Jump to content

Dapol's new Class 68 locomotives


Nobby (John)
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Quite rare to see them (Chiltern 68s) on flask duty. Apparently there's a standing instruction within DRS not to use them on n*ke jobs.

 

This was a repaired wagon move. https://www.flickr.com/photos/ianmartian/18847416719/in/photolist-ukErw2-u4aNZw-uHtWmF-u4bpom

Cheers,

Mick

 

edit - Chiltern

Edited by newbryford
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite rare to see them on flask duty. Apparently there's a standing instruction within DRS not to use them on n*ke jobs.

 

 

 

Are you referring just to the Chiltern 68's?.

 

A pair of DRS 68's have been doing the Crewe to Wylfa (Anglesey) Nuke trip daily for the past 3 or 4 months solid now. It's all gone quite boring as it used to be a heady mix of Cl 20's, 37's, 57's and 66's in all manner of combinations, but since the summer, it's been all 68's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also run your Chiltern Cats with Dapol's excellent IDA 'SuperLow 45' container flats, with either one pair...

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnneave/23621558054/in/photolist-BZmEfj-terfk2-ubhwAi

 

...Or multiple sets, as well as some 'Megafrets':

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16744289031/in/photolist-rvCRLt-rvHzw4-qzP7gC-qzB1tQ

 

DRS 68s have featured many times on container flat moves to/from repair, notably with Class 37s and sometimes coaches in tow too.

 

Thanks,

Jack.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that hasn’t been rectified is the Vossloh logo on the front, it still point the wrong way on number 2 end, number 1 end is correct. That is on 005, don’t know for sure about other numbers, I know one of the ScotRail ones is wrong too.The ‘V’ should point this way...> and not this way.. <. Easy fix with a decal I suppose, if you were so inclined.

Edited by Diesel Do Nicely
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has the issue of the 'sideways sagging' couplings been sorted for heavier trains on the latest release batch?

 

I have experienced the same issue with the first batch of 68s. 

 

A few months ago I bought some Kadee Couplings to try instead of the NEM ones provided. I have been trying to use the Kadee Couplings on 002 and 005. 

 

However last night I realise I hadn't tried using the Kadee's on 006, 007, 010 and 014. 007 has a broken coupling anyway and 010 has become unprogrammed from the controller somehow so I duly tried to run 006 and 014 together in a consist fitted with the Kadee Couplings. Surprise, surprise they ran for about 30 minutes in two small running sessions in both directions without any of the couplings falling off or the locos derailing. 

 

The only thing I can think of that has happened is that when I first opened 002 or 005 I noticed that one of the couplings had been completely snapped off and it was in the box removed from the loco. I refitted the coupling and the push in mechanism that holds the coupling and thought no more of it. I'm now thinking that because the coupling has been completely snapped off either during manufacturing, checking or in transit etc this could be why the whole coupling mechanism has been falling off and I was thinking that all of the 68s are not compatible to run together in multiple. However that doesn't appear to be the case as I have had 006 and 014 running together. 

 

My advice would be to try any other 68s you have, if you bought more than one and see what the couplings are like on them. 

 

It looks like I might have just been unlucky and received one loco with a broken coupling which made me think that I couldn't run any 68s in multiple. Until I tried the other 68s with Kadee couplings...

 

Hope this helps. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder about the economics of using 2 brand new locos on flask trains

 

Is DRs still tax payer owned ? If so that’ll explain some of the stupid amount of tax I pay !

 

Yes, the NDA. But sorry, I know this thread is about the superb Dapol model, but I must correct with a fact. DRS 'Specialist Freight' (ie nuclear waste and spent fuel movements) are paid by the clients, namely Magnox and EDF. Simply, you are seeing 68s and 88s on specialist freight services because the client, who is paying, wants them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder about the economics of using 2 brand new locos on flask trains

 

Is DRs still tax payer owned ? If so that’ll explain some of the stupid amount of tax I pay !

 

Using two locos is nothing to do with economics on NDA work.

The operating case specifies two locos.

It wouldn't look good either to leave a failed train out there for too long.

"If they can't keep their trains runninfg, what chance have we with the power stations/ safety etc........". brigade will have a field day3

Apologies for the OT, almost political bit.

 

Cheers,

Mick

Edited by newbryford
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I wonder about the economics of using 2 brand new locos on flask trains

 

Is DRs still tax payer owned ? If so that’ll explain some of the stupid amount of tax I pay !

Yes still tax payer owned.

 

But really it may be the best option. They are more efficient and reliable than older locos and exist - if they aren’t on this traffic what else would they be doing?

 

Roy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Flasks have to run as double loco as we know for back up sake, but I read somewhere a while ago The long term plan was to use the 88s on the flasks, can run as electric where it can (assuming most places will get knitting eventually) and if it were to fail, then the Diesel engine is there as back up, effectively 2 locos and save having 2 separate locos on it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Flasks have to run as double loco as we know for back up sake, but I read somewhere a while ago The long term plan was to use the 88s on the flasks, can run as electric where it can (assuming most places will get knitting eventually) and if it were to fail, then the Diesel engine is there as back up, effectively 2 locos and save having 2 separate locos on it

 

They ought to use a Western.

 

Geoff Endacott

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm the proud owner of a Scotrail 68 -  Do i model Scotrail? Nope. Do i model Modern image? Nope. Do i model in 4mm? Nope, But the model (and the full size ones!) is so nice I just had to own one - it's just stunning and looking a million dollars in my display case. Can anyone explain further what the difference is between the first and second batch of models (mine is the second batch) -  I've spotted the brake discs are now painted and the revised speaker space in the chassis , but there's also mention of different handrails and horn grilles - what exactly has been changed?

 

TFN

Jon 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the NDA. But sorry, I know this thread is about the superb Dapol model, but I must correct with a fact. DRS 'Specialist Freight' (ie nuclear waste and spent fuel movements) are paid by the clients, namely Magnox and EDF. Simply, you are seeing 68s and 88s on specialist freight services because the client, who is paying, wants them.

 

 

That makes perfect sense then, I just had a visions of a gold plated solution paid for by us , but it seems this is a necessity not a luxury

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has the issue of the 'sideways sagging' couplings been sorted for heavier trains on the latest release batch?

 

Interesting this was brought up. I just got my hands on my 1st 68 model. Overall impressed but as is always the case theres something to take the edge off. For some reason in the box 2 of the under frame boxes were off. I can see there is glue but the glue is only on the boxes and has not made contact with the under frame (easy enough to sort). Another minor but annoying niggle for DC users is the provision of light switches within the body shell (so has to be removed each time you make a change), the only positive being the body is pretty easy to remove.

Now back to the quoted post and the most disappointing issue and thats the couplings. On hauling a reasonable train the couplings even on straight track can pull to one side under load. There is not enough inertia in the body mounted coupling springs to stay central. This leads to crazy huge gaps between stock and loco, its at its worst with stock that also has the dreaded body mounted side sprung couplings. After any slight curvature the spring doesn't re-centre the coupling and the large gap remains. The coupling also has a fair bit of vertical movement so if pushing a reasonable load there is risk of under ride.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Interesting this was brought up. I just got my hands on my 1st 68 model. Overall impressed but as is always the case theres something to take the edge off. For some reason in the box 2 of the under frame boxes were off. I can see there is glue but the glue is only on the boxes and has not made contact with the under frame (easy enough to sort). Another minor but annoying niggle for DC users is the provision of light switches within the body shell (so has to be removed each time you make a change), the only positive being the body is pretty easy to remove.

Now back to the quoted post and the most disappointing issue and thats the couplings. On hauling a reasonable train the couplings even on straight track can pull to one side under load. There is not enough inertia in the body mounted coupling springs to stay central. This leads to crazy huge gaps between stock and loco, its at its worst with stock that also has the dreaded body mounted side sprung couplings. After any slight curvature the spring doesn't re-centre the coupling and the large gap remains. The coupling also has a fair bit of vertical movement so if pushing a reasonable load there is risk of under ride.

Can you not just take the small panel on the roof off to change the switches on the second batch?

 

Roy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you not just take the small panel on the roof off to change the switches on the second batch?

 

Roy

 

You can only access the cab light switches crazily, it would have been a far better design to be able to access the head and taillight switches which surely are the most used ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is not enough inertia in the body mounted coupling springs to stay central. This leads to crazy huge gaps between stock and loco, its at its worst with stock that also has the dreaded body mounted side sprung couplings. After any slight curvature the spring doesn't re-centre the coupling and the large gap remains. The coupling also has a fair bit of vertical movement so if pushing a reasonable load there is risk of under ride.

 

I usually apply a few strokes of an HB pencil to the surfaces which should slide over each other. 99% of the time this does the trick, and not just for coupler systems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that hasn’t been rectified is the Vossloh logo on the front, it still point the wrong way on number 2 end, number 1 end is correct.

I was considering one of the new models, but now this has been pointed out I simply cannot un-see it. I looked at each of the new ones in the shop yesterday and they are all the same, incorrect at one end.

The logo is embossed into the models front so a decal won't correct it.

 

It jumps out at me each time I look now, highlighted as it is on a yellow background, so I must think about this carefully. I could always run it with the same end facing forwards, but I considered one ended running because of the livery error and decided to leave it. It just offended the laws f aesthetics far too much and I believe this would now do the same. The shop says they have had few inquiries about this model so I have time to think.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone explain further what the difference is between the first and second batch of models (mine is the second batch)

 

 

To understand the differences between Dapol's first and second batch, one has to look at the prototypes and how they evolved. 

 

(001)002-005 were constructed before DRS increased the fuel tank specification. 001 is the exception, originally fitted with the smaller tank, seen in its white Vossloh livery, but the increased tank was fitted before delivery to the UK, via Innotrans. The extended tank has now been retrofitted to most, I have only recently noted 003 without the larger tank. 

001-015 were delivered in two livery variants. Originally the driver door handle bars and the multiple working step handle bars had one bolt. (More subtlety they also were smooth in finish without grip striations).

 

Subsequently, 008-015 have been fitted with AAR multiple working for the Chiltern Railways contract. The customer (Arriva) requested the handle bars to be removed due to safely concerns over no grip and the single bolt was demonstrated to be susceptible to failure. Until new bars and bolts could be manufactured, 010-015 had then removed. DRS did not alter this, and changed the bars once delivered. There is more detail here I just wont go into. But, fascinating to myself alone.

 

Later batch deliveries 016-025 and 026-034 have had different paint (same colour, different product) and wheel sets alterations, along with internal changes which do not affect the model. 026 upwards, now have black cab air-conditioning units. 

 

Another really minor difference, is some locos had additional warning flashes by the nose steps, these only appear on 008, 012, 016, 017 & 018.

 

It should be noted, further modifications to 026 up revolve around the sale of Vossloh to Stadler (removal of Vossloh logo, Stadler works plates and bogie plates). 

 

Thus the models, represent this evolution. To most it shall not matter, but if you are like me, you really appreciate the detail Dapol have paid to this evolution. 

 

Batch 1

 

DRS 001 - original single bolt and large tanks

DRS 002 - original single bolt and smaller tanks

DRS 005 - original single bolt and smaller tanks

SR 006 - original single bolt and large tanks

SR 007 - original single bolt and large tanks

DRS/CR 010 - no aar socket, original single bolt and large tanks - ie before Chiltern service

DRS/CR 014 - no aar socket, original single bolt and large tanks - ie before Chiltern service

 

Batch 2

 

DRS 003 - original single bolt and smaller tanks

DRS/CR 008 - aar socket, new three bolt and large tanks

SR 006 - new three bolt and large tanks

CR 010 - aar socket, new three bolt and large tanks - ie current Chiltern service

CR 015 - aar socket, no bolt and large tanks -- ie initial Chiltern service

 

Model in terms of prototype modification timeline 

 

DRS 002/003/005 (1st and 2nd batch) - 003 is an interesting one, as still with small tank, but now with three bolts. Thus, is this a current representation to model, or as introduced? Depends how much the 3 bolts bother you....

DRS 001 (1st Batch)

CR 010/014 (1st Batch) 

CR 015 (2nd Batch) 

SR 006/007 (1st Batch) 

DRS 008 (2nd  Batch) - current 

SR 006 (2nd Batch) - current 

CR 010 (2nd Batch) - current 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just picked up 68008 from JDM Models in Settle for less than the price of the major box shifters......

 

The internal packaging looks a bit more robust - there are support mouldings under the bogies, as well as extra expanded foam.

 

Some of the first batch varied in the selection of front deflector plates that were supplied.

 

Two types - slotted for use with the NEM mounted coupling and a solid plate for the prototypical look.

 

This one has one slotted and one solid fitted to the loco and one of each in the accessory pack.

 

Need to have good look at the circuit board now and see what needs doing to make it compatible with a full 6-function decoder, as it still seems to have the Halo lights as a logic level output.

 

Cheers,

Mick

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Just received my replacement body for 68005 in the post, beautifully packed and the nameplates printed on both sides perfectly, etched plates included. It was only Thursday when I received an email from DCC saying that my card was out of date and could I contact them. I think that's pretty good service and I do not begrudge the £4.50 postage change, it came requiring a signature on delivery.  Many thanks Dapol and the staff at DCC.

 

all the best

 

Godfrey

Edited by Godfrey Glyn
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just picked up 68008 from JDM Models in Settle for less than the price of the major box shifters......

 

The internal packaging looks a bit more robust - there are support mouldings under the bogies, as well as extra expanded foam.

 

Some of the first batch varied in the selection of front deflector plates that were supplied.

 

Two types - slotted for use with the NEM mounted coupling and a solid plate for the prototypical look.

 

This one has one slotted and one solid fitted to the loco and one of each in the accessory pack.

 

Need to have good look at the circuit board now and see what needs doing to make it compatible with a full 6-function decoder, as it still seems to have the Halo lights as a logic level output.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

Interested to know if you have looked at the circuit board.  The enamelled wire has gone and diodes on the halo circuits have been replaced by transistors.  I have tried a Zimo 644D (without any modifications to the wiring) and it will not switch on the halos.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...