What will replace the class 37??

[hooverboy]

Just a thought, the class 37 is the ubiquitous "go anywhere" locomotive due to it's low route availability,short wheelbase,and multi purpose haulage capabilities.
What could be in line to replace it?

The new arrivals like class 93 have a high axle load ,and there is nothing in the pipeline that can duplicate this function.

What would you suggest as a suitable replacement?.Build from new, or modify old stock.If so,what?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

How sound are the bodyshells and chassis on the class 37s? Because if the answer is 'very sound', then what would be wrong with re-engining, new bogies, new electrics and so on?

 

[randyrippley]

First you need to decide how to power it. Is there an emission-compliant diesel engine that will fit into a 37 or equivalent size body?
Or can you pack enough fuel cells in? Until you know that any decision is futile

 

[HSTEd]

The most likely option is Co-Co genset locomotive - given the very low power requirement.

You could probably make it electrodiesel because at the end of the day it doesn't have to have that many horsepower to replace the 37.

 

[D365]

given the money that’s going into fitting them with ETCS, I’d be shocked to see them go within the next 5/10 years!

How sound are the bodyshells and chassis on the class 37s? Because if the answer is 'very sound', then what would be wrong with re-engining, new bogies, new electrics and so on?

The difficulty is that there’s at least five unique 37 variants, and that’s only considering locomotives which are fit for the mainline!

 

[172007]

Isn't this why Colas were trialing Class 43's as they are RA5?

 

[O L Leigh]

Didn't the Cl66s see them all off about 20 years ago, or is there something I have missed?

I get the point that Cl37s have a low RA number but I don't see how that is affecting operators. How many places are there on the network that can only be reached by a Cl37 and not by any of the more recent classes? If it really was an issue I would have expected that we would have seen a replacement already.

 

[mcmad]

Didn't the Cl66s see them all off about 20 years ago, or is there something I have missed?

I get the point that Cl37s have a low RA number but I don't see how that is affecting operators. How many places are there on the network that can only be reached by a Cl37 and not by any of the more recent classes? If it really was an issue I would have expected that we would have seen a replacement already.

More than you would think but they all tend to be the sort of places that don't frequently require freight locos on either infrastructure or commercial freight trains. On the odd occasions there is a need there is a process to allow one of visits subject to agreement from the engineers, particularly the civil engineers.

 

[172007]

RA5 is very useful but... A fair work 37's do RA5 is not required and it's adhoc work that is often seasonal. If you own the loco and it's East to repair I.e. no computers then you have very few overheads to cover than leased / leveraged multimillion pound loco that realy needs to be working 365 days less required downtime a year to cover it's overheads.

 

[HSTEd]

Given the amount of black smoke that Class 37s belch forth they are likely to become an embarassment to the railway in the future as it attempts to defend its eco-credentials against the assault of electric cars and buses.

It would be advisable that they be pensioned off before then.

Given their extremely specialised duties it would only take a relatively small fleet to replace them.

 

[MattRat]

Perhaps the Class 19 project would be a good fit as a replacement, although I may be wrong as there is very little information about them.

 

[AndrewE]

Given the amount of black smoke that Class 37s belch forth they are likely to become an embarassment to the railway in the future as it attempts to defend its eco-credentials against the assault of electric cars and buses.

It would be advisable that they be pensioned off before then. Given their extremely specialised duties it would only take a relatively small fleet to replace them.

I have seen some pretty filthy "modern" diesels recently. The only real answer is widespread electrification. However, given how few of them there are, and how robust they are (and how good they sound) I would just let small operators continue using them. We still have buses belching black fumes next to pavements in towns around here, so the odd old diesel loco on a separate right-of-way isn't really a problem.
If someone was to propose using them on a commuter shuttle through Bham New St that would be a diferent matter!

 

[Irascible]

Probably a hybrid powerpack in a 37 would be the replacement, I'd imagine...

Does beg the question ( same for DMUs ) what the newest suitable powerplant family is - there doesn't seem to be *that* much future in mid-sized diesel plant.

 

[zwk500]

I would imagine that given the 37's duties the most likely successor would be a Class 66 with restrictions over the problematic bridges.

 

[gg1]

Could an additional batch of 68s be ordered or do they no longer meet current emissions regulations?

 

[Grumpy Git]

How sound are the bodyshells and chassis on the class 37s? Because if the answer is 'very sound', then what would be wrong with re-engining, new bogies, new electrics and so on?

Just don't let Porterbrook anywhere near if they do.

I'm not sure I could stand a thread on 737's (and I'm not talking about aircraft).

 

[HSTEd]

Probably a hybrid powerpack in a 37 would be the replacement, I'd imagine...

Does beg the question ( same for DMUs ) what the newest suitable powerplant family is - there doesn't seem to be *that* much future in mid-sized diesel plant.

A genset locomotive with a pair of IEP engines seems most likely?

 

[JamesT]

Could an additional batch of 68s be ordered or do they no longer meet current emissions regulations?

The 68s are the relatively old Euro IIIa spec, so I don't think you could have more. They're also RA7 rather than RA5 of the Class 37.
The descendants of the 68s are going to be the Class 93s with a Euro V engine. It's claimed it will have lower track access charges than a Class 66, so perhaps it might be able to handle tasks that currently only a 37 is suitable for.

 

[XAM2175]

I'm not sure I could stand a thread on 737's (and I'm not talking about aircraft).

Well you needn't get too worried about 737s in particular, given that the 700 to 749 designator range is for AC and AC/DC electric multiple-units.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

What about the 69, or is that too heavy?

 

[MattRat]

The 68s are the relatively old Euro IIIa spec, so I don't think you could have more. They're also RA7 rather than RA5 of the Class 37.

What about the 69, or is that too heavy?

Same applies to class 69.

 

[Nym]

given the money that’s going into fitting them with ETCS, I’d be shocked to see them go within the next 5/10 years!


The difficulty is that there’s at least five unique 37 variants, and that’s only considering locomotives which are fit for the mainline!

Nowt compared with other loco and fleets' number of variants. Five is nothing to deal with compared with others I'm handling.

 

[D365]

Nowt compared with other loco and fleets' number of variants. Five is nothing to deal with compared with others I'm handling.

Any steam boilers in your assortment?

 

[Nym]

Any steam boilers in your assortment?

Yep. Disconnected, but still there.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Probably a hybrid powerpack in a 37 would be the replacement, I'd imagine...

Does beg the question ( same for DMUs ) what the newest suitable powerplant family is - there doesn't seem to be *that* much future in mid-sized diesel plant.

The 1600bhp MTU engine in the GBRF class 73/9's comes to mind.

In reference to suggestions for bigger engined locomotives like the 68, how do the running costs in terms of fuel and maintenance of a lower powered 73/9 compare to something like a 66 or 68? On a car there's fairly significant differences in fuel consumption between a four cylinder and a V8 but I assume it's not so simple for locomotives.

Are there many sections round the country that a heavier locomotive can't access? The route north of Inverness is RA5 but 66's run regularly on it.

 

[JKF]

Would some duties such as leaf season work just be picked up by MPVs? I’m assuming those are low RA as there’s not much to them.

 

[MattRat]

Would some duties such as leaf season work just be picked up by MPVs? I’m assuming those are low RA as there’s not much to them.

I think they'd much rather prefer something to fully replace them, like for like. Multiple different locos to do all the same roles wouldn't be very 'standardised'.

 

[Sm5]

I think the end for the 37’s is definitely coming.

Last year GBRF trialled 66’s on the NRTT , Colas are testing class 43’s on NRTT. For ROG drags, pretty much anything could sub on that.

For the non-DRS ones this is most of their work.

 

[Grumpy Git]

I'm sure a brand new loco low-emission diesel could easily be designed to meet the same route availability as a cl37, but with much more power to boot. The problem comes in the quantities of scale, there just is not enough demand to make it worthwhile (unless someone is happy to cover the design costs in a batch of "say" 20 loco's)?

 

[MattRat]

I'm sure a brand new loco low-emission diesel could easily be designed to meet the same route availability as a cl37, but with much more power to boot. The problem comes in the quantities of scale, there just is not enough demand to make it worthwhile (unless someone is happy to cover the design costs in a batch of "say" 20 loco's)?

Well the loco would also likely replace any remaining class 20s, so there's that.