Uses for redundant Class 67s.

[jopsuk]

What about using them for a national network of express mail? They'd be ideal for it, in fact you might say they were built for it...

 

[The Planner]

I know everyone says the 67's are rubbish at everything. Well I say onone, 67015 if memory serves haul 2600 tonnes of loaded HTA hoppers of Hull Docks ABP boundary back in 2008. I was doing work experience with my brother in law and I was hanging out of a window painting the frames on a house that overlooks Hedon Road and the ABP/ Nettwork Rail boundary. It hauled it to Drax and brought the empties back to Hull were the 67 was replaced with a 66.

A 67 hauling 2600t ?!? Did it explode?

Now, I know they can't do that all the time it would kill them. But it got me thinking. Why are they not deployed on Intermodal Services to displace 66's etc to heavier duties as the growth in freight traffic makes more work.

67's have operated Intermodal before, and with ease. So why are they been faced with redundancy and possible withdrawa?

I doubt a 67 could haul 1600t of boxes at anywhere near the timings of a 66, therefore they won't get used, the fact they aren't now should tell you something.

TDK is probably the best person to tell you about the performance of the things.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What about using them for a national network of express mail? They'd be ideal for it, in fact you might say they were built for it...

On electrified tracks they've got class 325s (btw, do the 325s still have their shoes?)

 

[D365]

On electrified tracks they've got class 325s (btw, do the 325s still have their shoes?)

So with 67 haulage they have the option of taking them off the electric, should the need arise.

I vaguely recall mention of the third-rail shoes having been removed as they may not have graced Southern territories for a while now.

 

[whhistle]

Are 67s suitable at all for "Thunderbird" work?

This is what I thought.
Why not get rid of anything pre Class 60 and use 67's instead. Perhaps even look at the 60's for retirement...

However the bogie layout may be the reason...

 

[SpacePhoenix]

So with 67 haulage they have the option of taking them off the electric, should the need arise.

I vaguely recall mention of the third-rail shoes having been removed as they may not have graced Southern territories for a while now.

Did they remove all the 3rd rail stuff or just the shoes only?

 

[ExRes]

What about using them for a national network of express mail? They'd be ideal for it, in fact you might say they were built for it...

That idea will never catch on, plain silliness ..........


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This is what I thought.
Why not get rid of anything pre Class 60 and use 67's instead. Perhaps even look at the 60's for retirement...

However the bogie layout may be the reason...

I would've thought that the 60 is a bit like Popeye to the 67 being more of an Olive Oyl

 

[jopsuk]

he said "pre" class 60- so 20, 31, 37, 47, 56, 57 (I think that's the lot- I'll not count the occasional 52 & 55).

Problem is they have a Route availability of 8- where as all those older classes have 5, 6 or 7 and thus can go more places. I doubt re-engineering them to a Co-Co would be at all economically viable.

 

[trainplan1]

A 67 hauling 2600t ?!? Did it explode?



I doubt a 67 could haul 1600t of boxes at anywhere near the timings of a 66, therefore they won't get used, the fact they aren't now should tell you something.

TDK is probably the best person to tell you about the performance of the things.

Back in yonder a couple of 67's were being used to cover Engineering haulage work in Doncaster area. (Think most of the 66's were being used elsewhere) When it came to discussing said train using a 67 there was a bit of a hesitation from the DBS representative about it hauling just 10 autohoppers...

 

[ExRes]

he said "pre" class 60- so 20, 31, 37, 47, 56, 57 (I think that's the lot- I'll not count the occasional 52 & 55).

Problem is they have a Route availability of 8- where as all those older classes have 5, 6 or 7 and thus can go more places. I doubt re-engineering them to a Co-Co would be at all economically viable.

If you continue reading his post you'll see that he also said "Perhaps even look at the 60's for retirement......"

 

[sprinterguy]

If the ECML thunderbirds continue it will be new DRS Class 88 electrics with last mile diesels.

If you have some sort of insider information then fair enough, but otherwise, what use would (primarily) electric locomotives be as rescue locos when they are of greatest use when there has been a dewirement or other loss of overhead power?

Would the last mile engine on a class 88 be sufficient for, say, hauling a full "dead" class 91+mark 4 set, possibly supplying train supply as well if the train has been stranded a while and the batteries are going flat, from perhaps Newark to Doncaster, or from the wilds of Northumberland to Newcastle, to terminate and detrain passengers?

 

[ash39]

I don't think there are any 67's in storage at the minute. They just seem to sit in sidings idling doing nothing but waste diesel.

Or they could just switch the engine off?

If the ECML thunderbirds continue it will be new DRS Class 88 electrics with last mile diesels.

Nice idea until it comes to diversions! Be interesting to see one haul a full 225 round the Durham coast on 'last mile' capability alone!

 

[HarleyDavidson]

442 + 67 = Reading - Gatwick express, with the capability of being diesel hauled over non juiced sections, use 442 electric power over juiced sections and thence you send the 166/165s all to the West Country. Simples!

 

[HSTEd]

It would be better to use one of those super 73s for that purpose - assuming they keep the high level jumpers.
All you would need is to modify the 73s to provide ETH to the 442s through the main shoe rail and everything would work.

 

[Jamesb1974]

Perhaps even look at the 60's for retirement...

That isn't going to happen for a while yet. A 67 would be absolutely no substitute for a 60.

Class 67 Max tractive effort; 32,000 lbf
Class 60 Max tractive effort; 106,500 lbf

Which makes this comment raise an eyebrow;

I know everyone says the 67's are rubbish at everything. Well I say onone, 67015 if memory serves haul 2600 tonnes of loaded HTA hoppers of Hull Docks ABP boundary back in 2008.

2600 tons is what a 60 hauls out of Liverpool Bulk terminal and even on a dry rail surface, if you're doing 10mph at the top of Anfield bank you've done well and you've got a good engine.

 

[matacaster]

How about using a few on a reincarnated Thames-Clyde Express, using some Pullman type carriages and possibly an observation coach (modified MK2F or MK3) at the rear? [ie St Pancras, MML, Nottingham (reverse), Derby, Sheffield, Leeds (east to west), Skipton, S&C, Carlisle, G&SW, Glasgow]

Obviously couldn't go via Waverley route, north of border (maybe G&SW?) but a scheduled daily premium offering both ways with full dining car facilities might woo some executive travellers and monied tourists?

Also may provide a partial rail backup when WCML knitting falls down.

 

[D365]

Did they remove all the 3rd rail stuff or just the shoes only?

In terms of traction and the body shell, Class 325 can be considered identical to a Class 319. From what I understand the design (as is the case with any DC-capable unit) uses a 750V bus - there is little else to be removed!

www.scot-rail.co.uk/page/Class+325
http://www.porterbrook.co.uk/downloads/brochures/319 Brochure.pdf

 

[paulclass43]

Retire anything pre class 60? Perhaps get shot of the 60?

Have you gone insane, the idea here is to find traction for FOC's to use so they don't have to start turning down contracts. You get rid of anything pre class 60. You may as well liquidate DRS and what is going to haul the Mendip Jumbo.

Anyways you start scrapping all those locos were are you going to buy new ones from. None of the manufacturers can afford to finance a tier 3b/tier 4 locomotive to fit in our loading gauge. We won't even be getting anymore 68 because CAT can'tale there equipment fit within our loading gauge without totally redesigning the loco which is cost prohibitive.

Now the 67 hauling the loaded coal didn't explode, didn't do too bad really, not great either. They're find on 1600 tonne intermodal but not up to 66 timing. Timing are going to be irrelevant soon as the railways are just going to have to make do with unsuitable locos or start turning away business. I'm my eyes it's better to sacrifice a little time and use unsuitable locos then turn down business. Ide use back to back 43's before I turned down business.

 

[alexl92]

This is what I thought.
Why not get rid of anything pre Class 60 and use 67's instead. Perhaps even look at the 60's for retirement...

However the bogie layout may be the reason...

On the heaviest flows, such as oil tankers, 60s are still better than 66s. Ridiculous suggestion.

 

[RichmondCommu]

How about using a few on a reincarnated Thames-Clyde Express, using some Pullman type carriages and possibly an observation coach (modified MK2F or MK3) at the rear? [ie St Pancras, MML, Nottingham (reverse), Derby, Sheffield, Leeds (east to west), Skipton, S&C, Carlisle, G&SW, Glasgow]

Obviously couldn't go via Waverley route, north of border (maybe G&SW?) but a scheduled daily premium offering both ways with full dining car facilities might woo some executive travellers and monied tourists?

Also may provide a partial rail backup when WCML knitting falls down.

How do you define executive travelers? Time is money in which case they will either fly to Scotland or use the ECML to travel to Leeds. With both options being more cost effective than your idea.

Not only that but how much are these Pullman type carriages going to cost and which TOC would be mad enough to adopt your idea? Nothing wrong with nostalgia but the days of a train taking so long to get to Leeds and Glasgow are long gone I'm afraid.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What about using them for a national network of express mail? They'd be ideal for it, in fact you might say they were built for it...

In the same way that the post carrying TGV's have now been withdrawn?

 

[paulclass43]

On the heaviest flows, such as oil tankers, 60s are still better than 66s. Ridiculous suggestion.

Well said. There are only two major down sides to the 60's. One the 60mph top speed limits the range of traffic flow they are suitable for to tanks and stone. Two they are of an old and non-standard design and need replacing as soon as there is a viable replacement. Still have a higher haulage capacity then a 66.

These days even a DRS 68 can out match a 66 in terms of haulage capacity thanks to the compter modulated traction control. The lines of superiority of CO-CO over BO-BO are becoming blurred.

The two supreme haulers of course are still CO-CO's, the Class 59's and the Class 70's. Both beastly machines. Id like to see what a 70 can do on the Mendip Jumbos.

What we need really is a standard CO-CO and a standard BO-BO. Maybe 4500arhp for the CO-CO at 75mph and 3500arhp at 100mph for the BO-BO. But until then FOC's just need to make do with what they can scrounge up.

Not going to happen in this country. We like to tinker and fart around until nothing works right.

 

[BestWestern]

Well said. There are only two major down sides to the 60's. One the 60mph top speed limits the range of traffic flow they are suitable for to tanks and stone. Two they are of an old and non-standard design and need replacing as soon as there is a viable replacement.

Why? There is plenty of stuff in regular use which is far older, and so many different designs of kit on the railway now that 'standard' barely exists as a concept any more. Given their recent rebuilds, DBS clearly feel they have a future for the time being.

As for 67s, turn them upside down and put rubbish in them, surely...

 

[paulclass43]

How about using a few on a reincarnated Thames-Clyde Express, using some Pullman type carriages and possibly an observation coach (modified MK2F or MK3) at the rear? [ie St Pancras, MML, Nottingham (reverse), Derby, Sheffield, Leeds (east to west), Skipton, S&C, Carlisle, G&SW, Glasgow]

Obviously couldn't go via Waverley route, north of border (maybe G&SW?) but a scheduled daily premium offering both ways with full dining car facilities might woo some executive travellers and monied tourists?

Also may provide a partial rail backup when WCML knitting falls down.

Not going to woo executive travellers. They will use the ECML for Leeds, MML services for Nottingham and Sheffield, and the WCML form Calisle and Glasgow. Or if they are really daft or dont care about their carbon footprint then they will fly. (I say daft because domestic flights have to be the most stupid idea in the history of aviation).

Nice to discuss as a conscept though. How many coaches are you planning to put behind the 67. They struggle to get over 80mph with more than 8 coaches (they can but they dont like it). Plus remember that a 67 has a higher haulage capacity for freight then they do passenger. The reason is that they loose nearly 500arhp to the ETH system. I would say that a good rule of thumb is 2000arhp on passenger trains, 2500arhp on freight.

You could add a generator car but that would take away from cabin space and would require you to swap the generator car and the observation car around at each terminal station And theres precious few fascilities that could perform such a thing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why? There is plenty of stuff in regular use which is far older, and so many different designs of kit on the railway now that 'standard' barely exists as a concept any more. Given their recent rebuilds, DBS clearly feel they have a future for the time being.

They weren't rebuilt. They were rewired to improve short term reliability as a stop gap and rebranded as Super 60's as a sales exercise to persuade other FOC's to buy them (Colas). The Super 60 thing isnt anything to get exited about. DBS are keeping them for now because they have bugger all else to use with the chronic traction shortage. As soon as theres something available to replace them then theyre gone. It will be a shame to see the tugs go though. They were the bees knees in the 90's but now they are old, frail and slow. The problem is that the EU's new emission regs have put a virtual block on new traction development.

Yes there are older traction in use. But again, with the exeption of DRS they are on hire to fill in for the lack of traction.

Its nice to hold on to the past, I certainly do it but, you've got to know when enough is enough. Just like putting down a faithful dog.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Or they could just switch the engine off?

That still leaves them redundant and useless.



Nice idea until it comes to diversions! Be interesting to see one haul a full 225 round the Durham coast on 'last mile' capability alone!

Theres wont be any 225's in a few years. Reduced diversion timetables under IEP will be taken care of by the bimode sets. There will be very little will for a full diesel rescue loco. Unless the wires come down. Then theyll do what they do now 90% of the time and that just stop everything, diesel and electric until the wires are back up.

Someone asked if I had insider knowledge. No I don't, Ive just factored in the bimode IEP sets and balanced advantages and disadvantages of using diesel or electric Thunderbirds. For the record I hate the bi-mode IEP and would rather use diesel thunderbirds but electric is more likely as a good portion of the East Coast fleet is going to be able to rescue their selves.

 

[BestWestern]

That's very interesting, certainly more than I knew about the 60s. I wasn't just referring to locos however, there is an abundance of elderly passenger carrying rolling stock still in use and seemingly intended to continue for the forseeable (universal access lavs in class 150s, etc etc). I wouldn't consider a loco from the turn of the 90s to be particularly old, or obselete. The issue of course was EWS' idea that endless class 66s would be all that was needed for the next few decades, a plan which has now been shown as rather lacking.

 

[paulclass43]

That's very interesting, certainly more than I knew about the 60s. I wasn't just referring to locos however, there is an abundance of elderly passenger carrying rolling stock still in use and seemingly intended to continue for the forseeable (universal access lavs in class 150s, etc etc). I wouldn't consider a loco from the turn of the 90s to be particularly old, or obselete. The issue of course was EWS' idea that endless class 66s would be all that was needed for the next few decades, a plan which has now been shown as rather lacking.

I agree that EWS's vision of an all 66 fleet was lacking. But at the time Wisconsin Central bought what would become EWS, they were faced with an absolutely knackered loco fleet. The only options available really were 66's and 59's. They would have been better going for an all Class 59 fleet and covering all their bases in one. EWS was never really financially stable thanks to the (excuse me here ex BR chaps, im really sorry) scrap iron they inherited. It forced them to sell to Canadian National. The 60's are my age and although im not old at all, im showing the same signs of decay as the 60's.

Oh dont get me started on ancient DMU's. I live in a Pacer area and Im not prepaired for a rant like that.

I feel really aweful calling the old BR locos scrap iron but its true. But, I love heritage traction.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Could I just ask. Does anyone actually sleep on here? Or is everyone up commenting all night lol?

 

[snakeeyes]

how many MK3 coachers are there left unused? convert some of these and do push /pull with the 67's?

 

[BestWestern]

how many MK3 coachers are there left unused? convert some of these and do push /pull with the 67's?

Well, 24 class 442s, I make that 120...

 

[fgwrich]

how many MK3 coachers are there left unused? convert some of these and do push /pull with the 67's?

Very few. The majority of the Loco Hauled Mk3s left in store are owned by DB Schenker, baring the odd few in store around the network - Who owns the former Greater Anglia Mk3 in store in Barrow Hill? The rest if any are left are former HST Vehicles, although the FGW Conversions have taken most of the former Virgin HST TRSB left in store.

 

[Western Lord]

Well, 24 class 442s, I make that 120...

I make it 96, the power cars are not standard Mk.3.

 

[Suraggu]

Intercity EMU's are the way forward for GEML and have been prefered for a long time.
5 car 444 type units with 110mph top speed, AC traction motors. The good thing with units is off peak trains which are generally quieter.
For example:a peak morning Norwich -London is extremely busy, run as 10,car, at London front portion works off peak to Norwich and back, the couples up to unit in London to form a 10 car peak service back to Norwich.

It sounds mad but actually for a line like the GEML that would work and with EMU's having superior acceleration it would be able to speed up journey times.