DB Class 60 for sale

[Ashley Hill]

I'd like to take that and extend it to dumping them in the ocean to create artificial reefs.

Well if you can bury a 27 I’m sure you can drown a 60 .
I hope one or two eventually get preserved.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Well if you can bury a 27 I’m sure you can drown a 60 .
I hope one or two eventually get preserved.

Aren't some already preserved? I know of at least one that's at Margate.

 

[ExRes]

Aren't some already preserved? I know of at least one that's at Margate.

Do you? which one would that be? you probably mean 081 which is still rotting in Toton Yard

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Do you? which one would that be? you probably mean 081 which is still rotting in Toton Yard

There's 60 086 at the Wensleydale isn't there? ( Though I have a feeling I read something about it moving on a few months ago ).

 

[Alanko]

Isn't there a 60 on a short length of track in an industrial estate somewhere? I've seen photos of it parked next to a couple of other locos on short lengths of track.

Aren't they quite complex with the anti wheel ship technology? I assumed they would be tricky to run in preservation unless you can get up to speed with stuff coded and compiled in some ancient programming language, or figure out how to bypass that stuff.

 

[ExRes]

WNXX have listed the stored dates for the 12 locos

037 - Jan 2006
032 - Jul 2006
078 - Aug 2007
036 - Oct 2007
089 - Aug 2008
052 - Oct 2008
012 - Jan 2009
093 - Jan 2009
068 - Sep 2009
077 - Dec 2009
048 - Nov 2010
084 - Jun 2011

Isn't there a 60 on a short length of track in an industrial estate somewhere? I've seen photos of it parked next to a couple of other locos on short lengths of track.

That's 050 & 086 on a private site at Kinsley

There's 60 086 at the Wensleydale isn't there? ( Though I have a feeling I read something about it moving on a few months ago ).

Moved some time ago along with 60050

 

[D365]

Aren't some already preserved? I know of at least one that's at Margate.

Depends on your definition of ’preserved’!

 

[ExRes]

Depends on your definition of ’preserved’!

'Pickled' and 'preserved' are the same I believe

 

[Wyrleybart]

I'd like to take that and extend it to dumping them in the ocean to create artificial reefs.

Off the beach at Dawlish to create a barrage

When's a loco not a loco. EWS and Thence DB are subject to these regs after chopping up locos at Wigan and thus not making them available to competitors I would imagine the requirement to offer them for sale would have some sort of regulation about not selling the key components separately as that would have the same effect.


Does that regulation still apply though ? I doubt it

 

[smithy_37688]

Would be interesting to see if anymore get how should I call it - Saved from the cutter's torch!!
The one's that don't have holes in the block's anyway!!
GBRf for anymore ??
I'm hearing GBRf are potentially in line for more of the fleet, but really don't know whether to believe it or not to be honest!!

 

[ExRes]

Reported on WNXX that 60081 has finally entered the paint facility at Toton, considering its current condition I guess it can only come back out looking better

 

[Alanko]

Allegedly 60081 is off to LSL's display collection in Margate.

 

[fgwrich]

Allegedly 60081 is off to LSL's display collection in Margate.

No allegedly about it, it is indeed heading off to Margate (to the 1:1 collection with 47501, 47841 and others). Though Toton will have to do a few repairs to the bodywork first, not just to repair the corrosion from several years sat outside, but from the time it threw a leg out of bed and chucked a piston through the side.

 

[37114]

No allegedly about it, it is indeed heading off to Margate (to the 1:1 collection with 47501, 47841 and others). Though Toton will have to do a few repairs to the bodywork first, not just to repair the corrosion from several years sat outside, but from the time it threw a leg out of bed and chucked a piston through the side.

It needs a replacement engine room door at least, one was damaged when it put the leg out of bed. Shame that they are not rebuilding it to working order but so be it.

 

[Wyrleybart]

It needs a replacement engine room door at least, one was damaged when it put the leg out of bed. Shame that they are not rebuilding it to working order but so be it.

Haha. A piece of MDF glued in with a bit of Gorilla would do if it is only for cosmetics !!

 

[ExRes]

Not exactly the right thread as they were sold by DB some time ago, WNXX reporting that the three GBRf Class 60s, 004, 014 & 018 stored at Toton are to be removed by road, two will go to Loughborough Brush as spares providers and one to Longport for evaluation by EMD, the possibility of conversion had been talked about last year when DCR bought the batch of fourteen with 60057 the suggested loco but it was moved to Loughborough with the others, it will be interesting to see if the conversion work is 'simply' for replacement of the engine, if so what engine? how will they get over the environmental hurdles unless it's a brand new engine?

 

[ac6000cw]

if so what engine? how will they get over the environmental hurdles unless it's a brand new engine?

AFAIK, the rules are different if it's a rebuild/re-engining exercise - the class 69 rebuilds are witness to that (their engine doesn't meet emissions requirements for new build locomotives).

Quote below re. the class 69 project from RAIL magazine: https://www.railmagazine.com/news/fleet/exclusive-the-gb-railfreight-class-69-project-explained

“We looked at fitting a twin-engine Caterpillar design, an MTU V16 engine or even two Cummins engines, before settling on the EMD12N-710. These are what’s fitted in a Class 66, and these are ten brand new engines.”

Despite the engines being brand new 3A emissions-compliant, they are still of a design that had been discontinued due to emissions regulations imposed on the industry. This meant that GBRf 66779 Evening Star, which arrived in the UK in 2016, was the final brand new ‘66’ to be built for this market.

However, GBRf was able to prove that their emissions were an improvement on what had been in the locomotive previously. Furthermore, because the Class 56 retains Grandfather Rights on the network, the approval process is a lot quicker.

 

[43096]

AFAIK, the rules are different if it's a rebuild/re-engining exercise - the class 69 rebuilds are witness to that (their engine doesn't meet emissions requirements for new build locomotives).

Quote below re. the class 69 project from RAIL magazine: https://www.railmagazine.com/news/fleet/exclusive-the-gb-railfreight-class-69-project-explained

One other issue is fuel consumption: the Mirrlees MB275 in the Class 60 uses less than the EMD 710 engine. So a swap to the 710 would be a downgrade in that sense.

If they're going to re-engine, then personally I'd like to see them put the Caterpillar C175-16 (as used by the 68) in...

 

[BRX]

It's a deliberately created/tolerated loophole. The question is what would happen if it were closed?

Would it force the development of a proper, emissions-compliant new diesel loco for the UK market?

Would it force TOCs to concentrate their existing diesel fleets on work that actually needs to be diesel hauled, instead of habitually running diesel on electrified routes?

Would it encourage further development and use of "last mile" hybrid locos?

None of these outcomes would seem to be negative ones to me. Of course, the FOCs will say that unless they can continue using cheaper, outdated, polluting locos, a portion of rail freight haulage will become nonviable and traffic will revert to lorry transport.

 

[Richard Scott]

It's a deliberately created/tolerated loophole. The question is what would happen if it were closed?

Would it force the development of a proper, emissions-compliant new diesel loco for the UK market?

Would it force TOCs to concentrate their existing diesel fleets on work that actually needs to be diesel hauled, instead of habitually running diesel on electrified routes?

Would it encourage further development and use of "last mile" hybrid locos?

None of these outcomes would seem to be negative ones to me. Of course, the FOCs will say that unless they can continue using cheaper, outdated, polluting locos, a portion of rail freight haulage will become nonviable and traffic will revert to lorry transport.

All locos are polluting! Need to be more specific on emissions and exactly what those emissions are. Ok, some have higher emissions than others but that's a general term as lots of different pollutants to consider.

 

[zwk500]

It's a deliberately created/tolerated loophole. The question is what would happen if it were closed?

None of these outcomes would seem to be negative ones to me. Of course, the FOCs will say that unless they can continue using cheaper, outdated, polluting locos, a portion of rail freight haulage will become nonviable and traffic will revert to lorry transport.

What if the FOC's aren't lying about this?

 

[richieb1971]

Hopefully it's a kind of ironing out the kinks of the current engine bogie system. I assume this will be the first time new eyes will be looking at the 60's? Its always been Toton, Brush and UKRL engineers.

 

[D365]

One other issue is fuel consumption: the Mirrlees MB275 in the Class 60 uses less than the EMD 710 engine. So a swap to the 710 would be a downgrade in that sense.

If they're going to re-engine, then personally I'd like to see them put the Caterpillar C175-16 (as used by the 68) in...

On an ops level, I’ve heard mixed reports about the Class 69. So unless there’s a serious weakness in the Class 60 that could be addressed by re-engineering, this is why I’m also sceptical.

 

[BRX]

Need to be more specific on emissions and exactly what those emissions are.

Emission Standards: Europe: Nonroad Engines

dieselnet.com

What if the FOC's aren't lying about this?

I didn't say they are or would be lying.

My answer to what we should do if it's the case that imposing emissions regulations meant rail transport started shifting to more polluting road transport is that we should have transport policy that ensures this doesn't happen.

 

[ac6000cw]

One other issue is fuel consumption: the Mirrlees MB275 in the Class 60 uses less than the EMD 710 engine. So a swap to the 710 would be a downgrade in that sense.

I agree, but I suspect a 710 is the most likely choice if GBRf go down the 're-engining' route (just because of spares and servicing commonality with most of their diesel fleet).

If they're going to re-engine, then personally I'd like to see them put the Caterpillar C175-16 (as used by the 68) in...

Because of the noise? (gets 'dieselhead' hat out of cupboard ).

Problem with going for a high-speed diesel engine (e.g. Cat/MTU/Cummins) I assume would be incompatibility with the existing cl. 60 alternator, which is designed for a medium-speed engine. New alternator or a reduction gearbox between the two?

How about using an ex-HST power car MTU R4000 and alternator, combined with a set of batteries to create a diesel-battery hybrid?

 

[Richard Scott]

Emission Standards: Europe: Nonroad Engines

dieselnet.com

I didn't say they are or would be lying.

My answer to what we should do if it's the case that imposing emissions regulations meant rail transport started shifting to more polluting road transport is that we should have transport policy that ensures this doesn't happen.

I meant the engines themselves. Some older engines sometimes have lower emissions in certain areas and higher in others. NOx is an example due to lower compression on older engines.

 

[Rail Quest]

I agree, but I suspect a 710 is the most likely choice if GBRf go down the 're-engining' route (just because of spares and servicing commonality with most of their diesel fleet).

Because of the noise? (gets 'dieselhead' hat out of cupboard ).

Problem with going for a high-speed diesel engine (e.g. Cat/MTU/Cummins) I assume would be incompatibility with the existing cl. 60 alternator, which is designed for a medium-speed engine. New alternator or a reduction gearbox between the two?

How about using an ex-HST power car MTU R4000 and alternator, combined with a set of batteries to create a diesel-battery hybrid?

Yeahh its a shame the 710 is an obvious pick if this re-engineering thing actually happens (perhaps could do with a separate thread for the topic at this point).

However, I'm starting to wonder if the existence of the class 99 order (with their proposed cat engines) would make GBRf more likely to opt for a cat engine. In which case - the main reason for them not going Cat would be the point on the alternator. Don't 60s have really aggressive traction motors as well that cause (or used to cause) a ton of slippage? If so, would that be an issue for conversions?

 

[43096]

I agree, but I suspect a 710 is the most likely choice if GBRf go down the 're-engining' route (just because of spares and servicing commonality with most of their diesel fleet).

In theory the same engine as the Class 99s + batteries might be an idea. But Longport is Progress Rail = Caterpillar and the 99 engine is Cummins I think?

Because of the noise? (gets 'dieselhead' hat out of cupboard ).

That could be part of it!

 

[ac6000cw]

However, I'm starting to wonder if the existence of the class 99 order (with their proposed cat engines) would make GBRf more likely to opt for a cat engine.

Latest info I have seen is that the 99 will use a Cummins QSK50 engine

Don't 60s have really aggressive traction motors as well that cause (or used to cause) a ton of slippage?

The 60's (with 'Sepex' individual axle motor control) have probably the best wheelslip control of any of the BR-era diesel locos.

 

[Rail Quest]

Latest info I have seen is that the 99 will use a Cummins QSK50 engine

Ooo interesting - hadn't noticed this come up. Fair enough

The 60's (with 'Sepex' individual axle motor control) have probably the best wheelslip control of any of the BR-era diesel locos.

Ahh fair enough, must have heard some dodgy info