GBRF confirms conversion of Class 56s to Class 69s

[Yorkshire09876]

Not so sure about that. Isn't this CEM ?

Isn't what CEM?

The two 56s aren't there for overhaul - they are to provide parts for the 69 project. One of them has fairly significant collision damage.

 

[ac6000cw]

The two 56s aren't there for overhaul - they are to provide parts for the 69 project. One of them has fairly significant collision damage.

(My bold) I think you've just answered the question you asked in post #1346:

A recent photo on Flickr confirms reports that 56081 has now lost its bogies as well as 56303 - both are on accommodation bogies and presumably have a doubtful future?

 

[Yorkshire09876]

(My bold) I think you've just answered the question you asked in post #1346:

Likely, but not definite - especially in the case of 56081. It's probably going to depend on how much they remove from it - if it ends up nearly complete once the 69s are all done it could still be sold for reuse.

56303 is accident damaged (drooping cab) so far less likely to be a candidate for reuse.

 

[D365]

It was reported that 081 suffered a traction motor failure, which is what put it out of traffic. Perhaps that it, and 303, are now both on accommodation bogies is a clue that 081 could be reinstated using ’spare parts’ from 303. But that is 100% speculation on my part.

 

[Nym]

It was reported that 081 suffered a traction motor failure, which is what put it out of traffic. Perhaps that it, and 303, are now both on accommodation bogies is a clue that 081 could be reinstated using ’spare parts’ from 303. But that is 100% speculation on my part.

Your implication there being that those stripping the locomotives for parts are aware of this potential intent so would be stripping something first, then later. That they'd be aware of a potential restoration to traffic of another locomotive to inform their errr, 'stripping methods', and most of all, that those doing the work give a rats behind about any of this.

 

[D365]

Your implication there being that those stripping the locomotives for parts are aware of this potential intent so would be stripping something first, then later. That they'd be aware of a potential restoration to traffic of another locomotive to inform their errr, 'stripping methods', and most of all, that those doing the work give a rats behind about any of this.

I wouldn't even know who owns the locomotives in question!

 

[Yorkshire09876]

I wouldn't even know who owns the locomotives in question!

Both owned by EMD, I believe.

 

[LUYMun]

A recent photo on Flickr confirms reports that 56081 has now lost its bogies as well as 56303 - both are on accommodation bogies and presumably have a doubtful future?

I think everything apart from 56009 had bogies when they went into Longport, and the loco scrapped for parts, 56106, also had bogies in photos of it at Leicester shortly before it was broken up, so presumably some bogies were not suitable for reuse given that they've needed to cannibalize two further locos.

Presumably for said Flickr photo: https://flic.kr/p/2qNCT8y

 

[Class15]

I can never understand the 56303 thing. It was involved in an extremely low-speed derailment, and all pictures of it show very minor collision damage, far less bad than locomotives that have been derailed (thinking of the 86 in the Watford crash). Was the actual reason for it being withdrawn that DCRail didn’t need it urgently and didn’t want to fund repairs?

 

[Yorkshire09876]

I can never understand the 56303 thing. It was involved in an extremely low-speed derailment, and all pictures of it show very minor collision damage, far less bad than locomotives that have been derailed (thinking of the 86 in the Watford crash). Was the actual reason for it being withdrawn that DCRail didn’t need it urgently and didn’t want to fund repairs?

The cab is drooping, which means the main base structure is bent - it would be a fairly big job to rectify that.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Isn't what CEM?

The two 56s aren't there for overhaul - they are to provide parts for the 69 project. One of them has fairly significant collision damage.

This was what was said

Even if they have, they wouldn't be taking bogies off the two 'spares' locos unless they needed them for the 69 project - if they were waiting for existing bogies to return they'd just leave the converted locos on accommodation bogies until the overhauled ones were ready.

It was mentioned on WNXX a while ago that the last two needed bogies to complete them.

My response about CEM was that locomotives were routinely refitted with refurbished parts from others in the class, so 56081 and 56303 could have donated wheelsets and springs to the programme, then received replacements at the end of the class 69 programme.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

This was what was said

Even if they have, they wouldn't be taking bogies off the two 'spares' locos unless they needed them for the 69 project - if they were waiting for existing bogies to return they'd just leave the converted locos on accommodation bogies until the overhauled ones were ready.

It was mentioned on WNXX a while ago that the last two needed bogies to complete them.

My response about CEM was that locomotives were routinely refitted with refurbished parts from others in the class, so 56081 and 56303 could have donated wheelsets and springs to the programme, then received replacements at the end of the class 69 programme.

The locos belong to EMD, and one has significant damage. Who would they be refurbishing them for? It's obviously not impossible, but the limited demand for 56s seems to be further dwindling, with Colas reducing their fleet.

Also, if they had suitable parts to refurbish, those would have been there longer than the time since the two 56s arrived so would be refurbished first - i.e. they wouldn't need to take bits off the 56s.

Are the bogie frames on 56s cast? If so, cracks in some of them could explain a shortage.

 

[FrontSideBus]

I saw 69010 hauling the Drax at Edge Hill yesterday. It is strange seeing a 56 with a 66 roofline and exhaust note!

 

[The_Train]

Has anybody seen any suggestions that Colas are pulling their 56s to have them converted to 69s? I know it was something that was discussed a while back (did they end up borrowing one from GB to test it in the end?) but all seems to have gone a bit quiet on that front since.

 

[D365]

Has anybody seen any suggestions that Colas are pulling their 56s to have them converted to 69s? I know it was something that was discussed a while back (did they end up borrowing one from GB to test it in the end?) but all seems to have gone a bit quiet on that front since.

Notwithstanding the fact that ~half of their 56s are currently owned by Beacon Rail, Colas hasn’t indicated anything of the sort to me. Any speculation on the future of Colas operated Class 56s would belong better in the existing speculative discussion.

 

[ac6000cw]

Are the bogie frames on 56s cast? If so, cracks in some of them could explain a shortage.

They look fabricated to me - see https://www.flickr.com/photos/36593372@N04/49627632456/in/photostream/lightbox/ (not my photo)

Another photo from a GBRf post on X - (27th March 2020) "This week saw the first fully overhauled bogie arrive at #EMD Longport from overhauler #PullmanRail Cardiff.":

 

[sbrignall72]

Just passed Longport and 69001 was on plus one in undercoat 69015?

 

[trainmania100]

69007 to Newhaven marine today. Are GBRf going to start using their marine paths soon?!

 

[50002Superb]

My photo of 013 from Monday.

It’s weird seeing them in the wild unfinished.

 

[Trainman40083]

Just passed Longport and 69001 was on plus one in undercoat 69015?

I am sure I saw a picture of a 69 at Longport, parked next to the Class 60 shell, identified as 69016.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Mar 2025 ==

Has anybody seen any suggestions that Colas are pulling their 56s to have them converted to 69s? I know it was something that was discussed a while back (did they end up borrowing one from GB to test it in the end?) but all seems to have gone a bit quiet on that front since.

I thought it was because they needed repairs, but were not required at the current time for service. I guess you only repair locos you need. The loss of the Preston bitumen traffic would render some locos spare.

 

[Ashley Hill]

My photo of 013 from Monday.

It’s weird seeing them in the wild unfinished.
View attachment 176266

Is there any speculation which livery those that require painting will carry? Im still hoping for Kestral livery.

 

[Trainman40083]

Is there any speculation which livery those that require painting will carry? Im still hoping for Kestral livery.

I guess we are not far off seeing 69014 painted.

 

[50002Superb]

I guess we are not far off seeing 69014 painted.

It’s at Arlington at the moment so shouldn’t be long now

 

[fgwrich]

It’s at Arlington at the moment so shouldn’t be long now

Imminent. It’s currently in the paintshop.

 

[FrodshamJnct]

And here is 69014:



(Image shows newly painted 69014).

 

[Class15]

And here is 69014:

View attachment 176281

(Image shows newly painted 69014).

Wow that looks absolutely incredible. And I’m sure @Ashley Hill will be pleased too!

 

[Ashley Hill]

Wow that looks absolutely incredible. And I’m sure @Ashley Hill will be pleased too!

I said it would look good. I hope everybody else likes it.

 

[Rail Quest]

I said it would look good. I hope everybody else likes it.

Looks amazing, one of my favorites so far with the 69 fleet. Makes me wonder if someone from GBRf is looking at this thread...

 

[ac6000cw]

Sorry, but the front just doesn't look right without a 4-character headcode panel... (although I assume the standard black 'GB Railfreight' logo will be put on the front).

I think the 'GBRf with Whiskers' is the best looking cl. 69 livery so far.

 

[Sun Chariot]

I think the 'GBRf with Whiskers' is the best looking cl. 69 livery so far.

Whiskers? Did someone say DP1 DELTIC for the next slass 69 "heritage" livery?

I do agree, I like the 69s' standard livery. Suits the locos and enhances the overall "look".