DRS Planning 10 X Mixed Traffic Locos

[Journeyman]

I hope you're not referring to the fabled publication called "The Scotsman"?

The fact is that the 73/9s are now doing a sterling job running the diesel legs in Scotland. Similarly, against all expectations by some, Wabtec and GBRf have turned their 92s into reliable lekky locos for the Anglo-Scottish legs of the CS. I think we have to accept that GBRf know what they are doing. That's something I normally can't quite believe when it comes to DRS.

Both the 73s and 92s went through a period of absolutely dreadful reliability on the Sleepers, though. It's taken a long time and a lot of work getting them to settle down.

 

[JohnMcL7]

I hope you're not referring to the fabled publication called "The Scotsman"?

The fact is that the 73/9s are now doing a sterling job running the diesel legs in Scotland. Similarly, against all expectations by some, Wabtec and GBRf have turned their 92s into reliable lekky locos for the Anglo-Scottish legs of the CS. I think we have to accept that GBRf know what they are doing. That's something I normally can't quite believe when it comes to DRS.

The 73/9's still aren't running all the Scottish legs of the sleeper though, it's still the Class 67 for Inverness. Even the 73/9's that are running haven't been doing it for very long either to get a reasonable view of their performance.

Nothing against the 73/9's I think it's just a bit early to be proclaiming them a success particularly when they were such a disaster to begin with.

 

[cj_1985]

Remember that one of the 73/9s (along with 92038) is mostly dedicated to Mk5 testing from Polmadie... that will be part of why there is still a 67 in use on, IIRC, the aberdeen route. PLus there was one out of use for repair after damage caused at Craigentinny 18 months or so ago

Over the last year or so I think they have all rotated through Loughborough for Dellner coupling equipment to be fitted... think one is in there ATM for some work.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Remember that one of the 73/9s (along with 92038) is mostly dedicated to Mk5 testing from Polmadie... that will be part of why there is still a 67 in use on, IIRC, the aberdeen route. PLus there was one out of use for repair after damage caused at Craigentinny 18 months or so ago

The 67 is on the Inverness route, I wasn't meaning that comment to suggest the 73/9/s can't do the route just that they're not in as much use as suggested.

 

[GrimShady]

I hope you're not referring to the fabled publication called "The Scotsman"?

The fact is that the 73/9s are now doing a sterling job running the diesel legs in Scotland. Similarly, against all expectations by some, Wabtec and GBRf have turned their 92s into reliable lekky locos for the Anglo-Scottish legs of the CS. I think we have to accept that GBRf know what they are doing. That's something I normally can't quite believe when it comes to DRS.

I'd be better off with an issue of the Beano than that old reliable publication.

 

[CosherB]

The 73/9's still aren't running all the Scottish legs of the sleeper though, it's still the Class 67 for Inverness. Even the 73/9's that are running haven't been doing it for very long either to get a reasonable view of their performance.

Nothing against the 73/9's I think it's just a bit early to be proclaiming them a success particularly when they were such a disaster to begin with.

They are a success. Period.

 

[JohnMcL7]

They are a success. Period.

They're severely delayed, had to be recalled from service and even now they've only been running a few months and not running all the routes they are meant to. Perhaps in time they will work well and prove their worth but it's a long way from making that call. Period.

 

[captainbigun]

Severely delayed? No more than, for example 68 which still has some issues.
Recalled from service? Again, no more than any other new fleet, and it wasn’t a global fleet recall but a rolling modification programme.

They are running all of the intended routes. As already stated they aren’t running the Inverness as the fleet has been minus two locos, one for CAF and another for collision repair. Aside from that they are performing well.

Exactly what are you measuring this current poor performance on?

 

[43096]

Severely delayed? No more than, for example 68 which still has some issues.
Recalled from service? Again, no more than any other new fleet, and it wasn’t a global fleet recall but a rolling modification programme.

They are running all of the intended routes. As already stated they aren’t running the Inverness as the fleet is minus two locos, one for CAF and another for collision repair. Aside from that they are performing well.

Exactly what are you measuring this current poor performance on?

Collision repair? 73969 has been fixed for some time, or is 73968 at Loughborough also damaged?

 

[captainbigun]

Collision repair? 73969 has been fixed for some time, or is 73968 at Loughborough also damaged?

Meant to read past tense.....fixed.

 

[GrimShady]

What were the issues with the 92s? Simply age related or have they always been unreliable?

 

[43096]

Meant to read past tense.....fixed.

That makes sense! Only real issue preventing use on the Inverness portion is the CAF stock testing requirement.

 

[captainbigun]

Indeed, plus with 92s being away for modification and also for CAF having the 67 means there’s a spare 73 knocking around if there’s an odd job, either for CAF or covering something else. It makes sense to have retained it rather than stretching the fleet adding risk.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Deleted

 

[captainbigun]

Several years delayed and withdrawn? What are you on about? Limited return to service? What?

Retention of third rail equipment costs little to nothing and adds future capability. What’s the argument here? It’s staying on the 92s as well.

So this is all about 37s.....that figures. 37s prove themselves every day in Cumbria.....

Must be school holidays.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Several years delayed and withdrawn? What are you on about? Limited return to service? What?

Retention of third rail equipment costs little to nothing and adds future capability. What’s the argument here? It’s staying on the 92s as well.

So this is all about 37s.....that figures. 37s prove themselves every day in Cumbria.....

Must be school holidays.

Yes, they were meant to be deployed two years ago and were withdrawn due to alternator problems - are we not talking about the GBrf 73/9's that were meant to be used on the Caledonian Sleeper? I'm not familiar with the other variant so perhaps they have been a great success.

As for the school holidays comment, that is a little ironic coming from someone who repeatedly makes childish comments in their replies and avoids anything of substance but perhaps that's an introspective comment you're making.

It's also ironic to proclaim at best very limited service of the 73/9 as a 'success' and then to criticise the 37's which have been running for over five decades and still in mainline use - if there's still large numbers of 73/9's in daily use in 2070 though I will very much agree with you about the 73/9's success. The topic is partially about 37's as there's a lot of them still in mainline use which really shouldn't be and the 73/9's suitablity as a type 3 replacement hence the reference to route availablilty and the discussions on using Co-Co layouts.

 

[matacaster]

Whilst there is a justified desire to reduce carbon emissions, I for one, fail to see how a few legacy locomotives are going to make a significant impact. Once we are out of the burocratic EU, which likes to legislate to generate orders for new (often German) diesels etc, in my opinion it would be far better to leave legacy loco emissions alone and focus on planes, lorries, ships, buses, vans, cars etc where a relatively minor reduction in pollutants per vehicle makes a massive difference overall because of the numbers involved.

 

[captainbigun]

You repeatedly refer to delay and withdrawal. They were neither delayed or withdrawn. Please state, loco by loco when they were ‘withdrawn’. The alternators were modified on a rolling basis, pretty simple modification at that. Show me a fleet of new or modified locos/units that hasn’t been modified!

And yes, there is a fleet that’s running around southern and has been for considerable time now.

There’s no point debating 37s or other designs. They weren’t and aren’t an option!

Substance, seriously, you’ve repeatedly made claims with no fact to back them up.

 

[ac6000cw]

Severely delayed? No more than, for example 68 which still has some issues.

Out of curiosity, do you mean there are 'issues' with the class 68 fleet?

 

[captainbigun]

Out of curiosity, do you mean there are 'issues' with the class 68 fleet?

More niggles than issues, but yes, 68.

 

[Far north 37]

Yes, they were meant to be deployed two years ago and were withdrawn due to alternator problems - are we not talking about the GBrf 73/9's that were meant to be used on the Caledonian Sleeper? I'm not familiar with the other variant so perhaps they have been a great success.

As for the school holidays comment, that is a little ironic coming from someone who repeatedly makes childish comments in their replies and avoids anything of substance but perhaps that's an introspective comment you're making.

It's also ironic to proclaim at best very limited service of the 73/9 as a 'success' and then to criticise the 37's which have been running for over five decades and still in mainline use - if there's still large numbers of 73/9's in daily use in 2070 though I will very much agree with you about the 73/9's success. The topic is partially about 37's as there's a lot of them still in mainline use which really shouldn't be and the 73/9's suitablity as a type 3 replacement hence the reference to route availablilty and the discussions on using Co-Co layouts.

As far i was aware the class 37s were performing pretty poor in cumbria was that not why the class 68s were brought in to try replace them on that diagrams

 

[JohnMcL7]

Whilst there is a justified desire to reduce carbon emissions, I for one, fail to see how a few legacy locomotives are going to make a significant impact. Once we are out of the burocratic EU, which likes to legislate to generate orders for new (often German) diesels etc, in my opinion it would be far better to leave legacy loco emissions alone and focus on planes, lorries, ships, buses, vans, cars etc where a relatively minor reduction in pollutants per vehicle makes a massive difference overall because of the numbers involved.

I was assuming the driving force for it would be reliability and efficiency, I'm surprised there are still so many 37's running in daily use and can't see how that makes sense economically. I know some of those like the passenger services are temporary until there are suitable DMU's but going forward there does seem to be a need for that type of engine.

 

[JohnMcL7]

As far i was aware the class 37s were performing pretty poor in cumbria was that not why the class 68s were brought in to try replace them on that diagrams

I don't disagree with that, given their age it's not really a surprise it's just I was pointing out the irony in proclaiming one engine type a success after just a few months work and criticising nearly 60 year old engines that shouldn't be in regular mainline use.

 

[matacaster]

I was assuming the driving force for it would be reliability and efficiency, I'm surprised there are still so many 37's running in daily use and can't see how that makes sense economically. I know some of those like the passenger services are temporary until there are suitable DMU's but going forward there does seem to be a need for that type of engine.

Yes, but several posters have pointed out that relatively modern locomotives that would otherwise perhaps fit the bill can no longer be purchased due to daft emissions rules which don't seem to apply fairly across the spectrum of vehicles. Diesel cars are some petrol cars are very heavily taxed (£530 in my case) yet buses, lorries, taxis, ships., planes (and even bl**dy virgin space tourism craft - how much pollution will just ONE launch create? etc) seem to get away with hardly any grief in comparison.

 

[Far north 37]

I don't disagree with that, given their age it's not really a surprise it's just I was pointing out the irony in proclaiming one engine type a success after just a few months work and criticising nearly 60 year old engines that shouldn't be in regular mainline use.

I think i was misquoted there someone else said they were doing a great job on the cumbria coast as much as i love 37s myself grew up with them on the far north line and will always be my favourite loco and after been such a solid and reliable loco for so long not sure there up to it under drs on the cumbrian coast now.

 

[matacaster]

I was assuming the driving force for it would be reliability and efficiency, I'm surprised there are still so many 37's running in daily use and can't see how that makes sense economically. I know some of those like the passenger services are temporary until there are suitable DMU's but going forward there does seem to be a need for that type of engine.

Perhaps it depends on what contracts a company has signed up. A one-year contract twice a week and 'prospects which may not materialise' will not support a £1m loco purchase. However, a 5-10 year+ contract to build HS2 (which I don't think will ever get north of Birmingham in fairness) would represent a purchase or viable long term lease.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Yes, but several posters have pointed out that relatively modern locomotives that would otherwise perhaps fit the bill can no longer be purchased due to daft emissions rules which don't seem to apply fairly across the spectrum of vehicles. Diesel cars are some petrol cars are very heavily taxed (£530 in my case) yet buses, lorries, taxis, ships., planes (and even bl**dy virgin space tourism craft - how much pollution will just ONE launch create? etc) seem to get away with hardly any grief in comparison.

I appreciate the emissions requirements make it difficult but I'm assuming the primary motivation for it would be to get more reliable and efficient modern locomotives. I do know about unfair VED, £290 for a 170bhp petrol that I do a couple of thousand miles on a year.

I think i was misquoted there someone else said they were doing a great job on the cumbria coast as much as i love 37s myself grew up with them on the far north line and will always be my favourite loco and after been such a solid and reliable loco for so long not sure there up to it under drs on the cumbrian coast now.

They're my favourite engine as well but I am surprised they're still in such widespread use given their age particularly when you see pictures of them in their early days alongside steam engines which highlights just how old they are.

 

[GrimShady]

Yes, but several posters have pointed out that relatively modern locomotives that would otherwise perhaps fit the bill can no longer be purchased due to daft emissions rules which don't seem to apply fairly across the spectrum of vehicles. Diesel cars are some petrol cars are very heavily taxed (£530 in my case) yet buses, lorries, taxis, ships., planes (and even bl**dy virgin space tourism craft - how much pollution will just ONE launch create? etc) seem to get away with hardly any grief in comparison.

Not true for shipping. It's actually quite heavily regulated.

The bonus is ships can move huge amounts of cargo per tonnage of fuel, even more so than rail. The worst polluters are aircraft and road based vehicles.

 

[CosherB]

I'd hope that, in time and given demand, GBRf will procure further 73/9s. It's hardly an accident that they've been collecting 73s over the years, for ongoing use and/or conversion.

 

[GrimShady]

I'd hope that, in time and given demand, GBRf will procure further 73/9s. It's hardly an accident that they've been collecting 73s over the years, for ongoing use and/or conversion.

Why 73/9s though? Maybe due to being the newest of the old locos?