Class 66 Preservation

[junglejames]

Hi JungleJames,

You say "yes they are good locos", but from where I sit I've long thought that they're just not quite good enough. They do a very good job and do just about what is asked of them, but they were 'built to a price', to borrow a phrase often used to describe certain British cars of the 60s and 70s. They are noisy, uncomfortable, draughty and (in my opinion) were put together with little thought for those who have to operate and maintain them. I had 66 951 today on very light train (680 tons, all empty) and considering it's only a few years old, the noise and vibration in the cab was aweful. Ironically, it's one of the later batch with extra soundproofing but felt more like an early '5 series loco! Fair enough, they do put in the mileage day in, day out, but they are going to need a heck of a lot of money spending on them in the not too distant future. The reliability I'd put down to their very simple design, compared to something like a 56 for example, but they should really have been equipped with a bit more grunt to keep pace with other traffic flows, especially on routes with endlessly changing gradient profiles, like the Midland South of Leicester. Desborough Bank is particularly bad with our heaviest train, even with a run up through Market Harborough under greens, with nearly 2,400 tons on you'll be down to about 20mph at the summit.... a bit more grunt would help keep the job rolling along much better, and cause far less (very expensive) delays

They do cope quite well when given a clear road, the problem comes when you're trying to keep the momentum up with a 'bad' loco when following a stopper; if you back off too much you delay any train that's behind you, and if you keep running under double and single yellows, you'll use the brake a lot more and take longer to build your speed back up when the stopper gets a way ahead of you!

Having said all that.... it's certainly not a bad idea to start thinking about a preservation group for them, once they're gone they're gone. I'd join up for a laugh

I have heard these complaints before. A lot of complaints from drivers.
Good locos reliability/ efficiency wise, but as you say, built at a price, and should have been better.

 

[GearJammer]

Just a personal opinion, it's named after my Dad

Fair enough, but your preserving a loco on the basis of its name/number trap, better to see the nameplates preserved or transferred to another loco!

I see where your coming from tho!

 

[junglejames]

Well, to compare the three in terms of maximum tractive effort Class 56-277kN, Class 58-275kN and Class 66-409kN. So they're an improvement of 47%. The continuous maximum for the standard Class 66s is just 15-17kN shy of those maximum tractive effort figures. Don't forget the 65mph Class 66/6s which put out a maximum of 467kN.

Granted they're not perfect but they are also very capable locos too and their reliabilty is the key to their success.

Those figures go totally against everything ive heard. Quite strange. They sort of make sense though when you look at the engine power, and the top speeds.
Oh i give up, i dont know which is stronger!
Any drivers know for sure? What will haul the most? 56, 58 or 66?
Need someone thats driven all 3!

 

[Anon Mouse]

a 31?

 

[Rugd1022]

Those figures go totally against everything ive heard. Quite strange. They sort of make sense though when you look at the engine power, and the top speeds.
Oh i give up, i dont know which is stronger!
Any drivers know for sure? What will haul the most? 56, 58 or 66?
Need someone thats driven all 3!

I've driven all three and despite what the figures say, I'd say the 56 is stronger than a 66.... I can't remember what the tonnage limit is for a 56 but from experience they have the ability to keep the momentum up, whereas a 66 needs more coaxing than you might think, especially on gradients / undulating routes.

58s were good, except for the rather bad habit of slipping a lot.

But.... give me a Western or a 60 any day!

 

[junglejames]

I've driven all three and despite what the figures say, I'd say the 56 is stronger than a 66.... I can't remember what the tonnage limit is for a 56 but from experience they have the ability to keep the momentum up, whereas a 66 needs more coaxing than you might think, especially on gradients / undulating routes.

58s were good, except for the rather bad habit of slipping a lot.

But.... give me a Western or a 60 any day!

Thanks for that.
Similar to what id always heard before.
The 66s really should have been a lot better.
I always thought from the beginning that EWS ordered too many, and replacing everything was unnecessary, and not actually possible with 1 type of loco. It seems they have somehow managed it, but with a lot of compromises.

Oh well, as mentioned, probably good for EWS cost wise in the long run.

 

[Crapper]

I have heard these complaints before. A lot of complaints from drivers.
Good locos reliability/ efficiency wise, but as you say, built at a price, and should have been better.

I would agree with my colleagues sentiments. The 66 is a truly abysmal locomotive should you be unfortunate enough to have to work on them every day. A step back in terms of driver comfort from 58/60, and causing people to experience hearing loss and back problems.

DB are beginning to pay the price now for their 'balanced' maintainance policy (bare minimum), and main line failures are getting more and more frequent, and increasing numbers are running around with isolated motors and other pre existing defects.

I say sling 001 in the museum, and scrap the rest of them as soon as possible. Detestable machines.

 

[junglejames]

Crikey, they are liked!! I havent heard complaints that strong before! Says a lot though i think.

 

[Rugd1022]

Crikey, they are liked!! I havent heard complaints that strong before! Says a lot though i think.

With each day that passes James, the bad ones are getting worse..... exceptionally rough riding, rain ingress around the cab windows (which usually sits on the flat area below the windscreens), rattling side windows which don't fit when the rubber seals perish, constant wind noise and horrible draughts round the back of your neck and feet.... the list is endless :roll:

Having said all that, they're nothing like as bad as bl**dy railgrinders!

Nidge

 

[34002salisbury]

i do like the idea of preserving 66s but aren't we forgetting the lovely 67s. If a 67 had to be preserved it would have to be 67024! She is loved by many of my friends.

 

[sprinterguy]

i do like the idea of preserving 66s but aren't we forgetting the lovely 67s. If a 67 had to be preserved it would have to be 67024! She is loved by many of my friends.

Out of curiosity, what makes number 24 so special?

 

[34002salisbury]

its just a regular 67 but peoplespeak of her well

 

[Spagnoletti]

What is needed, not just for 66s but over the whole range, is a co-ordinated policy, over all preservation facilities.

Good luck with that, when you tell the owners of (for example) the 40+ preserved 37s that all but 2 will be scrapped to allow better utilisation of resources.

 

[60163]

i do like the idea of preserving 66s but aren't we forgetting the lovely 67s. If a 67 had to be preserved it would have to be 67024! She is loved by many of my friends.

I'd love to see a 67 in Regional Railways. For some reason I think it'd suit them...but any livery would be nice, the EWS one looks so tired.

 

[Bittern]

I'd love to see a 67 in Regional Railways. For some reason I think it'd suit them...but any livery would be nice, the EWS one looks so tired.

I'd like to see one (and a 66) in BR two-tone green with yellow warning panels. I think they'd suit that.

Photoshop relivery-ers, perhaps?

 

[sprinterguy]

I'd love to see a 67 in Regional Railways. For some reason I think it'd suit them...but any livery would be nice, the EWS one looks so tired.

Yeah I think a Reggie Skip would look rather good. I quite liked the 47 (Or were there a couple of them?) that was painted into Provincial livery back in the day.

 

[142094]

31s did look good in RR livery. Insstead of units we should be building loco hauled stock. Love to see those days again.

 

[sprinterguy]

31s did look good in RR livery. Insstead of units we should be building loco hauled stock. Love to see those days again.

It worked well on the 37/4s as well! The Manchester to Blackpool run has seen its’ fair share of interesting traction over the years hasn’t it? First the class 31 hauled “Club Trains”, then 31s came back in around 2000 when hired in from Fragonset, and now it’s got the 180s, which I suppose is as interesting as things get on local services these days. Unfortunately, locos and stock just isn’t feasible for interurban and commuter flows, no matter how much as I’d like to see push-pull class 67s+load 6 on the S&C and Transpennine North with a DBSO at the other end!

 

[oldrailbug]

As an ex British outsider living in Australia I have to say one of the things I liked most about British locomotives was their originality.

Sadly to see my home country filling up with American locos is pretty sad, here in Oz just about everything is made under licence in Australia from GE in the USA.

Also like Australia Britain it seems imports trains from Asian countries like Japan, one day it may come back and bite us on the backside but I guess we can expect that when railway companies are being snapped up by overseas buyers.

As for the class 66 they will most likely finish up as static samples like many of the Yank diesels did in Australia, if not they could always be sent over to the Sacramento Railroad Museum in California.

 

[60163]

Photoshop relivery-ers, perhaps?

Yes please, if any are reading this

 

[yummy125]

I would like to see a "Shed" or "Skid" saved when the time comes. Both sound quite nice under full power.