It is all personal taste I guess. I despise 150/1's more than any other Northern Unit, my mate who drives them preferes them to any other train. Ha ha. There is no right or wrong, only opinion. My friend prefers banking with Barclays, I have worked in finance for decades and think Barclays are the scum of the earth. Who am I to tell my mate he is wrong. Ha ha.
-
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
It is all personal taste I guess. I despise 150/1's more than any other Northern Unit, my mate who drives them preferes them to any other train. Ha ha. There is no right or wrong, only opinion. My friend prefers banking with Barclays, I have worked in finance for decades and think Barclays are the scum of the earth. Who am I to tell my mate he is wrong. Ha ha.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Beveridges
Established Member
The ex LM 150s look horrible inside it must be said.
How could anyone prefer a 150/2 over a 150/1? The few differences between them are all in the 150/1s favour.
How could anyone prefer a 150/2 over a 150/1? The few differences between them are all in the 150/1s favour.
Last edited:
It depends on how much Crack you've had. Neither are very nice.
150/2s are better looking (externally) and more useful (thanks to the corridor connection on the cabs). I agree neither are very nice to travel on though.
Photohunter71
Member
Just had a read of the link you sent.That certainly makes interesting reading. I was intrigued to read that they see the class 68's as "part of a component of a wider DRS fleet strategy", I'm thinking that the 68's and 88's aren't the only new loco's they will be obtaining.
Beveridges
Established Member
I think they are. The wider fleet strategy could include getting more 37s up and running. If I remember right they recently bought a fleet of "heavyweight" 37/7s for specific uses such as ballast jobs and other heavier flows. These are part of the wider fleet strategy as well. Its fair to say DRS are one of the big players now, easily the 3rd biggest FOC in the UK and may only be behind Freightliner and DB Schenker for so long. They are also starting to use 92s. The future fleet strategy does not seem to start and end at 68s and 88s.
Last edited:
Good stuff, it will be nice if hideous traction isn't part of company policy. Ha ha.
Freightmaster
Verified Rep
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 4,424
Easily the 3rd biggest???
hock:hock:hock:Not sure how you work that out, but GBRf operate more than three times
as many trains than DRS per day (with more new flows to come in 2014),
whereas DRS is expected to stagnate in 2014 (losses will balance any gains).
Just because they have dozens of locos sat around doing very little
doesn't make them a 'big player', I'm afraid...
MARK
Beveridges
Established Member
Easily the 3rd biggest???
Not sure how you work that out, but GBRf operate more than three times
as many trains than DRS per day (with more new flows to come in 2014),
whereas DRS is expected to stagnate in 2014 (losses will balance any gains).
Just because they have dozens of locos sat around doing very little
doesn't make them a 'big player', I'm afraid...
MARK
I'm sure DRS run more thans than GBRF and they certainly have a larger fleet. How can DRS be expected to stagnate what with the new 68s and 88s on the way plus the recent acquisition of 92s and 37/7s ?
As for the "locomotives sitting around doing nothing", GBRFs 73s were not doing a great deal last time I checked, and their 92 fleet (6 locomotives) only deals with one flow per day to/from Trafford Park, and it doesn't even run every day!
Last edited:
captainbigun
Member
- Joined
- 3 May 2009
- Messages
- 977
You seem to be equating size of fleet with number of trains.
As FM has stated GBRf are way way bigger than DRS. He's looking at paths which is an actual way of measuring number of regular services. For 2014 the pathing differential with losses and gains leaves things stagnant.
They haven't acquired the 92s, they are on hire, they'll go back once they get their 88s (whenever that will be). They've had no choice but to take the 92s as it's the only tool available to do the Tesco job.
68s and 88s will come and other locos will go to make room. These new locos will have to be in use 24/7 to pay for themselves. Cheerio to 37s and 47s.
GBs 92s do the flows that they need to do, not all 6 are operational. The intermodal runs weekdays. The 73s see use when they need to see use.
Have you not noticed that the majority of the DRS fleet spends most of its time doing diddly squat?!
Last edited:
Beveridges
Established Member
66s? Or 68s looking at the latest photo they look hideous head-on.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Paths don't mean more trains especially where coal is involved. If I did a TRUST report for the busiest location in the country for freight (Barentby) it shows 13+ paths per hour, yet only 5 or 6 of those run. By far most of the cancelled paths are coal trains, which happens to be GBRFs main area.
The DRS fleet is used as required.
Last edited:
captainbigun
Member
- Joined
- 3 May 2009
- Messages
- 977
Ha ha.
Very scientific. If you want to believe DRS are the best thing after sliced bread, by all means do so, don't let facts get in the way.
A look at the companies accounts should give a fairly quick answer...
captainbigun
Member
- Joined
- 3 May 2009
- Messages
- 977
Mmm, but DRS is subsidiary of NDA which is in turn Government funded so not sure what it'll tell you for DRS.
Beveridges
Established Member
Those nuclear trains make a lot of money. Far, far more than coal.
captainbigun
Member
- Joined
- 3 May 2009
- Messages
- 977
Exactly, but they aren't tendered, so you cannot compare. Looking at the remainder of the DRS portfolio, how does it stack up against GB/FL/DB or even Colas?
Beveridges
Established Member
God it does look ugly in that photo, I don't know if its the DRS livery or the angle, but it looked OK in that video where it was on test pre-repaint
Sunbird24
Member
It has not been repainted!
68001 was outshopped in Vossloh White livery and sent to Velim where it is still white!
68002 was painted in full DRS livery before the unveiling ceremony.
Beveridges
Established Member
The white 68 looked better
Photohunter71
Member
it looks seriously P****d off,as though hauling stuff was an inconvenience to it!
Sunbird24
Member
Maybe, but I'll reserve judgement until I see them in the flesh, so to speak. Photographs can often distort the truth!
Royston Vasey
Established Member
Well I like it.
The prominent side grilles remind me of the Brush Falcon!
The prominent side grilles remind me of the Brush Falcon!
cj_1985
Member
Sorry if I have missed the answer to this in the thread, but I think I have checked thoroughly, has there been any mention of how 68002 and its "Sisters" will be delivered to the UK from Vossloh, Road, Rail or Sea?
Freightmaster
Verified Rep
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 4,424
Really? In case you hadn't noticed, it's my job to know exactly what freight
trains run on a day to day basis (rather than just paths), and taking this week
as an example, DRS are running an average of 40 trains a day, including any
test trains they supply locos for, while GBRf operate more than 140!
Quite easily! The 68s are a speculative purchase, aimed as they are
at gaining passenger hire work, but no such contracts have actually
been won by DRS yet, so they are a something of a gamble!
For clarification, the GBRf class 92s have three diagrams:
1. Ipswich yard to Trafford Park and return (runs five days a week)
2. Mossend to Carlisle and return (runs five days a week)
3. Daventry to Italy (runs two or three nights a week)
...and GB are also expected to take over the Dagenham Ford traffic soon,
which will utilise another class 92.
Basically, DRS have spent the past decade 'playing trains',
which they have got away with until recently (mainly due
their 'captive' nuclear traffic), but the market has recently
become far more competitive/demanding, so they are now
having to play catch up with the other FOCs.
Hopefully, the 'halo effect' of the new class 68s will be just
what they need to be taken seriously by potential customers,
and they will start winning new traffic flows as a result.
MARK
captainbigun
Member
- Joined
- 3 May 2009
- Messages
- 977
Well put FM.
I've still not worked out what happens if they don't win any of the up coming tenders for passenger work. The 88s are clearly aimed at the sleeper, but they aren't the only party bidding, there's no guarantee they'll win! In fact I am not even sure the 88s would arrive for the start of that contract.
I've still not worked out what happens if they don't win any of the up coming tenders for passenger work. The 88s are clearly aimed at the sleeper, but they aren't the only party bidding, there's no guarantee they'll win! In fact I am not even sure the 88s would arrive for the start of that contract.
Beveridges
Established Member
Yes Freightmaster but I also happen to have access to TOPS/TRUST/GENIUS as well so all the information all there in front of me.
Have you not considered the fact that DRS have high profile contracts such as Virgin Thunderbird when you made your 40 trains vs 140 comparison ?
Good thing you made your comparison just after the RHTT season ends, something DRS specialise in while GBRF do not seem to have a large enough fleet to even consider this work!
Or that most of DRS's nuclear and Intermodal services travel at least 8 times further than (for example) a GBRF coal train out of Immingham which is a very typical GBRF flow.
Have you included DRS locos being used on Charter trains / charter ECS moves in your statistics ?
Plus, a single nuclear train has got to be worth more than 20 coal trains put together, have you considered that?
Have you not considered the fact that DRS have high profile contracts such as Virgin Thunderbird when you made your 40 trains vs 140 comparison ?
Good thing you made your comparison just after the RHTT season ends, something DRS specialise in while GBRF do not seem to have a large enough fleet to even consider this work!
Or that most of DRS's nuclear and Intermodal services travel at least 8 times further than (for example) a GBRF coal train out of Immingham which is a very typical GBRF flow.
Have you included DRS locos being used on Charter trains / charter ECS moves in your statistics ?
Plus, a single nuclear train has got to be worth more than 20 coal trains put together, have you considered that?
Last edited:
cj_1985
Member
So crewing thunderbirds and not having regular moves, other than moves to and from stabling locations should count as daily services... even if the Thunderbirds are used on rescue work for VT, should they count as that would be passenger work and not freight.
Obviously people will have different definitions for what makes X and Y operator the larger or smaller... but I would agree with the view of daily hauled trains defining which operator is bigger.
Last edited:
Beveridges
Established Member
Number of trains ran is flawed without even considering distances travelled, value of the goods moved (compare nuclear to coal) or the time of year. Plus, thunderbird/passenger work contributes to the size of the FOC as they are supplying the crews and, more importantly, the locomotives.
Consider the distance the average DRS freight train covers compared to the average GBRF one. DRS are ****ing huge there aren't many parts of the UK where they don't go!
DRS certainly are one the "big players" and they have plenty of spare locos in their current fleet to cope with future expansion, thats not even including the new locos.
Consider the distance the average DRS freight train covers compared to the average GBRF one. DRS are ****ing huge there aren't many parts of the UK where they don't go!
DRS certainly are one the "big players" and they have plenty of spare locos in their current fleet to cope with future expansion, thats not even including the new locos.
Last edited:
cj_1985
Member
Well I don't know about anyone else... but I don't know the cost/value of a train of Nuclear rods, versus the cost/value of a train load of containers or a train of coal.... so a bit hard to seriously use that as a viable point of comparison,
captainbigun
Member
- Joined
- 3 May 2009
- Messages
- 977
This is turning into a McFly moment (old enough to know Back to the Future?!).
Spare locos does not equate to more trains. You're comparing a mixed fleet of 37s/47s with fleets of 66s. There's no comparison in the work those fleets can achieve. You need more 37s/47s as they fail more often.
It is also well known that some, at least, of the older locos will be replaced by 68/88.
As said before, don't let fact get in the way of your TRUST/TOPS frothing.
GB bigger than DRS. FACT.
- Status