Class 58's in France cut up

[Western Sunset]

Does anyone know when the video was taken?

Oh, and I agree with the list of 23 58s which "43096" posted above.

 

[DGH 1]

Quite the productive time for my original fugly pen indeed.

You'll need a 45 gallon drum of ink to supply your pen for the modern foreign trains.

 

[AndrewE]

Seems a peculiarly high figure for the class 47: 2080hp/1550kW at the rail and a weight somewhere between 120.5 and 125 tonnes for a late eighties or early nineties condition class 47/4 gives a figure of around 12.7 kW / Tonne weight.

There was a late eighties proposal for a new-build diesel passenger loco for the likes of Crosscountry services, to replace the 47s: A regeared, train supply fitted variant of a fairly modern class doesn't seem too outlandish as a fantasy suggestion, although the proposal was of course stillborn and at the time the 58s were presumably fully committed on MGR work anyway.

I just took the Wikipedia figures of 1920KW and divided by their 112 T. Where did the extra weight come from? Bigger fuel tanks? Removal of boilers and water tanks would have reduced it, (as would removal of the second man - joke!)
You are right though, it doesn't show an "at the rail" output, but I thought that the power to weight ratios was so wide as to be notable.

​

​

 

[Richard Scott]

I just took the Wikipedia figures of 1920KW and divided by their 112 T. Where did the extra weight come from? Bigger fuel tanks? Removal of boilers and water tanks would have reduced it, (as would removal of the second man - joke!)
You are right though, it doesn't show an "at the rail" output, but I thought that the power to weight ratios was so wide as to be notable.

​

​

47/3 were around 113t as had no train heat equipment. A 47/4 was in excess of 120t. Doubt the power at rail quote of 2080hp is correct as expect that was original rating when engines were 2750hp. I may be wrong but seems a little high (a 46 with same electrical equipment was 1960hp at rail and only 80hp less in engine).

 

[150249]

Don't forget that the work has been done over 2 or 3 months so no doubt some bits from the earlier processed locos was likely removed from site.

The 23 locos disposed of at Alizay are (or rather, were) 58001/004-007/009/010/011/013/018/021/026/032-036/038-040/042/046/049.

Other than 58012/016/023/048 in various states of repair in preservation, the only 'Bones' left are DB Cargo's 58044 stranded in Metz and 58025/027/041/050 in Spain (of which 041 is owned by Transfesa, which is a DB Cargo subsidiary).

What's the deal with 044?

 

[eldomtom2]

It is NOT "earmarked for the NRM" but designated by the Railway Heritage Designation Advisory Board. That is rather different - the NRM may not want it and the RHDAB could offer it elsewhere or, indeed, de-designate it.

The designation list can be found here: https://www.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/about-us/railway-heritage-designation-advisory-board/

How common is it for RHDAB-designated items to be destroyed before asking the NRM etc. if they want it?

 

[43096]

What's the deal with 044?

It had issues (wheelsets, I think)whilst being taken to Alizay to join the others and was dumped in Metz. Most likely option is for it to be cut up on site.

 

[DelW]

To think one of the few in the UK is being butchered to make a facsimile of one of the LMS prototypes...

That would surely only be problematic if there were proposals to preserve all of the remaining 58s. Since there are several extant preservation projects and there don't appear to be resources or funding available to preserve any more, then more of that loco will survive as part of an Ivatt lookalike than had it not been used, in which case it would have been scrapped in its entirety.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That would surely only be problematic if there were proposals to preserve all of the remaining 58s. Since there are several extant preservation projects and there don't appear to be resources or funding available to preserve any more, then more of that loco will survive as part of an Ivatt lookalike than had it not been used, in which case it would have been scrapped in its entirety.

It's only "problematic" on a personal level- I quite like 58s due to my first model being one, and personally don't give much of a stuff about the Ivatt locomotives. But it isn't my money being used, and I'm not the boss of Railway Preservation. Things would get pretty boring if it only the bits we personally like get saved. My point was more that 58s don't seem to be popular among preservationists (perhaps because they're still deemed "too modern"), to the extent that one was sacrificed for a project that was deemed more valuable.

If these French 58s had been cut up ten years ago there might have been more objections to using one for the Ivatt replica, but at the time the thinking was (understandably) probably "it doesn't matter, there are loads left in France".

 

[Richard Scott]

It's only "problematic" on a personal level- I quite like 58s due to my first model being one, and personally don't give much of a stuff about the Ivatt locomotives. But it isn't my money being used, and I'm not the boss of Railway Preservation. Things would get pretty boring if it only the bits we personally like get saved. My point was more that 58s don't seem to be popular among preservationists (perhaps because they're still deemed "too modern"), to the extent that one was sacrificed for a project that was deemed more valuable.

If these French 58s had been cut up ten years ago there might have been more objections to using one for the Ivatt replica, but at the time the thinking was (understandably) probably "it doesn't matter, there are loads left in France".

Don't think 58022 was a viable preservation project anyway so probably wouldn't have stood any chance. 56s aren't really fairing that well in preservation; both classes have issues of being air brake only and littered with 1970s and 1980s electronics, which are probably full of components that are now rare or unobtainable meaning a total redesign may be required if a card goes wrong.

 

[Wyrleybart]

It's only "problematic" on a personal level- I quite like 58s due to my first model being one, and personally don't give much of a stuff about the Ivatt locomotives. But it isn't my money being used, and I'm not the boss of Railway Preservation. Things would get pretty boring if it only the bits we personally like get saved. My point was more that 58s don't seem to be popular among preservationists (perhaps because they're still deemed "too modern"), to the extent that one was sacrificed for a project that was deemed more valuable.

If these French 58s had been cut up ten years ago there might have been more objections to using one for the Ivatt replica, but at the time the thinking was (understandably) probably "it doesn't matter, there are loads left in France".

It is all about individual opinions isn't it. You like 58s, I don't, but still respect your choice. The truth actually is that fifty class 50s were built in 1967-1968 and fifty class 58s were built 1981-1984. Of the 50s that initially survived the cutters torch most still survive today and there are currently four registered and able to go mainline. Class 58s on the other hand, despite being a reasonably modern and simple type 5 seem to have just one "class" backer, and does not seem to be able to get an example back onto the mainline, despite invites from preserved railways.

I genuinely hope that at least one example will return to the mainline but it seems to require huge support, which isn't forthcoming apart from tickets to galas. .

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Don't think 58022 was a viable preservation project anyway so probably wouldn't have stood any chance. 56s aren't really fairing that well in preservation; both classes have issues of being air brake only and littered with 1970s and 1980s electronics, which are probably full of components that are now rare or unobtainable meaning a total redesign may be required if a card goes wrong.

That's a fair point on 58022. On the 56s the fact that several previously "preserved" examples have returned to regular service, some of them rebuilt as 69s, shows that they haven't fared too badly. If you preserve a locomotive so well that it ceases to be considered "preserved" at all, one could consider that a resounding success. All depends on your perspective I suppose!

 

[Richard Scott]

That's a fair point on 58022. On the 56s the fact that several previously "preserved" examples have returned to regular service, some of them rebuilt as 69s, shows that they haven't fared too badly. If you preserve a locomotive so well that it ceases to be considered "preserved" at all, one could consider that a resounding success. All depends on your perspective I suppose!

With reference to 56s just meant the number currently preserved. There seems to be quite a few that were purchased and then sold on.

 

[xotGD]

It is all about individual opinions isn't it. You like 58s, I don't, but still respect your choice. The truth actually is that fifty class 50s were built in 1967-1968 and fifty class 58s were built 1981-1984. Of the 50s that initially survived the cutters torch most still survive today and there are currently four registered and able to go mainline. Class 58s on the other hand, despite being a reasonably modern and simple type 5 seem to have just one "class" backer, and does not seem to be able to get an example back onto the mainline, despite invites from preserved railways.

I genuinely hope that at least one example will return to the mainline but it seems to require huge support, which isn't forthcoming apart from tickets to galas. .

Class 50s had, and continue to have, a significant fan base. The same cannot be said of 58s. As I said upthread, a few Sunday line in the book moves to Nuneaton was the extent of most bashers' interest.

So plenty of folk to support multiple Hoover preservation projects, not so much when it comes to Bones.

 

[D365]

With reference to 56s just meant the number currently preserved. There seems to be quite a few that were purchased and then sold on.

I’m not familiar with the commercial arrangements, but 56301 is more-or-less under DCR stewardship. And even then, it seems to have taken some months of work to restore it to mainline working order.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Class 50s had, and continue to have, a significant fan base. The same cannot be said of 58s. As I said upthread, a few Sunday line in the book moves to Nuneaton was the extent of most bashers' interest.

So plenty of folk to support multiple Hoover preservation projects, not so much when it comes to Bones.

50s are both older and had a much longer working life in this country than 58s, so it's understandable that they have a bigger fanbase. They were also front-line express passenger locos which is a bit more glamorous than hauling coal around the East Midlands.

Even in preservation the 50s have had quite the story... I remember walking round Booth Roe's (as it was then) and seeing several 50s rotting away... then there was the ambitious but ultimately futile "Operation Collingwood" project which despite failing still helped keep several examples intact long enough to be saved.

With the French 58s going, the same isn't going to happen for them now... hopefully these locos being scrapped will galvanise efforts to save a couple from those that remain. Not least 58050 which fully deserves its designation as the last locomotive built at Doncaster works.

 

[DarloRich]

My point was more that 58s don't seem to be popular among preservationists (perhaps because they're still deemed "too modern"), to the extent that one was sacrificed for a project that was deemed more valuable.

Perhaps the issue is the 58's have been rotting away in France rather than in Nottingham - it cant be cheap or easy to get a mouldering loco back over the channel!

 

[cce]

4 saved examples of a class of 50 not-especially-successful locos seems like a decent number. I'm sure a lot of steam fans would be giddy with excitement to have 4 examples of much larger and more successful classes