Freightmaster
Verified Rep
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 4,423
That's no way to talk about another forum user...
hock:...oh, I see - you were refering to the older DRS locos!
MARK
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Class 68 Progress, what's the latest?
- Thread starter Photohunter71
- Start date
- Status
hock:...oh, I see - you were refering to the older DRS locos!
MARK
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Photohunter71
Member
I wonder just how many are ready? To me from what I can see from postings,2 are complete so far.
Having spent a year working with and dealing with the crap caused by the heritage fleet I hope to see the back of it.
Why oh why do people cling on to the heritage stuff on the mainline. A 47 is all well and good plodding along at 25mph on a preserved railway. But with my professional hat on given the choice I'll be having the state of the art 2014 locomotive over the relic of the 1960s.
sprinterguy
Veteran Member
I agree. The new, revised "Compass" livery sits well on a (relatively) slab-sided loco such as the class 68. However, even the complexity of the current Compass livery does not lend itself well to locos with large numbers of grilles or equipment doors across the bodyside such as class 20s and 37s, and the new variant is in a whole different league in terms of complexity!
Last edited:
bronzeonion
Member
Drivers and shunters here, correct me if im wrong please but with a near enough central driving position with no view out of the window from each corner of the cab, would this not make it near enough impossible to see each other whilst coupling up? Also you can't drive whilst leaning out of the side window like on near enough all classes of loco up to till the 66 which surely is an important thing to be able to do whilst shunting or simply checking your load?
Loki
Member
No links to the facebook photos, yet?
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Railnuts/192967507490617?id=192967507490617&sk=photos_stream
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Railnuts/192967507490617?id=192967507490617&sk=photos_stream
Beveridges
Established Member
But those unreliable old relics have got style, still unbeaten in design, aesthetics and sound.
We have still got DRS 20s, 37s, 47s (some rebuilt as 57s). Network Rail are still using 31s and 37s(in the form of 97s). Colas are still using 47s and West Coast Railway Co are still using 33s, 37s and 47s. GBRF are still using 20s, 73s and other relics including preserved diesels. Fliner are using 86's which are of similar age and 08's continue to be used by nearly company. I think I have covered everything but there may be even more relics that I have missed.
I don't think a small fleet of 68s with DRS is going to see all that off!
The relics are here to stay - and long may it continue. The relics are here to remind people what a proper train is (i.e. not a s****y railbus like a 142!) Preserved lines are not my thing. Like several people on here I am also a professional on the real railway but don't work with the relics, but I do work with 142s and believe it is these that should go, these are the problem on the railway today, they are everything that is wrong with the modern railway, not the classic relics. If there was a job with as good T&Cs as mine that involved working with the old traction I'd leave the 142s and 15x's behind tomorrow!!
I like to see the classics on the real railway hauling real trains, seeing them on pretend railways hauling kettle stock does nothing for me.
Having said that the 68s do seem likely to be the best diesel built since the class 60.
66s? Not even worth mentioning. They are an irrelevance.
Last edited:
Except that there are more than 400 of them built for the UK, so they are numerically the new 47.... and I'd be surprised if they weren't around for another 25 years.
Trust me Beveridges, like I said I've worked with the relics and with the "modern" stuff.
The reliability of the 47s I've been working with over the last year has been abysmal. At one point I believe there were 5 Class 47s at Norwich just to ensure that if needed there would be 2 working. Almost all of the locos we used spilled some or all of their vital fluids somewhere. Still we have ones with the same recurring faults. Then there is the fact that they need two drivers because there is no automatic fire extinguisher system (I believe) in the loco not being driven from and because there is too much of a risk of the locos not starting they always need to be left idling so need the extra driver in the rear loco to operate the extinguisher system if needed. The DMUs don't do that.
As to calling the 66s irrelevant that is just ignoring facts. The 66s are the class that sounded the death knell for the vast majority of all the classes you claim are still alive and well. There are well over 400 Class 66s running, no idea of the exact figure of "heritage" locos but I doubt it is far over 100 (excluding the 57s as, lets be honest, they're not really heritage).
How about a somewhat tortured metaphor. On your flight to Spain would you want an B737, a modern state of the art foreign aircraft or a Comet, a British built relic (of similar age to the 47s) best known for randomly exploding in flight?
The reliability of the 47s I've been working with over the last year has been abysmal. At one point I believe there were 5 Class 47s at Norwich just to ensure that if needed there would be 2 working. Almost all of the locos we used spilled some or all of their vital fluids somewhere. Still we have ones with the same recurring faults. Then there is the fact that they need two drivers because there is no automatic fire extinguisher system (I believe) in the loco not being driven from and because there is too much of a risk of the locos not starting they always need to be left idling so need the extra driver in the rear loco to operate the extinguisher system if needed. The DMUs don't do that.
As to calling the 66s irrelevant that is just ignoring facts. The 66s are the class that sounded the death knell for the vast majority of all the classes you claim are still alive and well. There are well over 400 Class 66s running, no idea of the exact figure of "heritage" locos but I doubt it is far over 100 (excluding the 57s as, lets be honest, they're not really heritage).
How about a somewhat tortured metaphor. On your flight to Spain would you want an B737, a modern state of the art foreign aircraft or a Comet, a British built relic (of similar age to the 47s) best known for randomly exploding in flight?
Beveridges
Established Member
Well the 142's are expected to last at least 35 years so anything is possible!!
They are confirmed the worst bags of s**t on the railway today!
Drive a 47 then drive a 142 and tell me which you would rather have from a professional point of view!
I have recently got the chance to pay to drive a 47 on a preserved line and they are Quality compared to the 142s that I have to drive in my job.
If the 142's can keep going until 2020 then I can't see why the 47's can't. 37's are even better still.
Also - what's wrong with needing two drivers to drive a 47 ? It's creating jobs. When the modern 68's come and everything can be done by one driver what do you think is going to happen to the jobs ? That is not good from a professional point of view.
Last edited:
I personally am not too fussy regarding sound, but I agree with you that the aesthetics of the older BR diesels (esspecially 47s and 60s) are far superior to anything built since privatisation. Same story with electrics, the aesthetics of a class 91 attached the correct way round to a train of mrk4 coaches puts all the modern European electric loco efforts mooted on here in the past (Vectron, Prima, Traxx etc.) to shame.
The question is, what will they see off? As they have the gear necessary for passenger services, it is hard to guess what DRS intends to do with them. If they directly replace something already in service then the 67s look like they might be in the sights. Chiltern silver trains, thunderbird duties and the hire-ins due to shortage of DMUs (eg. Y Gerallt Gymro, Scotrail, First Great Western). Anyone know better?
Then why can't we have more 57s rather than the modern European designs with no aesthetic value? Moving parts wear out but solid metal bodyshells should last practically forever if protected from corrosion with stringent painting/maintainance provided nobody starts directing high-powered projectiles at them. Why waste finite metal supplies by building new, less attractive, bodyshells? Recycle!
142s looking like going by 2020 at the moment I think, 143s and 144s might last longer though.
Similarly if a diesel intercity train (IC125) can last almost 60 years then the electric (longer life) IC225s should make 40 easy.
Unless the second drivers are moved to more productive jobs. In theroy if you need 2 drivers per train at present you could staff twice as many trains if they only need one driver each. Or, if you're talking passenger trains, the 2nd driver could be replaced with an extra on-board member of catering/ticketing staff.
Nym
Established Member
Bodyshells and Underframes by no means last forever, nor do bogie frames.
One killer of these is structural cracking, that no amount of maintenance, corrosion protection or anything of that matter will prevent structural cracking from vibration and torsional rotation etc.
57s are Life Expired, most 47s are Life Expired, the 37s keep going because of their construction compared with the 47s and what DRS did with them a while back...
One killer of these is structural cracking, that no amount of maintenance, corrosion protection or anything of that matter will prevent structural cracking from vibration and torsional rotation etc.
57s are Life Expired, most 47s are Life Expired, the 37s keep going because of their construction compared with the 47s and what DRS did with them a while back...
A very tortured metaphor there mate, a modern 737-800 is based on a design from 1967 although massively redeveloped. A bit like a class 57 compared to a class 47 (Oddly enough the first class 57 is newer than the first 737-800). The De Havilland Comet first flew in 1949, 2 years before the first Britannia Class steam loco was built! I don't think the comparison stands in the slightest.
I meant to add, the 737-800 is actually new build, just based on an old design, I think bringing the Comet in to it was mad. Ha ha.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just one further thing, I personally don't find the class 91's in the slightest bit attractive, nor are the 60's older BR locos, they were the last class ordered by BR weren't they?
Last edited:
Aesthetics don't matter. It doesn't matter if a 47 looks nicer than a 66. The 66 is a modern locomotive which is (from a commercial pov) better in every way than a 47.
I really dont the obsession with pushing these ancient locos on instead of replacing them.
I really dont the obsession with pushing these ancient locos on instead of replacing them.
That's because there is no obsession. The big players don't use them and the smaller players use them because they are seen as more cost effective for their businesses or are better suited to their customer profile.
"smaller players" such as DRS getting modern locos to displace "heritage" ones (and make no mistake, that's exactly what they're doing- these are much lighter and a fair bit less powerful than 66s) shows that the economics for companies like that are tipping away from using cheaply available "relics".
These decisions are very much hard headed economics.
These decisions are very much hard headed economics.
Sunbird24
Member
Most of the facebook photo's were taken in areas not visible from any public vantage points. I do often see groups being shown around but have not found any information regarding this. I know a lot of delivery drivers get to go around there. The unveiling place is just inside the main inner entrance but visually blocked by the new building and there is only one public place it can be seen from, through two wire mesh fences unless you happen to be 10' tall! What you get to see on an occasional passing visit is a matter of luck!
Beveridges
Established Member
Aesthetics don't matter?! Then why did so much effort and money go into the aesthetics and design of so many locos built under BR?
Inaccurate. Not better in "every way". The 66 can only reach 75mph so the 47 is better at any duty requiring higher speeds. The 66 is also heavier and cannot provide ETH so useless for passenger work if heating or air conditioning is required.
A 156 is better than a 142 in every way, does that mean we are suddenly going to see all the 142s disapear any time soon?
Last edited:
MY guesses, design philosophy probably. Also the fact that these old British locos were all made my different companies who probably wanted to develop a "brand" in the look of their products. Its a locomotive, its not meant to look pretty. Its meant to move as much weight as efficiently as possible. A Lambo looks beautiful but a Transit is a damn sight more useful.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the maximum permitted speed of any UK freight is 75mph (Class 4 intermodals) so that's a moot point. And the 66 is a freight loco so of course it doesn't have ETH. As to their weight a 66 has the same route availability as some of the 47s. There is no counter argument to the fact they are better than the locos they replaced. If they were so bad there would not be nearly 450 of them plodding around the UK. [/quote]
Beveridges
Established Member
The classic traction fans can argue all day with the 66 / 142 fans, in the end, nothing said on here is going to change anything what anyone thinks!
All I will say is, lets hope these 68s are everything the 66 isn't (I.e. good design, aesthetics and sound), and long may the classic traction continue running on the main line as well.
All I will say is, lets hope these 68s are everything the 66 isn't (I.e. good design, aesthetics and sound), and long may the classic traction continue running on the main line as well.
Last edited:
The Citadel
Member
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 22
Many years yet for 37's. 47's on notice now. Should be around with DRS until 2020 though.
59CosG95
Established Member
I hope that is just the angle but my god that looks like it hit every branch when it fell out of the ugly tree. It looks like its got Scouse Brows over the lights.
Last edited:
59CosG95
Established Member
You think that's bad...this loco shouldn't be allowed to haul trains! http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BB22394-Antibes.jpg
IIRC, there was a horribly negative reaction to the early designs, particularly those from English Electric. "Just boxes on wheels" just about hit the mark (I ask you - did anyone actually design the 37s, 40s, 20s, 55s?:roll
. This was affecting the commercial side of BR, as the campaign was to convince the travelling public that these monstrosities were sleek and modern. Hence, for the next step the Design Panel was engaged, and came up with the much sleeker Westerns, Hymeks, and 47s. You can trace the design of the latter through the 56s and 60s, and, even today, it does not look too outdated. It was a BR brand that was being launched, which included XP64.Ha ha, not the prettiest, looks like it has a nice personality though! I remember being hauled by a PKP class EU06 from Krakow to Katowice, unless I'm much mistaken that is a Class 83 with extra lights and body panels glued on so it looks ugly. Ha ha.
Sunbird24
Member
Certainly not the most accurate of reports, the picture is clearly 68002 in full livery running on the Vossloh multi-gauge test track at Albuixech.
68001 has already been photographed at Velim still in its outshopped white livery with no markings and is scheduled for return to Vossloh for completion during Q2 next year. Refer to earlier posts here for the links to other pictures and reports.
Kneedown
Established Member
Not quite. The driving cab of a 142 is far superior than a 156's, but apart from that you're right.
Beveridges
Established Member
No the driving cab of a 156 is miles better than a 150 which is miles better than a 142. 142s are absolute bobbins when it comes to the cab. The ONLY part of a 142 cab that is superior is the 2nd mans side, which is good news for instructors but not for drivers. Apart from that they are inferior in every way possible. The drivers side is uncomfortable and extremely cramped. You have to slide the seat backwards then forwards just to get in and out of the seat, thats what I call cramped. The cab side windows are bus windows.
Last edited:
- Status