Potential future uses for class 68 & Mk5 sets?

[Vanmanyo]

That would have been the plan for 68s too but added an extra operational issue to enure it always happened.

I'm quite glad it didn't happen as it does slightly reduce nosie!

 

[Peter Sarf]

Sure they are noisy and I live a mile from the CML in Warks, so I get the 68s passing quite late on at night compared to the measely 7pm at Marylebone, but surely people should take into account living by a railway? Especially at Marylebone - one of the busiest cities in the world and you expect it to be quiet!!?? It just sometimes seems a bit OTT especially as the 68s don't run past 7:30pm out of MYB. If anything, the people of Birmingham have more of a claim to the noise as the 68s can run as late as 10pm at Birmingham. The rich, as always, seem to be the priortiy...

I would not assume the people living by the railway line at Marylebone are rich.

The 68s are unfortunately significantly more of a noise pollution problem than other trains. Even going back to the 1980s. The deep throbbing (bass) travels quite well and is keeping people awake. It drowns out the more common noises in London and hangs around for multiples of ten minutes.

To get noticed in amongst all the noise in London is quite an achievement.

 

[12LDA28C]

I would not assume the people living by the railway line at Marylebone are rich.

The 68s are unfortunately significantly more of a noise pollution problem than other trains. Even going back to the 1980s. The deep throbbing (bass) travels quite well and is keeping people awake. It drowns out the more common noises in London and hangs around for multiples of ten minutes.

To get noticed in amongst all the noise in London is quite an achievement.

As previously mentioned, there are no late night departures / arrivals at Marylebone using 68s so they are not 'keeping people awake' at night.

 

[Vanmanyo]

As previously mentioned, there are no late night departures / arrivals at Marylebone using 68s so they are not 'keeping people awake' at night.

Latest is half 7 on a Saturday right? I believe there were some 9pm departures for a few weeks a few months ago but I forgot why they did that

 

[Bletchleyite]

As previously mentioned, there are no late night departures / arrivals at Marylebone using 68s so they are not 'keeping people awake' at night.

A lot of people work shifts, you know.

General background noise occurs in cities, but 68s are very, very noisy. It's like opening an airport in the middle of London. Noise pollution is a serious issue.

 

[The Planner]

I would not assume the people living by the railway line at Marylebone are rich.

Doing a look up on Zoopla for Boston Place, which runs alongside the railway at Marylebone has sold prices at £1.2 million. Paveley St a bit further north £500k for a flat. Doesn't suggest a slum to me....

 

[Bletchleyite]

Doing a look up on Zoopla for Boston Place, which runs alongside the railway at Marylebone has sold prices at £1.2 million. Paveley St a bit further north £500k for a flat. Doesn't suggest a slum to me....

As with much of London there is also Council property in the area.

 

[172007]

A lot of people work shifts, you know.

General background noise occurs in cities, but 68s are very, very noisy. It's like opening an airport in the middle of London. Noise pollution is a serious issue.

And yet the local authority allows heliport and a low level helicopter flight path down the river with no rules that I am aware of for limiting types due to noise. AW109's which seem the mainstay are pretty damned noisy.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And yet the local authority allows heliport and a low level helicopter flight path down the river with no rules that I am aware of for limiting types due to noise. AW109's which seem the mainstay are pretty damned noisy.

I guess this is well established but nonetheless you don't see one that often.

Whereas the Class 68s are the only class of locomotive or unit that has ever operated out of Marylebone (or for that matter any UK railway station) that is that noisy, though admittedly the original HSTs were close. They really are unacceptable in their current form. I don't see why people seek to defend such a poor design.

 

[12LDA28C]

A lot of people work shifts, you know.

General background noise occurs in cities, but 68s are very, very noisy. It's like opening an airport in the middle of London. Noise pollution is a serious issue.

If someone works nights and sleeps during the day they cannot expect the world around them to remain silent so that they can sleep soundly. The majority of people go about their daily business during the day which could involve having building / construction work done, noise from traffic and/or roadworks and so on. It is not reasonable to expect the world to stop because you need to sleep. Night time is a rather different proposition.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If someone works nights and sleeps during the day they cannot expect the world around them to remain silent so that they can sleep soundly. The majority of people go about their daily business during the day which could involve having building / construction work done, noise from traffic and/or roadworks and so on. It is not reasonable to expect the world to stop because you need to sleep. Night time is a rather different proposition.

I'm not expecting anything to remain silent. I'm simply expecting that the railway might have more sense than to use a poor design of locomotive that is excessively noisy and causing of vibration.

It is specifically the Class 68 that is a problem. It is the only locomotive in British railway history that is to that extent. I wonder if some who defend it either do so simply because they enjoy the noise (and I do get that) or because they've not actually stood next to one?

If they can't come up with a decent silencer and anti-vibration design the things should probably be scrapped, to be honest.

 

[Killingworth]

If someone works nights and sleeps during the day they cannot expect the world around them to remain silent so that they can sleep soundly. The majority of people go about their daily business during the day which could involve having building / construction work done, noise from traffic and/or roadworks and so on. It is not reasonable to expect the world to stop because you need to sleep. Night time is a rather different proposition.

Leaving sleep aside, the day I was waiting for another train at Piccadilly and a 68 was ticking over nose in convinced me that they're unacceptable. It was necessary to raise voices to be heard at cafes some distance away. Other trains were quiet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Leaving sleep aside, the day I was waiting for another train at Piccadilly and a 68 was ticking over nose in convinced me that they're unacceptable. It was necessary to raise voices to be heard at cafes some distance away. Other trains were quiet.

Exactly.

The problem isn't locomotives, it's the Class 68 specifically. It's just a terrible piece of design to be that noisy. Even a 67 would be fine.

Edit: given this thread:

DB Cargo Class 67's up for sale

DB Cargo have today put the following Class 67's up for sale: Loco Location 67001 Crewe 67003 Toton 67004 Toton 67009 Crewe 67011 Crewe 67018 Crewe 67019 Toton 67026 Crewe 67028 Crewe 67030 Toton https://uk.dbcargo.com/rail-uk-en/services/disposals

www.railforums.co.uk

...perhaps Chiltern should consider a purchase!

 

[12LDA28C]

Edit: given this thread:

DB Cargo Class 67's up for sale

DB Cargo have today put the following Class 67's up for sale: Loco Location 67001 Crewe 67003 Toton 67004 Toton 67009 Crewe 67011 Crewe 67018 Crewe 67019 Toton 67026 Crewe 67028 Crewe 67030 Toton https://uk.dbcargo.com/rail-uk-en/services/disposals

www.railforums.co.uk

...perhaps Chiltern should consider a purchase!

Been there, done that with 67s. I'm sure that's exactly what Chiltern need - an assortment of clapped-out 67s that have been in storage for years which won't work with Mark 5 stock, if that's what they end up operating as speculated in some circles.

 

[Neptune]

Exactly.

The problem isn't locomotives, it's the Class 68 specifically. It's just a terrible piece of design to be that noisy. Even a 67 would be fine.

I’ve said it before. From where I sit in the office at the end away from York station I can’t hear any trains except class 68’s. That’s with windows closed and air conditioning humming and with the city walls for protection.

Bear in mind (the Marylebone link) you get 170’s (the same engines as 168’s) and 158’s with Perkins engines (the same engines as 165’s) and I can never hear them.

 

[Vanmanyo]

I’ve said it before. From where I sit in the office at the end away from York station I can’t hear any trains except class 68’s. That’s with windows closed and air conditioning humming and with the city walls for protection.

Bear in mind (the Marylebone link) you get 170’s (the same engines as 168’s) and 158’s with Perkins engines (the same engines as 165’s) and I can never hear them.

But for Chiltern it's maybe what 5 or 6 times a day that you'll hear them, I don't see how this very limited amount of noise for perhaps 10 seconds whilst it departs or arrives warrants the withdrawal of the whole fleet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But for Chiltern it's maybe what 5 or 6 times a day that you'll hear them, I don't see how this very limited amount of noise for perhaps 10 seconds whilst it departs or arrives warrants the withdrawal of the whole fleet.

They make an utter racket on idle too.

If Chiltern had something less noisy then they could use them more often, too!

 

[Vanmanyo]

They make an utter racket on idle too.

They shouldn't be in idle at Marylebone for too long. Just a few minutes whilst they turn on the engine but I would say a 66 has the same idle noise levels as a 68. I did work experience at Crewe with DRS in the Summer and the 66s were louder than the 68s

 

[Bletchleyite]

They shouldn't be in idle at Marylebone for too long. Just a few minutes whilst they turn on the engine but I would say a 66 has the same idle noise levels as a 68. I did work experience at Crewe with DRS in the Summer and the 66s were louder than the 68s

There aren't any 66s at MYB nor are there going to be, so what the 66 is like is irrelevant. But having stood next to both, the pure decibels may be similar (I don't think they are, but they could be) but the deep bass noise of the 68 and the loud turbo whine on departure is far, far more disruptive. 66s make that odd "yinyinyin" noise, while 66s shake the platform.

There is a very good reason why these have drawn far more complaints than anything else. They are simply too noisy to be used anywhere without modification.

 

[Vanmanyo]

There is a very good reason why these have drawn far more complaints than anything else. They are simply too noisy to be used anywhere without modification.

I honestly don't think they are that bad and you're taking it out of proportion a bit. I've been at stations with friends and family whilst 68s are present and been on the 68s with friends and family who know nothing about trains and they've never said anything about it. If we didn't have NIMBYs this country would be far better. How people can't deal with a little bit of noise for a minute or two that might distract them a bit if they're nearby and then suggest the removal of these trains that thousands rely on each day is beyond me.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I honestly don't think they are that bad and you're taking it out of proportion a bit. I've been at stations with friends and family whilst 68s are present and been on the 68s with friends and family who know nothing about trains and they've never said anything about it. If we didn't have NIMBYs this country would be far better. How people can't deal with a little bit of noise for a minute or two that might distract them a bit if they're nearby and then suggest the removal of these trains that thousands rely on each day is beyond me.

Or maybe the railway could just consider its neighbours (something which, to be fair, they often aren't great at) and refrain from procuring such awful pieces of design, and if they do and are called out on it accepting that they made an error and need to remedy it?

 

[Vanmanyo]

Or maybe the railway could just consider its neighbours (something which, to be fair, they often aren't great at) and refrain from procuring such awful pieces of design, and if they do and are called out on it accepting that they made an error and need to remedy it?

I think the neighbours should really consider their locations better. Although I agree the railways are pretty poor at respecting some things (such as leaving trains idling at stations - Chiltern are good at this at Oxford), some things like a loud train affecting someone for a short amount of time is a bit silly. People don't ask airlines to make their planes quieter because they live by the runway and can hear the planes!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the neighbours should really consider their locations better. Although I agree the railways are pretty poor at respecting some things (such as leaving trains idling at stations - Chiltern are good at this at Oxford), some things like a loud train affecting someone for a short amount of time is a bit silly.

It's not silly at all.

People don't ask airlines to make their planes quieter because they live by the runway and can hear the planes!

Quite a lot of money is in fact put into reducing the noise emitted by airliners, and noise abatement procedures are followed on take-off (that's why the plane typically "throttles back" shortly after takeoff, completing the main climb once it's out of the urban area).

 

[Vanmanyo]

To be fair I just think some people can be deliberately anti rail and a big ignorant (I'm not saying you are at all) - would these people rather have more cars with more pollution on our roads or keep a noisy train in service that isn't too bad for the environment (especially if HVO works).

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be fair I just think some people can be deliberately anti rail and a big ignorant (I'm not saying you are at all) - would these people rather have more cars with more pollution on our roads or keep a noisy train in service that isn't too bad for the environment (especially if HVO works).

I'd rather have a quiet, slick, smooth and modern electric railway, or if I have to have diesel then a quiet modern DEMU like the 80x or the Stadlers.

(You could make a proper locomotive based on that design with several engines in it - would be quieter on idle as you'd only leave one running, and more resilient as if one failed it'd still move).

FWIW my Polish mate thought the 68+Mk3 sets on Chiltern were like "some sort of old Soviet thing". And he's definitely experienced trains actually fitting that description.

But all that aside, hopefully the silencer modifications are successful and they can continue in use, but if it proves impossible to sort the issue out then they're probably best scrapped and replaced with a new design that is quieter.

 

[Killingworth]

I'd rather have a quiet, slick, smooth and modern electric railway, or if I have to have diesel then a quiet modern DEMU like the 80x or the Stadlers.

(You could make a proper locomotive based on that design with several engines in it - would be quieter on idle as you'd only leave one running, and more resilient as if one failed it'd still move).

FWIW my Polish mate thought the 68+Mk3 sets on Chiltern were like "some sort of old Soviet thing".

I am not anti-rail at all, although my journey this morning might swing me that way.

I've heard 68s and they are noisy. They are noisier than anything else operating on the passenger railway. Imposing them on routes that haven't seen and heard regular loco hauled stock for decades was bound to incite local residents. I'm mighty glad not to be one of them.

 

[87015]

FWIW my Polish mate thought the 68+Mk3 sets on Chiltern were like "some sort of old Soviet thing". And he's definitely experienced trains actually fitting that description.

Love to know what that was in reference too. Dont think they (PKP) had any air-con open stock pre recent times, and certainly no high speed, high power mainline diesels.

 

[12LDA28C]

But all that aside, hopefully the silencer modifications are successful and they can continue in use, but if it proves impossible to sort the issue out then they're probably best scrapped and replaced with a new design that is quieter.

Scrapping Class 68s, really? Or maybe just move them to other (e.g. freight) work where they won't sit idling near residential areas for long periods of time.

 

[HSTEd]

Scrapping Class 68s, really? Or maybe just move them to other (e.g. freight) work where they won't sit idling near residential areas for long periods of time.

I don't think there is really much work for them on the freight side.

The mixed traffic Bo-Bo diesel locomotive has no advantage over a Class 66 in actual freight operations.
It amazes me people continue to buy them, given the debacle with the Class 67.

Then again the only purchaser of them in modern times has been Direct Rail Services, which needs locomotives for nuclear flask operations that are unlike any other freight activity.
Once the flask trains cease in another few years we shall have to see what happens.

 

[Neptune]

To be fair I just think some people can be deliberately anti rail and a big ignorant (I'm not saying you are at all) - would these people rather have more cars with more pollution on our roads or keep a noisy train in service that isn't too bad for the environment (especially if HVO works).

I’m not anti-rail, it’s given me a good living for over 30 years. And in that 30 odd years I’ve never come across anything as noisy as a 68. The worst thing is the bassy resonance at idle and on departing they are horrifically loud compared to even something like a class 37. One was sat under Leeds station roof for about 20 minutes the other week and it was truly unpleasant on the ears and I could feel it in my chest.

The analogy of ‘would people rather have more cars’ is totally irrelevant too. They’d rather have quieter trains. We’re talking about noise pollution here and the fact that these locomotives are ridiculously loud compared to everything else.

I’m in the camp with those that think that those who say they’re fine with the racket they make are enthusiasts who like the noise. They’d soon think again if they suddenly had to live with it day in day out like the people of Marylebone and Scarborough. Notice they didn’t complain about the noise of trains before the advent of the 68’s being thrust upon their neighbourhoods.