Class 58

[D7666]

The above is correct but overlooks axle load.

An easy way to look at this is to think of a car in snow. You'd rather have a front wheel drive car, because the weight of the engine creates a downward force on the driving wheels.

66's are a suspended solid frame, in which the whole weight of the unit is equally distributed between draw bars. 58's were effectively a floating frame structured between non-integral cab units. This means there was very little downward force on the outer powered axles, hence the chronic wheelslip.

I am not sure what you are trying to say there, but in the way I do read it I think you are wrong, Or at least giving a wrong explanation.

A front engine car is asymmetric. 58s were symmetric.

58s have approximately equal loads across all six axles. Quoting BR diagram 580aA , weights in tonne are

no.1 cab end
1 20.9 empty 21.5 w/o
2 21.0 empty 21.6 w/o
3 20.9 empty 21.5 w/o
4 20.9 empty 21.4 w/o
5 21.0 empty 21.6 w/o
6 20.9 empty 21.5 w/o
no.2 cab end

i.e. within less than 0.5% of each other.

If - as you say - it was leading axles causing wheel slip it had nothing to do with weight of the whole unit, but I can't myself see what else you are trying to say.

I can't find an equivalent diagram for a 66 but I believe they are near identical at 21.5 +/- 0.1 tonne per axle on all six axles.


--
Nick

 

[Beveridges]

I thought the only problem with the 58's were their wheel slip control system was basic, and while 58050 had the more advanced system as in the Class 60's, it was not fitted to the rest of the 58's for some reason!

Probably due to the fact that they were all getting binned so they didn't want to spend the money. Or the fact that there were 100 Class 60's around for the really heavy stuff.

 

[Kneedown]

That doesn't explain why the 56s and a number of 37s outlived them. Neither does it explain why they all ended up overseas and none have entered service with any other operators. I'm guessing the class had some kind of endemic problem that made them undesirable for some reason.

58's were lovely loco's to drive. Comfy and user friendly, but when it came to doing what they were designed for, ie pulling 2000ton freight trains, 56's and a pair of 37's were far superior. We used to dread getting a 58 on the Calverton Colliery jobs due to the wheelslip problems. On the climb out of Calverton towards Bestwood, with 42 loaded HAA's, you had to have your thumb/foot permanently on the sand button or you'd slip to a stand. Not a problem with a 56 or 2x20's, but the 58's sanding system was notoriously poor and unreliable. It was a high pressure system that neccesitated narrow sand pipes. Unfortunately the narrow pipes were very prone to blockages resulting in little, if any, sand being delivered to the railhead. Several Drivers had to return to Calverton and split their train into two portions, making two runs to Bestwood. Such Drivers became unwilling members of the "Pontoon" club (21 or bust!) I myself had to request assistance after slipping to a stand on the reasonably level track at Toton Centre, after being unable to get going again after stopping to pick up the Shunter.
58's had similar problems in other collieries too, Silverhill and Bentinck of the top of my head, but Calverton was the notorious one. To be fair everything struggled in Bentinck until the arrival of the 60's put an end to that.

 

[Beveridges]

That doesn't explain why the 56s and a number of 37s outlived them. Neither does it explain why they all ended up overseas and none have entered service with any other operators. I'm guessing the class had some kind of endemic problem that made them undesirable for some reason.

You notice how the 58 is the only loco class that has completely been removed off the railway network since privatisation. Every other class that existed at the start of privatisation is still running in some form:

08's/09's - DB, Freightliner, DRS, GBRf, WCR, nearly every Passenger TOC, Alstom, and countless small operators and industrial operators.
20's - DRS, GBRf
31's - Network Rail, BARS, Nemesis Rail
33's - WCR
37's - WCR, DRS, Network Rail
47's - WCR, DRS, Colas Rail, Riviera Trains, Nemesis Rail
56's - DCR, BARS, Colas Rail. There would have been even more if Jarvis/Fastline didn't go out of business.
58's - No operator has used them since EWS in 2002.
60's - DB
All the electric classes also still exist with the main freight operators.

The 58 is the odd one out

 

[D7666]

.... the 58 is the only loco class that has completely been removed
off the railway network since privatisation

Hmmmmm.

What date do you think "privatisation" was ?

You can't have one date for one purpose and another date for another purpose - so what is your single date ?

I reckon I have up to three challenges already, depending on what date you choose, and whether or not I challenge your date !!!

--
Nick

 

[Beveridges]

1995 or 1996

 

[breadfan]

You notice how the 58 is the only loco class that has completely been removed off the railway network since privatisation. Every other class that existed at the start of privatisation is still running in some form:

08's/09's - DB, Freightliner, DRS, GBRf, WCR, nearly every Passenger TOC, Alstom, and countless small operators and industrial operators.
20's - DRS, GBRf
31's - Network Rail, BARS, Nemesis Rail
33's - WCR
37's - WCR, DRS, Network Rail
47's - WCR, DRS, Colas Rail, Riviera Trains, Nemesis Rail
56's - DCR, BARS, Colas Rail. There would have been even more if Jarvis/Fastline didn't go out of business.
58's - No operator has used them since EWS in 2002.
60's - DB
All the electric classes also still exist with the main freight operators.

The 58 is the odd one out

87s? I think 87002 is still mainline registered but unlikely to work again other than abroad.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

87s? I think 87002 is still mainline registered but unlikely to work again other than abroad.

Not to mention the unique 'Badger'/'Doorstop', 89001*!


*Though of course that wasn't running at the time of privatisation but was revived only too-briefly by GNER!

 

[cj_1985]

You notice how the 58 is the only loco class that has completely been removed off the railway network since privatisation. Every other class that existed at the start of privatisation is still running in some form:

08's/09's - DB, Freightliner, DRS, GBRf, WCR, nearly every Passenger TOC, Alstom, and countless small operators and industrial operators.
20's - DRS, GBRf
31's - Network Rail, BARS, Nemesis Rail
33's - WCR
37's - WCR, DRS, Network Rail
47's - WCR, DRS, Colas Rail, Riviera Trains, Nemesis Rail
56's - DCR, BARS, Colas Rail. There would have been even more if Jarvis/Fastline didn't go out of business.
58's - No operator has used them since EWS in 2002.
60's - DB
All the electric classes also still exist with the main freight operators.

The 58 is the odd one out

How do you figure that, Fastline had 2x class 56s of its own plus hired an additional 56 from RVEL... by the time it went bust the 56s had already been OOS for some time. Plus, all 3x 56s (regularly) used by Fastline are still in use... 56301 (owned by the class 56 group) in use with DCR, 56302 (privately owned) is in use/on hire with Colas, and 56303 is now owned and used by DCR... even 56311 which was occasionally used/hired by Fastline is in use with DCR

 

[Beveridges]

So that makes the 58s and the 87s the only two classes to disapear completely since privatisation.

It may have been due to the fact that both classes were so useful to the foreign operators.

 

[D7666]

So that makes the 58s and the 87s

87s and 89 were two of the three I thought of.

01/04/94 was start of Railtrack so at the point the physical railway on which all trains run was privatised.

That was the date I was thinking of.

The 3rd type, is SNCF BB22200 which were in main line hire use to BR for joint SNCF freight but worked through to BR tracks, later Railtrack assets, at Dollands Moor and had BR drivers who learnt both the traction and the route. Crew training started early 1994, and workings lasted from 03/94 until 10/95 , at which point they come under "removed from the railway" since you must be excluding outside GB (else 58s and 87s still count).

--
Nick

 

[yummy125]

At Eastleigh Depot

 

[D6975]

58s did work up to the North West - just. I remember seeing them using the Crewe station avoider and heading up the WCML back in the late 80s/early 90s on MGRs. Not sure where they were heading, but I suspect it wasn't past Warrington.

 

[David Barrett]

Going back to the reason why etc. It is true that the Class 66 did for much of what we then had, but as to when: the Class 58s were planned for a 30 year life with an anticipated overhaul at the half way point. It seemed no coincidence to me that one by one they were just switched off at around this time in their lives no doubt conveying the impression of a substantial cash saving to E.W.S. although the greater and almost crippling cost was that of lease charges for the 66s.

 

[Train wasp]

I wonder if 58s will turn up on a DB tender list in the near future.

 

[yummy125]

A pic of our 58's dumpt'd awaiting their fate:

 

[Monty]

A sad sight, even more so when you consider the fact other operators are forced to reactivate and make do with older classes.

 

[Beveridges]

Plenty of life left in them yet, if the (older) "built on the cheap" Pacers keep going I see no reason why the 58s cant.

 

[455driver]

But a 56 is a much more capable machine than a 58 will ever be, they werent called Torville and Deans for nothing, slip sliding along!

 

[Monty]

But a 56 is a much more capable machine than a 58 will ever be, they werent called Torville and Deans for nothing, slip sliding along!

Could added ballast not go someway to solving that problem?

 

[455driver]

A 58 (130 tonnes) is already heavier than a 56 (126 tonnes).

 

[Smudger105e]

It was to do with the 58 bogie design, as power was applied the load came off the leading wheelsets which slipped far too easily...

Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk 2

 

[Beveridges]

At 130 tons they were even heavier than a 59/66

 

[David Barrett]

Could added ballast not go someway to solving that problem?

Sepex. and a modern package of electronicery more like.

 

[Oswyntail]

Sepex. and a modern package of electronicery more like.

Wasn't 58050 the testbed for Sepex? Did it work? (Memory may be defective here)

 

[David Barrett]

Wasn't 58050 the testbed for Sepex? Did it work? (Memory may be defective here)

Not sure, I do recall a 47 which was hauling around 2000 tons after modification.

Edit: by all accounts it was the case that 050 was so fitted but ran only trials when new and entered traffic fully as designed with the sepex. equipment removed. It was not considered to have been a success.

 

[Beveridges]

Not sure, I do recall a 47 which was hauling around 2000 tons after modification.

Edit: by all accounts it was the case that 050 was so fitted but ran only trials when new and entered traffic fully as designed with the sepex. equipment removed. It was not considered to have been a success.

If it was not a success then why did they use SEPEX for the class 60 ?

 

[455driver]

Edit: by all accounts it was the case that 050 was so fitted but ran only trials when new and entered traffic fully as designed with the sepex. equipment removed. It was not considered to have been a success.

I thought it was a success but it was felt that 58050 was best converted back to standard spec rather than be a one off.

 

[David Barrett]

I thought it was a success but it was felt that 58050 was best converted back to standard spec rather than be a one off.

So did I, probably a case of me letting contemporary writings influence my hazy memory. The "standard thinking" certianly rings true and makes me wonder whether a similar scheme for the other 49, or at least a viable number of them to permit a study of fleet capability, might have been possible given the will and money.

Maybe, on the eve of the class 59 and given the perceived view that the B.R.B. wanted a fleet of them, it was not thought that any home brewed package would even come close to consideration.

 

[Beveridges]

I thought it was a success but it was felt that 58050 was best converted back to standard spec rather than be a one off.

They should have converted the other 49 instead. If I remember correctly 58050 could haul the same loads as a Class 60.