Jim’s “out and about with GBRf” thread

[big jim]

Interesting to note the GBRf biomass hoppers in tow.

Was that a training/handling run or revenue train?

 

ISTR that 60s aren't allowed on the Drax biomass hoppers because their compressors aren't large enough to supply the air required to open the doors.

Can 60s provide enough air to operate the doors on the GB biomass hoppers or is it done differently on them compared to the Drax version?

 

Cheers,

Mick

It was a booked train, 66 dropped off it at tyne and we put the 60 on, loaded fine and I left before it began emptying so I assume it unloaded ok as the return is showing on RTT as en route to tyne as I type this

[Ragtag]

Welcome to my neck of the woods Jim (Ashington born and bred I grew up next to the second level crossing after the 'black bridge')

 

Unfortunately I missed it as I'm in Montreal at the mo but it'll be good to see 60s (or indeed anything) on the line again

[Alcanman]

With the heads up from Big Jim that 60047 would be working 6N86 / 9:19  Tyne - Lynemouth PS ( confirmed around 10.30am by looking out my window and seeing 60047 heading north) I guessed

 

the loco would be powering the return working 6N87 / 13:32  Lynemouth - Tyne. 

 

14:00 South Newsham level crossing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[big jim]

Same again!

 

 

Alcanman: you may have noticed we had signalling problems at newsham! The driver said you can see why we call it the Blyth and Twine, it’s held together with string!

 

The thing I’ve enjoyed most about this week so far has been the drivers reactions to the class 60, all have previous on them but not with as heavy trains as the biomass, every driver so far has said ‘can we just keep going from the docks once loaded and we won’t get a standing start on the bank’ every driver I’ve told to stop on the bank and trust me, we have had both dry and wet rail so far and the 60 has pulled away without so much as a squeak from the wheel and cruised to the top of the bank without breaking a sweat, by the time we have reached lynemouth they have all been very impressed by it and have said they are looking forward to using them full time

Edited August 21, 2018 by big jim

[scottishlocos]

Jim

 

Great to see you out and about with GBrf and class 60s on heavy trains they were designed to haul

[eastwestdivide]

What sort of tonnage are those biomass trains?

Edited August 21, 2018 by eastwestdivide

[4630]

Typically the loaded biomass trains are timed for 2,400 tonnes.

[John M Upton]

I have to admit I haven't been paying attention recently.  Why have Colas just spent a fortune on buying and repairing ten Class 60's only to then promptly bin them to a rival operator?  Makes no sense.

[big jim]

I have to admit I haven't been paying attention recently. Why have Colas just spent a fortune on buying and repairing ten Class 60's only to then promptly bin them to a rival operator? Makes no sense.

they were under utilising the extra 7 class 70 that we’re bought for work that never materialised so the people running the company (ie accountants) told em to get rid of 60s as they were an expensive asset, maintenance heavy etc, agreed though, makes no sense!

[virginhst539]

they seem to be clinging on to 60002 for now. it was still at oxwellmains the other day having missed its path to doncaster.

[big jim]

LOOK.....a GBRf engine!

 

 

Waiting for the single line at newsham on the way back from lynemouth

[big jim]

they seem to be clinging on to 60002 for now. it was still at oxwellmains the other day having missed its path to doncaster.

Some photographers on the bridge had the money shot earlier at pelaw as 60002 passed us on the oxwellmains just as we headed back to tyne!

[mark axlecounter]

I have been talking to a lad who was with you yesterday.

He was on the 4m03 and 6s00. He said something about oil and a shirt.

[big jim]

Yeah he said he you were asking about me!

 

3 days in and I’ve already ruined one shirt, 2 rips in it and covered in muck from going through the class 60 fan compartment, gonna have to get a ‘foremans smock’ or something

[russ p]

I remember the fan compartments being lovely new and clean

[jamie92208]

Yeah he said he you were asking about me!

 

3 days in and I’ve already ruined one shirt, 2 rips in it and covered in muck from going through the class 60 fan compartment, gonna have to get a ‘foremans smock’ or something

I've seen those called "An Inspectors slop" possibly by O S Nock.

 

Jamie

[mark axlecounter]

Yeah he said he you were asking about me!

3 days in and I’ve already ruined one shirt, 2 rips in it and covered in muck from going through the class 60 fan compartment, gonna have to get a ‘foremans smock’ or something

He said that you was clean going in but when you came out of that 60s engine room you was a dirty man.

[Enterprisingwestern]

The thing I’ve enjoyed most about this week so far has been the drivers reactions to the class 60, all have previous on them but not with as heavy trains as the biomass, every driver so far has said ‘can we just keep going from the docks once loaded and we won’t get a standing start on the bank’ every driver I’ve told to stop on the bank and trust me, we have had both dry and wet rail so far and the 60 has pulled away without so much as a squeak from the wheel and cruised to the top of the bank without breaking a sweat, by the time we have reached lynemouth they have all been very impressed by it and have said they are looking forward to using them full time

 

So, we build 100 perfectly capable locomotives, new foreign operators come and think they know better and import inferior locomotives and scrap/store the better locomotives?

No wonder the British railway system is in the state it's in.

 

Mike.

[The Stationmaster]

So, we build 100 perfectly capable locomotives, new foreign operators come and think they know better and import inferior locomotives and scrap/store the better locomotives?

No wonder the British railway system is in the state it's in.

 

Mike.

 

Yes and no.  the various types of heavy freight locos of the past 30 years have to be seen in context.

 

The 60s took a long while to get right but were good once they were sorted but Yeoman went for the Class 59 because they had good experience with GM and were  guaranteed they'd get exactly what they wanted 'out of the box' - and they did, together with superb after sales service plus more economical maintenance than the Class 60 would have given them.  Hence ARC and NP also went for Class 59s in their search for high power locos - they were the only 'off the shelf' alternatives to a Class 60 and the Yeoman experience, compared with BR's initial Class 60 experience, was a very firm indication of where to go shopping for a high power loco capable of working 5,000 ton (not tonne) trains.

 

The 66s were a rather different matter in that EWS needed a loco that was cheap to operate, very cheap to maintain, offered fleet standardisation in place of a rag bag assortment of ex BR types some of which were excellent and some of which were not much use as freight locos, and could no doubt be obtained on a very attractive lease deal.  Basically no the British manufacturer had no alternative to offer unless they came up with a new design which might well involve considerable post-delivery development work judging by their most immediately recent offering (the Class 60).  60s had turned out to be pretty good, perhaps not quite having the sheer grunt of a 59 but still pretty good - but in TLF hands they were definitely mollycoddled and probably wouldn't stand up to the sort of 'abuse' inflicted by the average Class 66 diagram.

 

All really an outcome of BR's  (no doubt partly Govt inflicted) stop-go-stop loco procurement policy after the main era of dieselisation which had inflicted on the network such junk as the atrocious Class 56 and left no real scenario in which there could be a steady development of  freight loco design and reliability.

 

As for storing the 60s while using something else there is a very simple matter of economics.  The 60s cost nothing to own and come with a possibly probably higher maintenance cost than the US locos when they are in traffic plus their fuel consumption needs careful attention when diagramming them.  In contrast the US built locos are being continuously paid for in terms of lease fees and cost little in the way of maintenance with a lot of it being capable of being done anywhere by a man who turns up in a van - they need less time on depot for maintenance so can work for longer hours in traffic at a lower cost.  Nobody is likely to leave standing something he has to pay for anyway while using a more expensive tool to do jobs where its full capabilities aren't needed - simple economics.  if the task changes then the balance changes and could favour a different approach using a different tool.

I've seen those called "An Inspectors slop" possibly by O S Nock.

 

Jamie

Or in railway clothing catalogue terms - a dustcoat.

[Covkid]

So, we build 100 perfectly capable locomotives, new foreign operators come and think they know better and import inferior locomotives and scrap/store the better locomotives?

No wonder the British railway system is in the state it's in.

 

Mike.

 

I think that depends on personal defination of "inferior". 

From an operating point of view the best loco is the one that never fails in traffic, carries tonnes of fuel, cheap to operate and maintaIn and is also cheap to acquire.  The 70 was the breakthrough design to get GE into the UK marketplace. From what I understand the 70 is a very strong loco and is the only heavy freight diesel in the UK with AC traction motors.  These give better performance than DC motors and need less maintenance. The downside to the 70s are ride (drivers are not keen on them) and their maintenance requirements.

[ruggedpeak]

However you slice it and dice it the 66's were pretty much a no-brainer for all the reasons mentioned above. The days of buying and operating a whole series of different size/types of locos in a fleet are long gone, as they are in vehicle fleets, airlines etc. A fully supported lease package is generally far more attractive to bean counters as well. The anomaly now is the Euro emissions regs that effectively preclude acquiring new loco fleets - if these regs disappeared I suspect a whole swathe of older traction would be scrapped in fairly short order and replaced by more 66's or similar.

 

There are of course notable exceptions like DRS for well known reasons.

[Gary H]

Yes and no.  the various types of heavy freight locos of the past 30 years have to be seen in context.

 

The 60s took a long while to get right but were good once they were sorted but Yeoman went for the Class 59 because they had good experience with GM and were  guaranteed they'd get exactly what they wanted 'out of the box' - and they did, together with superb after sales service plus more economical maintenance than the Class 60 would have given them.  Hence ARC and NP also went for Class 59s in their search for high power locos - they were the only 'off the shelf' alternatives to a Class 60 and the Yeoman experience, compared with BR's initial Class 60 experience, was a very firm indication of where to go shopping for a high power loco capable of working 5,000 ton (not tonne) trains.

 

The 66s were a rather different matter in that EWS needed a loco that was cheap to operate, very cheap to maintain, offered fleet standardisation in place of a rag bag assortment of ex BR types some of which were excellent and some of which were not much use as freight locos, and could no doubt be obtained on a very attractive lease deal.  Basically no the British manufacturer had no alternative to offer unless they came up with a new design which might well involve considerable post-delivery development work judging by their most immediately recent offering (the Class 60).  60s had turned out to be pretty good, perhaps not quite having the sheer grunt of a 59 but still pretty good - but in TLF hands they were definitely mollycoddled and probably wouldn't stand up to the sort of 'abuse' inflicted by the average Class 66 diagram.

 

All really an outcome of BR's  (no doubt partly Govt inflicted) stop-go-stop loco procurement policy after the main era of dieselisation which had inflicted on the network such junk as the atrocious Class 56 and left no real scenario in which there could be a steady development of  freight loco design and reliability.

 

As for storing the 60s while using something else there is a very simple matter of economics.  The 60s cost nothing to own and come with a possibly probably higher maintenance cost than the US locos when they are in traffic plus their fuel consumption needs careful attention when diagramming them.  In contrast the US built locos are being continuously paid for in terms of lease fees and cost little in the way of maintenance with a lot of it being capable of being done anywhere by a man who turns up in a van - they need less time on depot for maintenance so can work for longer hours in traffic at a lower cost.  Nobody is likely to leave standing something he has to pay for anyway while using a more expensive tool to do jobs where its full capabilities aren't needed - simple economics.  if the task changes then the balance changes and could favour a different approach using a different tool.

 

A very accurate summing up, Mike TBH.

That other abomination ofcourse was the Class 58, the less said about that the better!!

[big jim]

Had a go on the grabby machine earlier, won a Hornby class 60!

 

[Signaller69]

Had a go on the grabby machine earlier, won a Hornby class 60!

 

I'm guessing that one isn't "£1 a go, a prize every time"???!

[APOLLO]

I won a Teddy Bear on one of those !!

 

 

Brit15