Class 69 - Return of the body snatchers?

[russ p]

One of the causes of smoke on a 56 was oil building up in the silencers.

56080 had them removed, it changed the sound a bit ( for the better) but wasn't really any louder but it reduced smoke 

[rob D2]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

This morning I had to wait at Bishopstone crossing(risboro toaylesbury) whilst the spoil train went through heading to Calvert .As it passed my other half said what a scruffy loco , it was a 66 still in EWS livery and had paint peeling everywhere  and the roof looked as though it had no paint left on it.The loco sounded awful do they all sound bad now and does anyone know what will replace them?

They look good when resprayed in DB. Seeing as the last one was built a few years back, I don’t think you’ll see a replacement anytime soon

[TravisM]

6 hours ago, eastwestdivide said:

HS2 construction?? Don't know who's pencilled in for what, but there will surely be a significant requirement for that.

 

I thought GBRf were buying more Class 60’s for HS2 infrastructure work unless the rebuilding costs are uneconomical in comparison to a complete rebuild of a Class 56.

[TravisM]

2 hours ago, lmsforever said:

This morning I had to wait at Bishopstone crossing(risboro toaylesbury) whilst the spoil train went through heading to Calvert .As it passed my other half said what a scruffy loco , it was a 66 still in EWS livery and had paint peeling everywhere  and the roof looked as though it had no paint left on it.The loco sounded awful do they all sound bad now and does anyone know what will replace them?

 

I expect the Class 66, 67 and 68 will have a life expectancy similar to the Class 59 (35+ years), probably more so the Class 66.  For all it’s faults, a Class 66 is a cost effective, easy to maintain machine with spares that are easy to source and reliability that only BR designers, train planners and maintenance could dream off.

 

What killed off the Class 66 build was, as new builds they could not meet EPA tier 4 emissions and I think that Class 68’s are just under the limit.  Even with their larger loading gauge, the North American loco’s are struggling to be emissions compliant.

[daveyb]

On 04/04/2019 at 23:13, jools1959 said:

 

I expect the Class 66, 67 and 68 will have a life expectancy similar to the Class 59 (35+ years), probably more so the Class 66.  For all it’s faults, a Class 66 is a cost effective, easy to maintain machine with spares that are easy to source and reliability that only BR designers, train planners and maintenance could dream off.

 

What killed off the Class 66 build was, as new builds they could not meet EPA tier 4 emissions and I think that Class 68’s are just under the limit.  Even with their larger loading gauge, the North American loco’s are struggling to be emissions compliant.

And therein lies the question... why are we seeing an engine as poor, in emissions control terms, as the 12-710?  There are better and no doubt more expensive, engines on the market. The 710 doesnt meet the new standards for California rail use and Euro controls are tightening as time marches on.

 

Is this a case of using up the last of the cheap engines before they are 'outlawed' and hooking onto 'grandfather rights?

 

The Valenta / VP185 as been engineered with truck-style, electronic controlled, common rail injection and selective cylinder idle, so I'm sure the Ruston and Mirlees units could be.

 

It does seem that every time there is an emissions control system added, we see an increase in fuel consumption; which is counter-intuitive but real-life experience.

 

There must be a better engine than the 710. If only it could be as cheap.

[black and decker boy]

I’d imagine it’s as simple as commonality of spares with the 66 fleet rather than having a small pool of locos converted with something totally different.

 

i think for a re-power, you are allowed to use s PU one tier down from current. The 710 is a 3a unit so complies. Current regs are 3b of which there are non in use in the UK for heavy freight / type 5s

[mdvle]

15 hours ago, daveyb said:

And therein lies the question... why are we seeing an engine as poor, in emissions control terms, as the 12-710?  There are better and no doubt more expensive, engines on the market.

 

 

Because it is a known, reliable, engine with an existing spares supply and trained maintenance staff?

 

Part of the decision making for a commercial operation is the total cost, and whether the item will work for the expected lifetime of the purchase.

 

When you are talking about something that is expected to have 20 to 40 year service life you can be hesitant to choose options that don't have an existing track record of reliability and spares availability even if they do offer other nice features like better emissions or lower fuel use.

 

Similarly, the ability to use the same spare part inventory as current units, and no need for additional training for maintenance staff, offers additional savings (this is why all(?) of the low-cost airlines like Southwest, Easyjet, Ryanair operate with 1 type of aircraft)

[daveyb]

That is a definite argument for it, no question.

 

But if they lat as long as that we will be stuck with a polluting 2 stroke for the length of time, far longer than is reasonable if we are all expected to be environmentally friendly. 

 

Will they be allowed to take the GMD/EMD/CAT engines into London?  As of tomorrow (7 Apr 19) diesel engined vehicles from pre-2015ish will be charged extra to drive in London. 

 

It's rhetorical, we all know that is just propaganda and taxation not a real attempt to improve air quality, but the 710 will not comply with retrospective emissions limits so the 20-40 years may end up being much less thereby reducing the saving of maint and spares.  

[Davexoc]

The thing is, currently diesel emissions are seen as the bad boys, and this has come about because we were incentivised to switch to diesel by HMRC many years ago, because petrol emissions created too much CO2. The extra CO2 came about because we converted CO to CO2 in catalytic converters. So now with people switching back to petrol, CO2 is on the increase again.

 

Choice then, a few with lives lost to diesel emissions, or runaway CO2 levels possibly wiping out the human race. 

 

The emissions from a handful of 69s pales into insignificance against the private motor vehicle.

[TravisM]

21 hours ago, daveyb said:

And therein lies the question... why are we seeing an engine as poor, in emissions control terms, as the 12-710?  There are better and no doubt more expensive, engines on the market. The 710 doesnt meet the new standards for California rail use and Euro controls are tightening as time marches on.

 

Is this a case of using up the last of the cheap engines before they are 'outlawed' and hooking onto 'grandfather rights?

 

The Valenta / VP185 as been engineered with truck-style, electronic controlled, common rail injection and selective cylinder idle, so I'm sure the Ruston and Mirlees units could be.

 

It does seem that every time there is an emissions control system added, we see an increase in fuel consumption; which is counter-intuitive but real-life experience.

 

There must be a better engine than the 710. If only it could be as cheap.

 

The 710 series of engines are just a long line of successful GM products but you have to remember, they are just a further development 1930’s, 40’s and 50’s power units where fuel was almost at give away prices and nobody cared about emissions.

 

They are simple 2-stroke, lightweight, easy to maintain and virtually indestructible power units but with all the disadvantages of a 2-stroke engine.  If you remember the Japanese 2-stroke motorbikes (I do as I had a Kawasaki 400cc S3A), the amount of blue smoke emanating from the exhaust and hoping and praying you have enough fuel to last till the next petrol station.  Now times that many, many times!

 

To sum it up, the 710 is reliable, simple to maintain, fairly lightweight but thirsty and not very emissions friendly.  The GE “GEVO” 4-stroke engine is more fuel efficient, loads of low down grunt but it’s a big lump, needs a lot of cooling, no such thing as a “quick fix” and prone to blowing turbos.  But before you jump all over me, I got that information from my cousin who is a shop mechanic for Union Pacific at North Platte, NB.

[adb968008]

My guess is GBRF are tooling up for potential HS2 construction work. Once that starts, a lot of infrastructure will need moving for a good few years.

 

what state are the 58’s in France in ?

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by adb968008

[mdvle]

4 hours ago, daveyb said:

That is a definite argument for it, no question.

 

But if they lat as long as that we will be stuck with a polluting 2 stroke for the length of time, far longer than is reasonable if we are all expected to be environmentally friendly. 

 

Will they be allowed to take the GMD/EMD/CAT engines into London?  As of tomorrow (7 Apr 19) diesel engined vehicles from pre-2015ish will be charged extra to drive in London. 

 

It's rhetorical, we all know that is just propaganda and taxation not a real attempt to improve air quality, but the 710 will not comply with retrospective emissions limits so the 20-40 years may end up being much less thereby reducing the saving of maint and spares.  

 

It is difficult to impossible to predict the future, thus few companies will attempt that in the decision making process.  They also typically have the money to fight laws that are applied retroactively, thus it is a reasonable assumption that any diesel locos will be grandfathered out of any newer emission laws.

 

What it comes down to is if you really want to force these companies to go through the added expense of changing to a different engine family (either the GE, the EMD 1010, or others) then you need to either directly through emissions regulations or indirectly through taxation on fuel (to change the cost/benefit pendulum).

[jjb1970]

Unfortunately, my experience of dealing with government regulators is that outside of the US EPA virtually none of them understand engine emissions and rely completely on outside consultants to provide the technical knowledge (it made a decent living for me for a few years) and even fewer have any real understanding (or inclination to learn) about how businesses work.

[7013]

 I am assuming there may be some esternal (grills,vents,exhaust) differences between the 56 and the 69, In model terms it will be interesting to see if Hornby would re-tool theirs to become a 69,

or would someone like Accurascale, or a retailer take it on?

[SteveyDee68]

An interesting read, especially regarding fuel usage and emmisions. <Devil's Advocate Mode On> I wonder how Brexit will impact upon such matters, as currently it appears we are in line with European regulations. Perhaps our American cousins have been told that the current regulations are going to be thrown out of the window at the end of the year, encouraging US trade deals for such things as thirsty, dirty, US designed locomotive engines? <Devil's Advocate Mode Off>

 

Hours of Fun Debate

[Mike_Walker]

Except that the US "Tier 4" emissions standards are as tough as the latest European which is why production of the GM 2-stroke engines ceased some time ago. Presumably the 710s for the 69s will be reconditioned units recovered from scrapped North American locos or other sources - 12-710 engines in locomotives were somewhat thin on the ground most were 16 cylinder lumps.

[m0rris]

1 hour ago, 7013 said:

 I am assuming there may be some esternal (grills,vents,exhaust) differences between the 56 and the 69, In model terms it will be interesting to see if Hornby would re-tool theirs to become a 69,

or would someone like Accurascale, or a retailer take it on?

 

I think it will be a bit of a TBC - the GBRF 73/9s in their 2 different guises/liveries are still unclaimed by anyone. If the 69s all emerge in the same GBRF blue/orange, I suspect that they might not be top of anyone list, especially seeing as the last photos I have seen show significant changes to the front, side grills and the roof is effectively totally new between the cabs. They would be a lot of work for a small fleet.

[mdvle]

The biggest question given the small fleet size is how widespread they get used.  If they remain geographically limited, the small fleet size and lack of alternate liveries will make it a difficult sell - more so if as stated above they end up being significantly different enough that they need all new tooling

 

Now if say they were reliable, and perhaps then put into use on the Night Riviera and thus some painted in GWR colours that might help expand the interest, particularly if they find daytime use as well.

 

Add in GBRF at some point created a special livery that could drive collector interest and maybe.

[newbryford]

35 minutes ago, mdvle said:

BeyerThe biggest question given the small fleet size is how widespread they get used.  If they remain geographically limited, the small fleet size and lack of alternate liveries will make it a difficult sell - more so if as stated above they end up being significantly different enough that they need all new tooling

 

Now if say they were reliable, and perhaps then put into use on the Night Riviera and thus some painted in GWR colours that might help expand the interest, particularly if they find daytime use as well.

 

Add in GBRF at some point created a special livery that could drive collector interest and maybe.

 

A small fleet isn't always a no-no to making a model.

DP2, Falcon, Lion, 89, APT-E to list some fleets consisting of only a single example. And not many livery variants between them.

 

Other modelled numerically low quantities - D600 Warships, D84xx (Class 16).

There are also examples of low fleet numbers of steam locos that have been produced in model form.

 

As for Night Riviera use - are the 69's fitted with ETS?

(Or if you are referring to 73/9s - the ETS index is possibly a bit on the low side for a full Night Riviera set)

 

 

 

 

 

[mdvle]

5 minutes ago, newbryford said:

 

A small fleet isn't always a no-no to making a model.

DP2, Falcon, Lion, 89, APT-E to list some fleets consisting of only a single example. And not many livery variants between them.

 

Yes, but they are usually in some way collectible for being unique or prototypes, so the interest exceeds what should be expected (and I would point out the 89 isn't announced yet and while there could be several reasons why Rails haven't announced it as going ahead the fact that we are about to reach 3 months with silence doesn't really look good).

 

5 minutes ago, newbryford said:

Other modelled numerically low quantities - D600 Warships, D84xx (Class 16).

There are also examples of low fleet numbers of steam locos that have been produced in model form.

 

The early diesels benefited from being in the prime buying era at the time - a Class 69 would still have 30 years to reach that.

 

5 minutes ago, newbryford said:

As for Night Riviera use - are the 69's fitted with ETS?

(Or if you are referring to 73/9s - the ETS index is possibly a bit on the low side for a full Night Riviera set)

 

No, referring to the 69's (or even a subclass of 69's) - depends really on whether they are looking for a replacement for the Class 57's which are now at around 20 years old.

 

 

 

[m0rris]

I realise we are going a little bit off topic now -but reviewing the traction arrangements for the night riviera is part of the latest DA3 award for GWR - from where I am sitting I can only see three options 1) new build locos (unlikely) 2) 67s 3)  (after mods to stock/power cars) - HSTs.  I suspect that GBRF already know exactly what they want to deploy the 69s on to to release other traction.

[Wild Boar Fell]

Can't see the 69s being used for sleeper work, as far as I am aware there is no ETS on a 56 and certainly not on a 66.

 

As far as a model is concerned, you'd be into at least tooling up a new body (the roof is noticeably different), the amount of visible changes to the underside remain to be seen.

[Hilux5972]

Have any been converted yet?

[Covkid]

On 16/08/2020 at 00:40, mdvle said:

 

Yes, but they are usually in some way collectible for being unique or prototypes, so the interest exceeds what should be expected (and I would point out the 89 isn't announced yet and while there could be several reasons why Rails haven't announced it as going ahead the fact that we are about to reach 3 months with silence doesn't really look good).

 

 

The early diesels benefited from being in the prime buying era at the time - a Class 69 would still have 30 years to reach that.

 

 

No, referring to the 69's (or even a subclass of 69's) - depends really on whether they are looking for a replacement for the Class 57's which are now at around 20 years old.

 

I

On 16/08/2020 at 00:40, mdvle said:

 

From a modelliing perspective the 69s are likely to be a class of ten identical locos painted in GBRf and perhaps "company" liveries. Will they be diverse enough for a manufacturer ? Many of the prototypes mentioned made more than one livery in their short careers - perhaps GT3 apart 

 

I guess there is scope for an aftermarket kit of Shawplan multimedium type bits to convert the Hornby 56 into a 69. 

Bodyshell and bogies but new roof and loads of etched and printed bits. Might even be worth a subscription type production run for an enterprising individual who could acquire a batch of base model 56s at a good price.  

 

[black and decker boy]

13 hours ago, Hilux5972 said:

Have any been converted yet?

No, none completed but at least 1 or 2 are fitted with their new internals and parts of their new roof.

 

dont forget that GBRF own more than the 10 in the initial batch so if this proves a success, may extend the fleet. There are also 56s they don’t own or operate (yet)
 

in theory, Hornby could easily make these, a new bodyshell is all that is required as chassis & bogies remain the same (are the boxes on the under frame integral to the mould or added extra?) but not sure Hornby are that switched on to ultramodern Low variety locos. I could see Silverfox or somebody creating a 3D print or resin cast body, maybe with etched detailing?