The class 59s

[pheaton]

The main difference other than details is 59/2s and 59/1s have a higher top speed

[Steadfast]

Don't the four small black stars between the lights on the yellow panel indicate it is 59104?

 

cheer

Indeed they do. 103 is the odd one out in that they are white.

  

The main difference other than details is 59/2s and 59/1s have a higher top speed

I thought it was just the 59/2s that did 75? Neither Yeoman or ARC had any wagons that could do over 60, indeed much was 45mph and still is. When rakes of IIAs, HKAs etc run as class 4 I've only ever seen a 59/2 or a 66 on the front

 

jo

[newbryford]

My one and only 59 in e-format.

 

59201 at Warrington in March 2010. On trial on the LBT coal traffic.

 

 

Glad it didn't prove superior to British traction.........................................................................

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Andy Siddall]

Thanks Rivercider!

 

They say you learn something new everyday!

 

Cheers

 

Andy

[Accurascale Fran]

My one and only 59 in e-format.

 

59201 at Warrington in March 2010. On trial on the LBT coal traffic.

 

59201s.jpg

 

Glad it didn't prove superior to British traction.........................................................................

 

Cheers,

Mick

I still reckon a 59/0 would've piddled all over a 60 on such an assignment. May as well have used a 66 as use a 59/2.

[Classsix T]

I still reckon a 59/0 would've piddled all over a 60 on such an assignment. May as well have used a 66 as use a 59/2.

From what I remember the incline out of LBT was more than the 66s weedy alternator and traction motor package could handle.

 

C6T.

[newbryford]

I still reckon a 59/0 would've piddled all over a 60 on such an assignment. May as well have used a 66 as use a 59/2.

 

ISTR that a 60 came out marginally better than a 59 (and that was a 59/0) on extensive tests along the South Wales main line including Stormy Bank with heavy iron ore trains, despite having a lower rated tractive effort................

 

Why would a 59/0 be better than a 59/2 anyway? According to my reference books, the only obvious difference is top speed. All the other data appears the same - tractive effort/engine/traction motors/alternator

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Rivercider]

ISTR that a 60 came out marginally better than a 59 (and that was a 59/0) on extensive tests along the South Wales main line including Stormy Bank with heavy iron ore trains, despite having a lower rated tractive effort................

 

Why would a 59/0 be better than a 59/2 anyway? According to my reference books, the only obvious difference is top speed. All the other data appears the same - tractive effort/engine/traction motors/alternator

 

Cheers,

Mick

I seem to recall reading that the first five 59s were built in a specially set aside area of the factory

and the level of craftmanship and finish was very high, obviously as they were to be a shop window for future hoped for orders.

I think that meant that the quaility of the drivers environment in the cab was better for example,

though whether that difference also applied to the engine and performance on the road,

perhaps someone who has worked with them could say?

 

cheers

[pheaton]

Indeed they do. 103 is the odd one out in that they are white.

   I thought it was just the 59/2s that did 75? Neither Yeoman or ARC had any wagons that could do over 60, indeed much was 45mph and still is. When rakes of IIAs, HKAs etc run as class 4 I've only ever seen a 59/2 or a 66 on the front

 

jo

the 59/1s were not built for yeoman they were built for Hanson (ARCs parent company) which ran JFKs and JHAs which I believe "were" rated to 75mph

[big jim]

From what I remember the incline out of LBT was more than the 66s weedy alternator and traction motor package could handle.

 

C6T.

 

 

no, a 66 will get out of LBT, as long as you only have 19 iia wagons and take a run at the bank!

 

i only ever got stuck once coming out of there with 66725, i ended up hand sanding the track and i got it moving eventually, 45 mins to move less than 100 metres!

 

60s will get out of there easily as will 59s (although i've not had a go of them!!)

[pheaton]

My one and only 59 in e-format.

 

59201 at Warrington in March 2010. On trial on the LBT coal traffic.

 

59201s.jpg

 

Glad it didn't prove superior to British traction.........................................................................

 

Cheers,

Mick

I would say it did prove superior....

 

Its a speculative one....and I don't disagree with you,

 

But ask yourself has the 60 ever achieved the availability figures of the 59 (95%) no

 

but more importantly did the 60 spawn off thousands of re-orders.....no

 

in terms of performance there's very little between them, but the 59 led to the EMD series 66 and when the 60 was put out to tender by British rail EMD offered a state of the art class 59, which would have probably contained all the "toys" emd had to strip off the 59 to get to fit the British loading gauge......the only reason they didn't get the order was purely political.

Edited March 14, 2014 by pheaton

[newbryford]

I would say it did prove superior....

 

Its a speculative one....

 

But ask yourself has the 60 ever achieved the availability figures of the 59 (95%) no

 

but more importantly did the 60 spawn off thousands of re-orders.....no

 

in terms of performance there's very little between them, but the 59 led to the EMD series 66 and when the 60 was put out to tender by British rail EMD offered a state of the art class 59, which would have probably contained all the "toys" emd had to strip off the 59 to get to fit the British loading gauge......the only reason they didn't get the order was purely political.

 

Agreed that the difference is performance is marginal. (But to the right side of the pond!)

 

The 59's always were and pretty much always have been a cossetted and cared for bit of kit, with dedicated crews and fitters and routes - unlike the common user policy of the then BR. In much the same way that your own private car is far more cared for that the "pool car" at work - and I've driven some really dodgy pool cars!

This had an impact on reliability (no disrespect to any BR staff there), to the benefit of the EMD machines.

 

IMO, the availability figures were massaged for the 59's - as their availability was usually quoted as available for the jobs that they were booked to, not simply how many locos were available at any one time. That way, if a 59 was due maintenance, it wasn't included as "non-available", whereas, a 60 (and other BR locos) on maintenance would be unavailable, thus lowering the overall figure.

 

Stripping off the "toys" to make the 59 fit the UK loading gauge isn't a true comparison - it levelled the playing field to put the best package within the same restricted UK loading gauge.

 

The order wasn't all politics. Fuel efficiency was a prime reason.The Class 60 contract was awarded on "whole life cost", taking into account the fact that the Mirrlees lump burns far less fuel than the gas-guzzling EMD 645 and 710. I can't remember the figures but, ISTR that it was in the tens of millions of pounds over their intended lifetime. I wonder what the benefits are now, with the increases in fuel prices over the last few years?

I wonder if a 70 can match the specific fuel efficiency of a 60?

 

It was well known that the UK loco building industry probably couldn't deliver lots of locos in a short time span, but the EWS 66 order was partly political - EWS' parent company was Wisconsin Central - from the US.

 

As an aside from the 59/60 debate - how does the build quality of the 59 compare against a 66? Some of the early 66's are now showing large areas of rust. (That's one thing that was very good about the 60 - the superstructure and it's paint job. Even the odd ones that survive in their original triple grey today are in good structural and paint order, albeit very dirty!)

 

Cheers,

Mick

Edited March 14, 2014 by newbryford

[Classsix T]

no, a 66 will get out of LBT, as long as you only have 19 iia wagons and take a run at the bank!

 

i only ever got stuck once coming out of there with 66725, i ended up hand sanding the track and i got it moving eventually, 45 mins to move less than 100 metres!

 

60s will get out of there easily as will 59s (although i've not had a go of them!!)

Was thinking more alongside lines of EWSs Sheds Jim, half the engines the 59s (or 66/6s) are IMHO. But then market forces dictated what was delivered, a high availability replacement for 37/5, 37/7, 56 and 58.

Suffice it to say I am led to believe a certain Mr Heller was instrumental in all this, but will not divulge more without alcoholic bribery off forum!

 

C6T.

[Steadfast]

the 59/1s were not built for yeoman they were built for Hanson (ARCs parent company) which ran JFKs and JHAs which I believe "were" rated to 75mph

The Yeoman O&K stuff is 45 mph, the ARC (later Hanson) stuff is 60, running as class 7 and class 6 respectively.

The 59/1s are definitely 60 mph machines. If my memory serves, as built the Yeoman ones were lower but adding the yaw damper to the bogie allowed them to run at 60 mph.

 

jo

[The Stationmaster]

I'm surprised by the comments about Class 59 availability and 'dedicated Drivers' - the Yeoman and ARC locos were driven by all Drivers at two different depots, no sort of special selection - just Drivers doing their jobs.  Similarly the reliability of the Yeoman locos (and probably the ARC ones but I've never heard any detail for them) was incredibly different from that of the Class 60s, from what I was told, and know, the Yeoman locos suffered very few casualties in traffic and the main thing that failed on them was the BR supplied AWS gear.

 

But it is only fair to add that EMD's support organisation is little short of amazing - if there was a component failure the procedure was to email EMD and they would despatch the part immediately on receipt of the email.  Not only that but any part up to and including a traction motor in size/weight is despatched by airfreight and I do know of instances where Yeomans emailed for a part and collected it from Heathrow within 24 hours.  Similarly technical advice was always dealt with promptly by email.  Now one can understand this happening for Yeoman as a UK lead customer but the service received by ARC was no different.

 

As far as availability is concerned as I have said before there are different ways of measuring it and even BR Regions differed in their methods - and one measure is number of locos available for traffic against the number booked to be available for traffic, another is number available for traffic out of the total fleet and so on.

 

As far as load shifting ability is concerned the Yeoman and ARC 59s did exactly what they were designed to do, and no British manufacturer could match the spec - which was to get a trailing load of 5,000 (Long) tons from the Somerset quarries to Acton in a single trainload including the long climb up to Woodborough and the climb past Frome North on steep curvature up past Clink Road Jcn.  When we did a trial out of Whatley with the ARC locos we had a trainload of 5,100 (Long) tons plus a second Class 59 in the formation in case we hit problems on the gradient & curvature through Frome so over 5,200 tons trailing and in fact the Super Creep only cut in as we ran round to Clink Road when all the train was on the curve and on rising gradients.

 

The only problem is that with loads like that speeds are very low at the steepest parts but the locos will easily keep the trains rolling.  Incidentally speeds dropped to almost the same low levels doing a trial through the Severn Tunnel with a pair of Class 37s on 2,100 tons of loaded oil tanks.  As I tried to make very clear to the 'Heavy Haul' symposium at the IMechE which Yeomans sponsored back in the early '90s there is inevitably a trade off between load and speed when working with very heavy trains and that has to be measured against their value in reducing ton-mileage costs.

 

Compared with the early 59s the 66s are simply the 'cooking version' - a large fleet getting large fleet treatment and built in large numbers and very different when it comes to haulage capability.

[6Y99]

You are right in what you say Station Master. A work college was a driver based at Old Oak Common in the "Freight Link" and he was in the initial batch of drivers who learned the new type 5's The key that made the whole 59 project as you say was the second to non support EMD offered. He has told it was quite common to find EMD engineers at Old Oak or Acton or even riding out on the type in traffic and discussing any issues that he would be having with the loco's. The fault books would be constantly checked daily and the exam program that locomotives had was also brilliant. During his time on the 59s he only ever had to protect his train once near Taplow when he was working 4,000 ton loaded train and the alternator gave up the ghost and and he could apply any power. A new class 60 came out to rescue him and drag the whole lot back to Acton and even with a dead loco and 4,000 tons of  stone the 60 manged very well.

 

With regard to class 66s having spent the best part of 15 years working with them they are the cooking version of a class 59. However, the diagrams these locomotives work are far more punishing then any diagrams the former BR trainload companies ever created. The loco's mile per causality rate is streets ahead of what class 37s, 47s, 56s, 58s and 60s would ever achieve. Admittedly some of the operators who operate the class 66s have totally flogged the loco's and they are in need of major exams but on the whole what one of these locomotives can do on a full tank diesel is amazing. Yeah they can be rough riding and they are loud in the cab (but so are the 59s) but they are a solid loco and says something when GB want more of them and have paid a premium to get them.  

[newbryford]

I'm surprised by the comments about Class 59 availability and 'dedicated Drivers' - the Yeoman and ARC locos were driven by all Drivers at two different depots, no sort of special selection - just Drivers doing their jobs.  Similarly the reliability of the Yeoman locos (and probably the ARC ones but I've never heard any detail for them) was incredibly different from that of the Class 60s, from what I was told, and know, the Yeoman locos suffered very few casualties in traffic and the main thing that failed on them was the BR supplied AWS gear.

 

But it is only fair to add that EMD's support organisation is little short of amazing - if there was a component failure the procedure was to email EMD and they would despatch the part immediately on receipt of the email.  Not only that but any part up to and including a traction motor in size/weight is despatched by airfreight and I do know of instances where Yeomans emailed for a part and collected it from Heathrow within 24 hours.  Similarly technical advice was always dealt with promptly by email.  Now one can understand this happening for Yeoman as a UK lead customer but the service received by ARC was no different.

 

 

Hi Mike,

"Dedicated" is probably the wrong choice of word. What I was implying is that the fleet was and still is, relatively restricted in it's sphere of operations. As you say, two depots drove them, not everyone, everywhere. so possibly those two depots had a bit more "ownership" of them.

 

As you and 6Y99 point out, they are well looked after and continue to be doing exactly what it say on the tin.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Glorious NSE]

As an aside from the 59/60 debate - how does the build quality of the 59 compare against a 66? Some of the early 66's are now showing large areas of rust. (That's one thing that was very good about the 60 - the superstructure and it's paint job. Even the odd ones that survive in their original triple grey today are in good structural and paint order, albeit very dirty!)

 

In terms of the 59 it's probably hard to tell, as (so far as I can tell) most 59s have had at least two (sometimes more!) repaints in their careers whereas the 66s tend not to have one yet!

[BR(S)]

I've had a look through the three pages of this thread and I don't think anyone's posted this:

 

[D6775]

no, a 66 will get out of LBT, as long as you only have 19 iia wagons and take a run at the bank!

 

i only ever got stuck once coming out of there with 66725, i ended up hand sanding the track and i got it moving eventually, 45 mins to move less than 100 metres!

 

60s will get out of there easily as will 59s (although i've not had a go of them!!)

 

From my memory of being involved in putting HTA's & 60's then 59's on the LBT/Fiddlers trains, 66's would lift 19 HTA's out of LBT, but were downloaded in the wet where as a 59 or 60 would happily lift 23, possibly more but constrained by the RR loop at LBT. The difference in loadings subsequently became apparent on running LBT to Ratcliffe services, when these were increased to 23 HTA's, a 59 couldn't get up Caverswell bank, but a 60 would.

[Rob F]

From my memory of being involved in putting HTA's & 60's then 59's on the LBT/Fiddlers trains, 66's would lift 19 HTA's out of LBT, but were downloaded in the wet where as a 59 or 60 would happily lift 23, possibly more but constrained by the RR loop at LBT. The difference in loadings subsequently became apparent on running LBT to Ratcliffe services, when these were increased to 23 HTA's, a 59 couldn't get up Caverswell bank, but a 60 would.

How  would a 70 compare to a 59 or a 60? I know they have a higher rated power unit than either but are they more in the mixed traffic mould of the 66s or a heavy hauler like the 59s and 60s?

 

ROB

[Rods_of_Revolution]

How  would a 70 compare to a 59 or a 60? I know they have a higher rated power unit than either but are they more in the mixed traffic mould of the 66s or a heavy hauler like the 59s and 60s?

 

ROB

 

The Class 70 has a superior starting and continuous tractive effort, couple that with more modern electronics it should, in theory, perform better than either a 59 or a 60. This does assume that the Class 70 isn't on fire...

 

Cheers,

 

Jack

[Theo C. Cupier]

59202 at Westbury this afternoon.

 

[The Bigbee Line]

59001 at Eastleigh after some damage repairs 16th June 2009.

 

 

More pictures on Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/55938574@N03/sets/72157642874160594/

 

[cromptonnut]

I've seen some 59's on the Purley stone trains in recent weeks - haven't managed to get any decent pictures though as they're usually as I pass on the train heading to or from work.