Class 59 in 00

[Mooresby]

10 hours ago, Classsix T said:

Oof! Won their album in a radio phone-in competition (top ten albums, not theirs specifically) it's still in the sodding cellophane. I'll not even subject it to the outside as a bird scarer.

 

Christ, the plastic landfill those Neo-Osmonds must be responsible for...

 

C6T.

2nd prize presumably was two copies.... :)

[LaGrange]

10 hours ago, surfsup said:

she's currently awaiting a shiny (and expensive) new set of wheels. 

 

 

They need them replaced/reprofiled more frequently due to the creep-control they have to get heavy trains moving, so not a rare spare. Reckon its supply chain issues here alas, now where have we heard that before......

[Pmorgancym]

11 hours ago, LaGrange said:

 

They need them replaced/reprofiled more frequently due to the creep-control they have to get heavy trains moving, so not a rare spare. Reckon its supply chain issues here alas, now where have we heard that before......

Did they try creep control at Salisbury?  Looked like someone just pushed the big go lever!

[andythenorth]

Salisbury, the (very limited) videos imply they’re using kinetic techniques to shift the units using the moving mass of the 59, similar to off-road vehicle recovery when bogged.

 

Videos are only a minute or two though, so eh, dunno. 🙂 There’s quite a bit of froth and wibble on the Youtube comments and railforums https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-158-159-recovery-following-salisbury-collision.224409/

[adb968008]

On 09/08/2022 at 23:29, surfsup said:

It should be back out and about soon as it's moved into the main shed just last week. Unfortunately it's been a resident in Eastleigh Works since it's exploits at Salisbury - she's currently awaiting a shiny (and expensive) new set of wheels. 

 

To be honest though, I'm surprised GB hasn't swapped it with Freightliner for a 66 - it's still a pretty non standard loco in the GB fleet and a 66 would probably work out better for GB. 

Big engine for big jobs, special duty jobs..like Salisbury,

 

I’m sure its time as an inpatient waiting for wheels was just as rewarding as its time in service, afterall it didnt goto Eastleigh by choice or by failure.

 

i’m sure FL could make use of it, but they obviously dont need it, given the amount of stuff stored, DB too have tons of stored or easy to access locos on the continent. GBRF are sourcing everything they can get from as many places as they can.

[surfsup]

16 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Big engine for big jobs, special duty jobs..like Salisbury,

 

I’m sure its time as an inpatient waiting for wheels was just as rewarding as its time in service, afterall it didnt goto Eastleigh by choice or by failure.

 

i’m sure FL could make use of it, but they obviously dont need it, given the amount of stuff stored, DB too have tons of stored or easy to access locos on the continent. GBRF are sourcing everything they can get from as many places as they can.

While there is that, 003 remains pretty non standard in the GBRf fleet though, and seems to spend most of it's working days on the Eastleigh > Westbury > Eastleigh engineers circuit, I gather in part because of it's reliability. I just think a swap between owners would be a benefit to both - FL use the rest of the 59 fleet on the Mendip jobs (which of course they were designed for) while GB seems to use 60s and the lower geared 66s on the big heavy jobs in the North and South East. Swapping fleets at least would give FL all the 59s, GB a more standard fleet of 66s and probably slightly less headaches for both FOCs. 

 

Until anything of the sort happens though, this is all pretty academic though. 

[LaGrange]

14 hours ago, surfsup said:

Until anything of the sort happens though, this is all pretty academic though. 

 

Exactly, dont want this turning into wibblefest either, I'm sure Mendip Rail (at the time) knew 003 was available so could have bought it if they wanted. 

 

Gives the opportunity of 4 liveries for 003 after FY - DB/FY livery then HHPI and 2 versions of GBRF livery

[LaGrange]

Well the boxshifters said September, heres hoping

[GEARJAMMER]

On 31/08/2022 at 16:37, LaGrange said:

Well the boxshifters said September, heres hoping

I wouldn't hold ya breath.

[LaGrange]

On 02/09/2022 at 20:29, GEARJAMMER said:

I wouldn't hold ya breath.

'Oh look, Hell just froze over'.........

[pheaton]

2 hours ago, LaGrange said:

'Oh look, Hell just froze over'.........

do you know something we dont?

[GEARJAMMER]

On 05/09/2022 at 14:14, pheaton said:

do you know something we dont?

 

I know its now September and we've not seen so much as a photo of the production examples! 

 

Whilst LaGrange might be jumping the gun a bit by saying 'Hell just froze over'...... its certainly getting bloody cold!

[pheaton]

On 11/09/2022 at 00:30, GEARJAMMER said:

 

I know its now September and we've not seen so much as a photo of the production examples! 

 

Whilst LaGrange might be jumping the gun a bit by saying 'Hell just froze over'...... its certainly getting bloody cold!

with the delays gearjammer...im not sure they will bother TBH....im not expecting a pre-release review in the mags for the Dapol unicorn.

[LaGrange]

3 hours ago, pheaton said:

im not sure they will bother TBH....im not expecting a pre-release review in the mags for the Dapol unicorn.

 

Magazines say Q4 so thats 'more or less' now until Christmas. Given how long its taken Dapol can be confident at least that people know its coming, it wont be a surprise announcement.

 

Warley is the likely target, but that's just mere speculation, could land in Milton Keynes next month

 

As I've said before 'They will be here when they are here, not before then'

[St. Simon]

Hi,

 

I’ve just had a report from Dapol at the KMRC open day (via a trusted friend) that they are apparently on ship.

 

Of course, how long this ship might take is unknown, I personally think they are on the Titanic!

 

Simon

[Markwj]

10 hours ago, St. Simon said:

Hi,

 

I’ve just had a report from Dapol at the KMRC open day (via a trusted friend) that they are apparently on ship.

 

Of course, how long this ship might take is unknown, I personally think they are on the Titanic!

 

Simon

I think this was also reported in the last month or so but they do not appear in the latest mail shot from Rails which lists the forthcoming O, OO and N releases from Dapol. I think you may be right about the titanic!

[ERIC ALLTORQUE]

This will keep you amused as you wait the final stretch eh........

 

[atom3624]

Very informative, and quite a load for that test.

Is there a 'standard condition' for the load hauling - like 'x' tonnes over a distance of 10km, >= 20km/h ... etc.

 

Al.

[ERIC ALLTORQUE]

The 59 holds the haulage record for europe,two hauled 102 loaded wagons in 1992 with a dead one on the end incase of failure,they ran as loco 51 wagons the second powered loco and 51 wagons and the dead loco on the end.It got the record but a copling broke before the destnation they were aiming for but still did nine or ten miles with a mile long train at around 12000 tons.It was Forster Yeoman test.

22 hours ago, atom3624 said:

Very informative, and quite a load for that test.

Is there a 'standard condition' for the load hauling - like 'x' tonnes over a distance of 10km, >= 20km/h ... etc.

 

Al.

 

[Steadfast]

30 minutes ago, ERIC ALLTORQUE said:

The 59 holds the haulage record for europe,two hauled 102 loaded wagons in 1992 with a dead one on the end incase of failure,they ran as loco 51 wagons the second powered loco and 51 wagons and the dead loco on the end.It got the record but a copling broke before the destnation they were aiming for but still did nine or ten miles with a mile long train at around 12000 tons.It was Forster Yeoman test.

 

Pic linked from Flickr.

 

 

Jo

[Class 158 productions]

They had a sample of a national power one at the kernow 20th anniversary event. 

[atom3624]

Same moving AB's as the Hatton's one, or might they stay on?

Does the full sized one have skewed steps or is that reality going too far?  ....

 

Al.

[LaGrange]

3 hours ago, atom3624 said:

Same moving AB's as the Hatton's one, or might they stay on?

Does the full sized one have skewed steps or is that reality going too far?  ....

 

Al.

More a hand assembled one - I'm guessing from the batch that were seen at Ally Pally

 

Like I've already said they will just appear - Suez canal passage pending naturally

Edited September 19, 2022 by LaGrange

[The Stationmaster]

On 18/09/2022 at 14:04, ERIC ALLTORQUE said:

The 59 holds the haulage record for europe,two hauled 102 loaded wagons in 1992 with a dead one on the end incase of failure,they ran as loco 51 wagons the second powered loco and 51 wagons and the dead loco on the end.It got the record but a copling broke before the destnation they were aiming for but still did nine or ten miles with a mile long train at around 12000 tons.It was Forster Yeoman test.

 

I don't know where you got that from but as the person who did all the operational planning for that test train and took in all the technical planning meetings I can assure you that whoever told you that was in part talking a word which rhymes neatly with rowlocks.  For a start 102 wagons with a gross laden weight of 100 tons, or slightly over doesn't add to 12,000 tons but would only be 10,200 tons. Without looking back through my papers I can't confirm one way or the other the planned number of wagons but they definitely weren't evenly divided either side of the mid-train loco because the rearmost wagon was derailed while forming up the train at Merehead and having been re-reailed using a 50 ton bucket loader I made sure with FY staff that it was not reattached to the train.  However the  the train load still slightly exceeded 12,000 tons.

 

There was no loco on the rear end - dead or otherwise - simply the train engine and the mid-train helper (to use the Americanism). In fact we might have been able to avoid the problem we thought would be most likely if we had had a loco on the back of the train especially as the EMD reps turned down my request for an EOT monitoring unit stating they couldn't get one over from the USA.

 

The train actually ran something between no more than 5 - 6 miles before it parted and a coupling didn't break (which is what we thought would be most likely to happen) but in fact, and very unusually, a coupling hook on the mid-train loco broke.  Thus the test ended the better part of 60 miles from the location where the 12,000 ton test was planned to end.   Fortunately the burger van we had arrnged to be present there did turn up but as I had raced forward from the start in order to meet the trains at destination I and a couple of the local staff booked out specially to deal with the train splitting were offered as many burgers as we could ever wish to eat.

 

As it happened the test proved what a number of us from BR considered was probably going to be the Achilles Heel of working a train that heavy.  But what I think surprised all of us was that it happened far sooner than we had expected albeit in precisely the circumstances we considered were likely to cause what we thought might happen.

[ERIC ALLTORQUE]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

I don't know where you got that from but as the person who did all the operational planning for that test train and took in all the technical planning meetings I can assure you that whoever told you that was in part talking a word which rhymes neatly with rowlocks.  For a start 102 wagons with a gross laden weight of 100 tons, or slightly over doesn't add to 12,000 tons but would only be 10,200 tons. Without looking back through my papers I can't confirm one way or the other the planned number of wagons but they definitely weren't evenly divided either side of the mid-train loco because the rearmost wagon was derailed while forming up the train at Merehead and having been re-reailed using a 50 ton bucket loader I made sure with FY staff that it was not reattached to the train.  However the  the train load still slightly exceeded 12,000 tons.

 

There was no loco on the rear end - dead or otherwise - simply the train engine and the mid-train helper (to use the Americanism). In fact we might have been able to avoid the problem we thought would be most likely if we had had a loco on the back of the train especially as the EMD reps turned down my request for an EOT monitoring unit stating they couldn't get one over from the USA.

 

The train actually ran something between no more than 5 - 6 miles before it parted and a coupling didn't break (which is what we thought would be most likely to happen) but in fact, and very unusually, a coupling hook on the mid-train loco broke.  Thus the test ended the better part of 60 miles from the location where the 12,000 ton test was planned to end.   Fortunately the burger van we had arrnged to be present there did turn up but as I had raced forward from the start in order to meet the trains at destination I and a couple of the local staff booked out specially to deal with the train splitting were offered as many burgers as we could ever wish to eat.

 

As it happened the test proved what a number of us from BR considered was probably going to be the Achilles Heel of working a train that heavy.  But what I think surprised all of us was that it happened far sooner than we had expected albeit in precisely the circumstances we considered were likely to cause what we thought might happen.

I have seen some film of this somewhere and i was going on what was said on it as the train passed,its a while back so thanks for the facts you supplied.Will see if i can find film as i guess its on a disc somewhere in the loft,everyone likes a burger and cuppa.