What is the future for class 67?

[route:oxford]

Think it was Brush Traction that owned the Co-Co Bogie design that would not sell it IIRC (Type used on Class 89)

But would Brush Traction be prepared to rebuild a batch with their Co-Co Bogie?

 

[Bodiddly]

Well had Scotland gone independent they could have been part of the package: 90 odd distilleries, 400 oil rigs and 30 class 67s!

Tut Tut David! At least with the 400 hundred oil rigs we could afford to run them!
Seriously, there are numerous countries who would take them away from the UK if required. Israel for one, uses a very similar loco for their Intercity services.

 

[Ash Bridge]

But would Brush Traction be prepared to rebuild a batch with their Co-Co Bogie?

Who knows, these days probably. I think back then when EWS had just given a huge order to GM across the Atlantic for a comparatively cheap fleet of diesel-electrics rather than purchasing additional 60s or similar from Brush there were maybe some sour grapes involved?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Could that be done without falling foul of the emissions regs? Could some be physically converted to AC electrics? I know it wouldn't actually be done because of how much it would cost

DB has a tentative plan to fit the new AESS* technology to the 67s once all 174 UK based 66s have been done, which could be indicative that they do plan to hang on to the 67s and have use for them.


*Fuel saving thing - does a partial shut down when power is not needed, similar to the technology used in some cars these days. 66 176 has been fitted since February and is showing a good reduction in fuel used and, consequently, emissions.

 

[DownSouth]

Sell the damn things to an overseas operator!

Overseas operators have standards!

 

[455driver]

Overseas operators have standards!

Yes of course they do, its just that their standards are a lot lower than ours!
They are a darn sight more sensible as well!

 

[chorleyjeff]

Who knows, these days probably. I think back then when EWS had just given a huge order to GM across the Atlantic for a comparatively cheap fleet of diesel-electrics rather than purchasing additional 60s or similar from Brush there were maybe some sour grapes involved?

Unless run by a dominant individual withan axe to grind would a large company turn down potential business because of sour grapes?

 

[455driver]

Unless run by a dominant individual withan axe to grind would a large company turn down potential business because of sour grapes?

Short term pain, long term gain!

The people that won the contract cannot actually supply the train the customer has requested and have to change the spec. The next time that customer wants a train do you think they will go for the same supplier?

 

[Ash Bridge]

Unless run by a dominant individual withan axe to grind would a large company turn down potential business because of sour grapes?

I suppose they would not turn down potential business if they considered the offer made to them to use the design was acceptable, but of course we don't have that information do we.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Short term pain, long term gain!

The people that won the contract cannot actually supply the train the customer has requested and have to change the spec. The next time that customer wants a train do you think they will go for the same supplier?

Would be interesting don't you think if the contract to build the Class 66/67 fleets had gone the other way and Brush Traction had got the order instead. Would they have built a mixed traffic version of the 60, and the 67 been a Co-Co with higher gearing. Obviously just a laymans views but don't you think the Brush products would be of overall better quality, albeit at at a probably much higher cost?

 

[chorleyjeff]

Short term pain, long term gain!

The people that won the contract cannot actually supply the train the customer has requested and have to change the spec. The next time that customer wants a train do you think they will go for the same supplier?

Would depend on results of due diligence I guess and would also guess that a legal "situation" might well exist. So I take your point.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I suppose they would not turn down potential business if they considered the offer made to them to use the design was acceptable, but of course we don't have that information do we.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Would be interesting don't you think if the contract to build the Class 66/67 fleets had gone the other way and Brush Traction had got the order instead. Would they have built a mixed traffic version of the 60, and the 67 been a Co-Co with higher gearing. Obviously just a laymans views but don't you think the Brush products would be of overall better quality, albeit at at a probably much higher cost?

Also as a layman I would look at previous products to see if they did the job and then look in detail at alternatives, make a choice then negotiate very carefully to get a contract pinned down that ensured compliance with agreed standards with appropriate penalties for non compliance.

 

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Would be interesting don't you think if the contract to build the Class 66/67 fleets had gone the other way and Brush Traction had got the order instead. Would they have built a mixed traffic version of the 60, and the 67 been a Co-Co with higher gearing. Obviously just a laymans views but don't you think the Brush products would be of overall better quality, albeit at at a probably much higher cost?

Given how troublesome the 60s were when they were built - in stark contrast to the 59s - why should a Brush product have been of better quality? Some would say that the 60s are responsible for the final collapse of British loco building. Was it 6 years to get all 100 into productive service, after numerous modifications to software and hardware?

Back to the original question, I will be surprised if no work is found for the 67s given how desperate the freight companies seem to be for extra locos at the moment. Especially if the AESS mod programme goes ahead (could somebody please explain what it stands for), a 67 will be a better prospect for 10+ years of work than some of the older types currently ruining our air quality! I understand that the BoBo design imposes a variety of limitations, but surely they are much better than nothing?

 

[Ash Bridge]

Given how troublesome the 60s were when they were built - in stark contrast to the 59s - why should a Brush product have been of better quality? Some would say that the 60s are responsible for the final collapse of British loco building. Was it 6 years to get all 100 into productive service, after numerous modifications to software and hardware

You quote the 59s but don't forget they are a different beast entirely to the 66s, e.g virtually hand built for one thing. Also from what I have read most of the earlier problems with the 60s were software/Electronics related, on a pretty much totally new design at the time.