our failure to record the cl60, 67, 90, 92's and even 66's in the same way?

Im alright in that department I try to take as many stock images as possible

 

[33056]

Don't hate them, they are just boring as they are everywhere and fairly heavily silenced. Now if they sounded like Irish Rail 071s, Spanish 333s etc......

 

[Aureol]

...They are extremely reliable......and their availability is extremely flexible.

They are? hock:
I was under the impression that they are falling apart, and have been since day 1.
And they're not particularly flexible either, having a very poor Route Availability of 7. They have to be replaced by 60s, 37s or 47s on certain parts of the Network due to their high axle loading. And they're not very strong either, they can only pull relatively short trains compared to what a 60 can do.

Class 66s are hellfire in my opinion.

Everything built after 1995 is hellfire in your opinion....and 73s :roll:

 

[driver9000]

They were under threat of being blacked by ASLEF last year due to the utterly poor condition of the cabs, too hot and uncomfortable seating etc. Im not a fan of the 66 but for the job they were built to do they seem right at home hauling massive heavy trains along at around 70mph, in my minds eye I can often see 2x37s hauling the Tesco train and 56s hauling coal trains instead of the 66 I see pass by

 

[class 313]

Everything built after 1995 is hellfire in your opinion....and 73s :roll:

But Baggy, 455s were built early and mid-1980s.

 

[37402]

And they're not particularly flexible either, having a very poor Route Availability of 7. They have to be replaced by 60s, 37s or 47s on certain parts of the Network due to their high axle loading.

Much as I'm not the greatest fan, they are a very flexible loco; almost a nationwide class (with a few speed restrictions here and there). I've never known replacement by a duff for weight reasons, and as for a 60...they are even heavier! 66's are fine for the majority of freight traffic we have in this country.

Shame they are let down by the shoddy build quality (although this seems to be a bigger issue only in the later batches - this latest batch for GB were broke before they even arrived on the docks at Newport...the quote from someone commissioning them was 'never seen a brand new loco with so many faults') and poor cab environment. Wonder what the unions will make of the 'progress' in the cab mod programme come the summer...hock:

And they're not very strong either, they can only pull relatively short trains compared to what a 60 can do.

Absolute rubbish. For a start they are designed for completely different things; 60s are a heavy freight loco - lower top speed, gearing to give more 'grunt' at a low speed, whereas a 66 is a more general freight loco.

People tend to think that, because there are 50x60s in traffic, that the 50x60s are actually needed. In reality it probably is something like 25x60s and the other 25 are 'making up the numbers' and could be replaced by 66s if another batch were to be ordered. Think back a few of years to when EWS cut the 60 fleet total right back; that is how many are actually required for their haulage capability.

Finally, for a loco approx 10 years old with no overhaul carried out and worked as hard as both FL and EWS 66s are, availability still at around 85-90% is previously unheard of in the UK.

 

[P156KWJ]

But Baggy, 455s were built early and mid-1980s.

next it'll be that 390s or 377s are hellfire hock:

 

[RJ]

But Baggy, 455s were built early and mid-1980s.

He didn't mention anything about trains built before 1995...

 

[P156KWJ]

He didn't mention anything about trains built before 1995...

no, he's saying that fred likes 455s (a lot) and baggy was saying that fred likes trains built post 1995

 

[RJ]

no, he's saying that fred likes 455s (a lot) and baggy was saying that fred likes trains built post 1995

Saying everything built after 1995 is hellfire doesn't necessarily mean trains built before 1995 are not.

Its like me saying I think all EE locos are hellfire, but also thinking 52s are hellfire at the same time.

 

[Mintona]

Got that one wrong there RJ...all Sulzer locos are hellfire, as are 52s.

 

[RJ]

All Sulzers hock:. I quite like 33s though :razz:

 

[Mintona]

All Sulzers indeed, 47s are far better than anything EE ever churned out. Well, I reckon so anyway.