GBRf Class 69 Project

[MGR Hooper!]

9 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

 

This is one of Northern Ireland Railways' 80 class Diesel Electric Multiple Units built in 1973 so the timescale is similar. It is based on the British Railways Mk2 coaches. Out of interest have you any pics of a HHPDEMU for comparison?

 

Let me have a look through my archives. The unit I'm referring to in particular was a modified one and had smaller cab windows like the one above.

 

Not a 100% match but certain things do stand out.

 

Let me go hunt for that picture.

[royaloak]

On 16/11/2019 at 15:44, russ p said:

 

 

The GM engine is narrower than the EE one in a 57 there is loads of room whereas in a 56 which is basically the same body its tight. 

Apparently they are fitting PBL brakes to the 69 where the 58 already has them.

The 66 cab is based on the 58 one even sharing the same windscreens so you would think be a lot less work for them

Were the 58s available?

They might well be a better candidate but if none are available what are they supposed to do?

[russ p]

They haven't scrapped many 58s and they are lying about in Europe or the uk. Don't think any are working now

[MarshLane]

22 hours ago, jools1959 said:

 

Mainline testing is supposed to start in June, 2020.

 

Heritage Line testing from May next year ahead of the main line work ... wonder what heritage railway is close to the EMD site and Longport ... that's Stoke for anyone who doesn't know .....

 

[big jim]

I should imagine they will go to the Severn valley for testing as they have a good relationship with GBRf, they will just need someone who signs Longport to kidderminster to drag them there (that’s basically me or marcus37) 

[Erixtar1992]

23 minutes ago, big jim said:

I should imagine they will go to the Severn valley for testing as they have a good relationship with GBRf, they will just need someone who signs Longport to kidderminster to drag them there (that’s basically me or marcus37) 

Or drag them to nene valley maybe, seem to use that a lot for stuff

[DavidB-AU]

Any idea which variant of the 710 engine they are getting? I can understand using the same 12N-710G3B-EC as the 66/67 for ease of maintenance but I'm not sure if it's IIIa emissions compliant. Pretty sure the 

12-710G3C-U2 (used in the Euro 3000) is.

 

Cheers

David

[TravisM]

1 hour ago, MarshLane said:

 

Heritage Line testing from May next year ahead of the main line work ... wonder what heritage railway is close to the EMD site and Longport ... that's Stoke for anyone who doesn't know .....

 

 

Great Central Railway (North) seems to be used a lot for testing but I suppose any heritage railway with a mainline connection could be used.

 

9 minutes ago, DavidB-AU said:

Any idea which variant of the 710 engine they are getting? I can understand using the same 12N-710G3B-EC as the 66/67 for ease of maintenance but I'm not sure if it's IIIa emissions compliant. Pretty sure the 

12-710G3C-U2 (used in the Euro 3000) is.

 

From what I gather, the 710 lump is second hand and by using that, the Class 56 bodyshell, it gets around tier 3 emissions due to “grandfather” rights.

[MarshLane]

23 hours ago, MarshLane said:

Heritage Line testing from May next year ahead of the main line work ... wonder what heritage railway is close to the EMD site and Longport ... that's Stoke for anyone who doesn't know .....

Sorry guys, that was said tongue in cheek, but its been suggested to me from a GB source that they may go far closer than anyone mentioned ... just down the road in fact.  Time will tell I guess.

[big jim]

51 minutes ago, MarshLane said:

its been suggested to me from a GB source that they may go far closer than anyone mentioned ... just down the road in fact. 

don’t think they will fit on apedale’s tracks! 

[MarshLane]

1 hour ago, big jim said:

don’t think they will fit on apedale’s tracks! 

Oh drat!

[TravisM]

56128, taken at the Nene Valley Railway in 2010 and I think it was being prepared for overhaul as the bodyside paintwork is rubbed down.  I think it was in this state when work was abandoned and it was stored in the tunnel before being sold on to Booth’s and then a candidate for the Class 69 project.

[Fat Controller]

8 hours ago, MarshLane said:

Sorry guys, that was said tongue in cheek, but its been suggested to me from a GB source that they may go far closer than anyone mentioned ... just down the road in fact.  Time will tell I guess.

Churnet Valley?

[mdvle]

On 10/11/2019 at 09:21, russ p said:

I'd have thought class 58s would be better as they are trying to make them similar to 66s 

 

I wonder, if in this era of YouTube and other social media idiots, if the ledge on the class 58 might have been viewed as too tempting a target if a train ended up proceeding slowly through a station?

[royaloak]

14 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

I wonder, if in this era of YouTube and other social media idiots, if the ledge on the class 58 might have been viewed as too tempting a target if a train ended up proceeding slowly through a station?

The 70s have the same body style so cant see that being an issue.

 

If the 58s are not for sale how do you buy them?

[royaloak]

On 22/11/2019 at 01:44, DavidB-AU said:

Any idea which variant of the 710 engine they are getting? I can understand using the same 12N-710G3B-EC as the 66/67 for ease of maintenance but I'm not sure if it's IIIa emissions compliant. Pretty sure the 

12-710G3C-U2 (used in the Euro 3000) is.

 

Cheers

David

I think the rules are as these are rebuilds the engine doesnt have to comply with the latest regs only the ones in place when the loco (bodyshell) was built.

[mdvle]

4 minutes ago, royaloak said:

The 70s have the same body style so cant see that being an issue.

 

The 70s also date from 12 years ago, so a different decision might well be made today.

 

4 minutes ago, royaloak said:

If the 58s are not for sale how do you buy them?

 

A far more likely reason.

[russ p]

9 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

I wonder, if in this era of YouTube and other social media idiots, if the ledge on the class 58 might have been viewed as too tempting a target if a train ended up proceeding slowly through a station?

 

 

Never known it happens on a 20

[jessy1692]

9 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

I wonder, if in this era of YouTube and other social media idiots, if the ledge on the class 58 might have been viewed as too tempting a target if a train ended up proceeding slowly through a station?

Same could be said for empty freughtliners... not much you can do really. If an idiot decides to try climb on board a moving train, best of luck to them!

[MarshLane]

11 hours ago, royaloak said:

I think the rules are as these are rebuilds the engine doesnt have to comply with the latest regs only the ones in place when the loco (bodyshell) was built.

 

Yes I believe your right - it has to meet the emissions standards that were in place at the time of its construction as long as the frames remain intact, in which case its classed as a rebuild.  If the frames are changed, its a new locomotive that must meet the current standards.  Don't quote me, but I believe that's the case.  Thats why the 73/9s were classed as rebuilds.

Edited November 24, 2019 by MarshLane
Clarification

[Ohmisterporter]

Does that mean that if the frames become damaged and are replaced new, though all other parts are re-used, the loco is then classified as new build? 

[ess1uk]

Trigger ‘s broom

[TravisM]

1 hour ago, Ohmisterporter said:

Does that mean that if the frames become damaged and are replaced new, though all other parts are re-used, the loco is then classified as new build? 

 

That all depends on the age of the loco.  When 70012 was damaged, written off by the insurers and returned to the US, it was stipulated that “nothing” could be reused.  GE straightened out the frame (to a point) and it was used as the plant “switcher” and then used for testing.  As GE have been paid for the loco, they effectively have a valuable asset with could be stripped for spares or go into new builds, they then effectively get paid twice.  I think from what my cousin said who works at the plant, when GE have finished with it, it has to be scrapped.

[MarshLane]

6 hours ago, Ohmisterporter said:

Does that mean that if the frames become damaged and are replaced new, though all other parts are re-used, the loco is then classified as new build? 

 

Its not quite that simple and like most things around EU regulations, it is complicated and it all depends on what aspect you are talking about.  I don't know all the ins and outs, but if you are talking from a railway certification perspective then yes it would be a new build, but from an emissions standards viewpoint, I believe it would be a rebuild.

 

Where the GBRf 73/9s were concerned, my understanding is that they were classed as rebuilds from the railway certification point of view, as long as the frames were original.  Emissions standards did not really come into that as they were putting brand new MTU engines in, which had to meet the latest criteria.  However, move away from railway certification and EU emissions standards are not too interested in frames (or even what mode of transport they are) purely the power unit - which could be for use in a railway locomotive, ship, or even a static power plant in a factory.

 

GBRf used this latter point to obtain its final batch 66/7s, which were ordered after the emissions regulations changed.  From memory (I'll stand corrected) but EMD had four engines on the ground in Europe that were delivered but never fitted to a loco - hence the power unit had been delivered to Europe and had touched the soil, therefore it was in the EU while the old emissions standards were in place.  These four were then shipped back to the states and incorporated into the final batch of 66/7s to be built - Nos. 66773 to 66779.  Of the seven, four were the EU power units, one was the power unit from 66734, that was written off in the derailment at Loch Trieg, and the other two power units came from accident damaged Euro66s, meaning that GBRf could order seven locos after the deadline for new build engines.

 

Where the 69s are concerned, there is regulation whereby rebuilt locos are only required to meet the regulations that were inforce at the time of the construction, which means a lot more can be done.  

 

Fire regulations are similar for example, I once asked a very Senior Manager at Virgin Trains East Coast why the new Class 800s could not simply have the Mk4 interior, it worked, it had been proved and was better than the DfT had specified.  I was told "the seats in the Mk4 do not meet the latest fire regulations and cannot be use in the IET, we can use them in the Mk4, because being refurbished, the seats and internal spec only has to meet the fire regulations that were in force when the vehicles were built!" I'll not get into the IET specs here, because that is a whole different ballgame thanks to the DfT!!!!

[Colin_McLeod]

18 hours ago, MarshLane said:

 

Yes I believe your right - it has to meet the emissions standards that were in place at the time of its construction as long as the frames remain intact, in which case its classed as a rebuild.  If the frames are changed, its a new locomotive that must meet the current standards.  Don't quote me, but I believe that's the case.  Thats why the 73/9s were classed as rebuilds.

 

Sorry to quote you but how does this work with new build replica steam locomotives?