GB Railfreight in 'locomotive acquisition' talks

[CosherB]

What about bringing back the 58's? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_58#Disposal

Robert

DBC don’t want/need them with dozens of 60s parked up and the recent sale of 66s to GBRf. The chance of 58s returning to the UK for meaningful employment is zero.

 

[NightStar]

Just seems a shame to have a shortage of power in the UK and have perfectly good 58's laying unused abroad. They were not the most successful locos when compared to the likes of the 59's or 60's. But they still could earn their keep on freights. Especially if fitted with the same wheel slip control as the 60's since wheel slip is one of the biggest complaints with the 58's.

Robert

 

[richieb1971]

We only have a presumed shortage of loco fleets. The gamble for the operator is when to strike to make purchase orders for new/old/restore-able locos. I find it confusing that DBC won't win any new contract. They are the ones sitting on surplus stock. Any other operator (if winning a new contract) has to somehow pry that stock from DBC to make the contract work. I don't understand why a commissioner of work wouldn't be able to understand the dilemma. So lets say GBRF have won a contract against DBC. Then GBRF have to go to people like DBC to get the locos they need to do the contract they won against DBC. I'm completely blown away that the rail freight industry is in this predicament.

 

[Far north 37]

Just seems a shame to have a shortage of power in the UK and have perfectly good 58's laying unused abroad. They were not the most successful locos when compared to the likes of the 59's or 60's. But they still could earn their keep on freights. Especially if fitted with the same wheel slip control as the 60's since wheel slip is one of the biggest complaints with the 58's.

Robert

Im not sure what shortage of power you are on about theres plenty of unused freight locos lying about doing nothing.

I dont see why you would modify class 58s with similar equipment to class 60s when theres already plenty of class 60s lying unused for years.

Would be easier and probably cheaper to resurrect them than spending money to redesign less powerful locos.

 

[alexl92]

Is "freight company has eyes on potentially lucrative contracts" such a big shock?

DB have been losing freight contracts hand over fist recently. One wonders why.

Forgive me as I'm not up to scratch on the rail freight industry... what's occurring with DB that means they're losing contracts? I heard they weren't in the best financial shape; is that related?

 

[CosherB]

Just seems a shame to have a shortage of power in the UK and have perfectly good 58's laying unused abroad. They were not the most successful locos when compared to the likes of the 59's or 60's. But they still could earn their keep on freights. Especially if fitted with the same wheel slip control as the 60's since wheel slip is one of the biggest complaints with the 58's.

Robert

1. Is there a freight locomotive shortage in the UK? News to me.

2. How do you know that the 58s that have been parked up for years in Continental Europe are, as you claim, “perfectly good”?

 

[RingingEars66]

GBRf can't get 60's, I believe they tried but wanted to overhaul them at Brush. DB wouldn't let anyone take them away without DB doing all the overhaul, like they did for Colas. I was told that GBRf realised that they couldn't get the loco's away by road because they're too heavy for a nearby road bridge and DB won't let anyone take the engines out unless they're being overhauled on site at Toton. So I was told that GBRf walked away from the table, which I think is fair if DB are going to be that ridiculous over an asset which is seeing it's last chance at overhaul.

So the other story is that GBRf are going to overhaul some 56's and put 66 engines in them, re-engineering the whole loco. The other day I could see that there's been a massive shuffle about at Leicester and a whole rake of 56's has been put together with a 47 at the front ready to take them off somewhere! So that looks like it will be coming off. Personally, I think it's throwing good money after bad and that those 56's should be run as they are, without the re-engineering. Not because I'm any sort of great lover of the 56, but because they aren't a perfect bed for this overhaul. Something that rides badly and has poor traction controls isn't going to be any better with a GM power unit...

 

[richieb1971]

This video shows some of the 58's abroad. I'd say they are in good condition. If you read the comments in the youtube 4 of them were possibly on active duty. They could be stored in an over grown field somewhere though.

Shame about the 60's. It really does seem that EVERYTHING that can go against the class does go against it. Who would have thought that their geographic position along with their condition and weight would make them so hard to move? Not to mention the politics of the situation.

Its nice to see the 56 shells get some love, but not sure where those GM engines are coming from! Aren't all GM class 66 engines actually in class 66 shells?

 

[RingingEars66]

Shame about the 60's. It really does seem that EVERYTHING that can go against the class does go against it. Who would have thought that their geographic position along with their condition and weight would make them so hard to move? Not to mention the politics of the situation.
Its nice to see the 56 shells get some love, but not sure where those GM engines are coming from! Aren't all GM class 66 engines actually in class 66 shells?

Well I think it's typical DB wanting to hold all the cards while balancing upon a house of them. You have to wonder if it's now the place of a fair competition authority to get involved because it's things like this that will drag down the freight industry overall.

I thought that about the engines, but they must know something we don't. Admittedly, I'm on the inside looking out and I don't even know where they're sourcing the engines. Perhaps it's a GM engine and not specifically a 66 engine. I believe, the EU standards won't allow any more 66 engines. Still don't think it's a good idea, but if DB want to be awkward with the 60's then options are probably limited. However, I've also heard that the parent company for GBRf also owns the company that owns the 58's that are abroad. Apparently there's a row of them sat in France with the same parent owners now, so we shall see...

 

[cj_1985]

I can kind of understand DB wanting the overhaul contract for 60s they are selling.
BUT the 60s they are either going to need to be sold or scrapped in the next few years before DB have to vacate Toton.

Unless they plan to move them and store them somewhere else... But I can't understand the logic in paying to store something that's close to scrap condition in the case of some of those 60s

 

[Spartacus]

That's what I was thinking about the engines, unless they're planning on sourcing second hand units. The thing is that I always thought the engines in 56s were one of their strong points, it was other things that typically let them down, though obviously they're high on cost and maintenance by modern standards, and down on power too.

Funny that Brush has been mentioned for the 60s: I knew a few people who worked for Fastline and they complained that their 56s almost seemed to come out of Brush less reliable than when they went in!

 

[cj_1985]

I may be wrong, probably am, but I was under the impression that you can re-engine a loco (and possibly DMUs) with engines that don't meet the latest engine emmisions.

That the limitations on apply to new build . Could be wrong though.

 

[43096]

BUT the 60s they are either going to need to be sold or scrapped in the next few years before DB have to vacate Toton.

Who said DB have to vacate Toton?

http://uk.dbcargo.com/rail-uk-en/Ne...lanning_together_for_the_future_of_Toton.html

HS2 Ltd has recently confirmed that land occupied by DB Cargo UK’s rail freight workshops is not required to deliver the baseline plans for the railway.

DB Cargo UK’s Chief Executive Hans-Georg Werner said he hoped the news would put an end to speculation that the company’s Nottinghamshire depot would have to be hastily relocated to make way for HS2.

“While the site may have to move to accommodate new economic development associated with the HS2 Hub Station at some time over the next 15 to 20 years, there is time to work with all interested parties to ensure a holistic approach is taken....

 

[cj_1985]

Who said DB have to vacate Toton?

http://uk.dbcargo.com/rail-uk-en/Ne...lanning_together_for_the_future_of_Toton.html

I was going from what I read... Admittedly a year or longer ago

 

[F2002]

Such as shame DB won't let GBRf overhaul the 60s at Brush.

Why would they insist on only them overhauling the 60s? guessing GBRf found it might of been cheaper getting the locos overhauled by Brush.

Maybe DB were making a healthy profit selling the loco and overhauling them and didn't see much profit in simply selling the loco?

 

[BRX]

It would be a funny arrangement for GBRf to be running and depending on locos that had been overhauled by a competitor in whose interests it might be for them to be a wee bit unreliable....

I guess Colas went for it though.

 

[F2002]

It would be a funny arrangement for GBRf to be running and depending on locos that had been overhauled by a competitor in whose interests it might be for them to be a wee bit unreliable....

I guess Colas went for it though.

This crossed my mind too but I’d hope DB would behave correctly and besides the Colas 60s have been pretty good since colas acquired them?

If DB really wanted to sell the 60s they should do exactly that, unsure why they would be difficult about any future overhaul.

If they are too valuable to hand over to a competitor then scrap them and perform component recovery.

 

[GB]

It would be a funny arrangement for GBRf to be running and depending on locos that had been overhauled by a competitor in whose interests it might be for them to be a wee bit unreliable....

I guess Colas went for it though.

That’s where lawyers and contract negotiations come into play.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Assuming the story about DB only selling the 60s if the overhaul is done at Toton is true it isn’t ridiculous at all. The money will be in the overhaul. Depending on which locos are involved the loco itself will be worth scrap value, so why would DB sell assets only for a third party (Brush) to make the lion’s share of the profit?

Whether it is a loco’s last chance to run again is something enthusiasts worry about not people running a business.

 

[Spartacus]

If DB really wanted to sell the 60s they should do exactly that, unsure why they would be difficult about any future overhaul.

If they are too valuable to hand over to a competitor then scrap them and perform component recovery.

Like anything it's probably a marginal case, not worth selling them to a competitor unless they can get more money for them than they're currently worth, refurbing them adds value, like doing up a house before you sell it usually ups the value above the investments made. Trouble is in this case the buyer wants to do them up their own way, so they don't want them refurbing first, so it's no longer worth selling them. There might be some 'intermediate refurb' they might both go for: expensive houses are usually built with crap kitchens and bathrooms as they buyer invariably want to rip them out and put one in to their style.

 

[Grannyjoans]

Would be easier and probably cheaper to resurrect them than spending money to redesign less powerful locos.

Less powerful ?! 58's have 3300hp and 60's 3100hp.
More like, locos with higher gearing and less wheelslip protection than a class 60.
The power is not the issue.

 

[RingingEars66]

Assuming the story about DB only selling the 60s if the overhaul is done at Toton is true it isn’t ridiculous at all. The money will be in the overhaul. Depending on which locos are involved the loco itself will be worth scrap value, so why would DB sell assets only for a third party (Brush) to make the lion’s share of the profit?

Whether it is a loco’s last chance to run again is something enthusiasts worry about not people running a business.

That's true, but who else is going to come knocking now? They can either sit and rot, making DB nothing, or they sell a few and make something on parts. So it would seem now that GBRf are going elsewhere and obtaining 56's to overhaul. Opportunity lost.

 

[43096]

That's true, but who else is going to come knocking now? They can either sit and rot, making DB nothing, or they sell a few and make something on parts. So it would seem now that GBRf are going elsewhere and obtaining 56's to overhaul. Opportunity lost.

Not necessarily. It could be that the 56 “plan” is a negotiating tactic to get DB back to the table about 60s - GBRf showing that the 60 deal is not the only option.

 

[BRX]

I don't know what the current situation at Toton is in terms of work - but if it's quiet I could see that maybe DB would be keen to have some work in the form of the 60s to keep the workforce there busy, rather than having to lay people off and re-recruit in the future, and so on. In other words their interests might not be so much a matter of making money as keeping the depot busy. Complete speculation on my part.

 

[Bertie the bus]

That's true, but who else is going to come knocking now? They can either sit and rot, making DB nothing, or they sell a few and make something on parts. So it would seem now that GBRf are going elsewhere and obtaining 56's to overhaul. Opportunity lost.

DB haven't lost anything. If the locos are worth scrap value now they still will be if/when they dispose of them in the future. Scrap value fluctuates so they might make more or they might make less but it is obviously worth their while not selling now unless they do the overhaul or they wouldn't be doing what they're doing.

 

[hwl]

Not necessarily. It could be that the 56 “plan” is a negotiating tactic to get DB back to the table about 60s - GBRf showing that the 60 deal is not the only option.

Agreed but I suspect it needs to be a viable plan B if DB still don't play. (Plan A being 60s or possible some continental 66s imported.) If GBRf are looking at HS2 construction traffic the 60s are probably the ideal fit.

Would a compromise of a minimum of work done by DB to get the locos running ok then get Brush to finish off make sense? I think the original plan had Toton doing the work on the engines themselves.

 

[HSTEd]

I don't get why people are surprised. DBC is acting exactly like a good private business should - strangle the competitors by any means necessary.

It is not in their interest to sell a specialist heavy freight fleet of locomotives to their competitors unless they can make a huge pile of money out of it.

If you want to escape this sort of behaviour I am afraid public ownership is about the only option.

 

[Kingsbury Jn.]

Less powerful ?! 58's have 3300hp and 60's 3100hp.
More like, locos with higher gearing and less wheelslip protection than a class 60.
The power is not the issue.

It's what power it puts down on the rail that matters and 60's have a little more in this respect. Class 66 locos are as powerful as a class 58 but substantially more than both at the rail.

 

[xotGD]

I don't get why people are surprised. DBC is acting exactly like a good private business should - strangle the competitors by any means necessary.

It is not in their interest to sell a specialist heavy freight fleet of locomotives to their competitors unless they can make a huge pile of money out of it.

If you want to escape this sort of behaviour I am afraid public ownership is about the only option.

They could always try winning some contracts so that they would have use for the lines of locomotives slowly rusting away.

 

[HSTEd]

They could always try winning some contracts so that they would have use for the lines of locomotives slowly rusting away.

Maybe they calculate that the contracts are not worth them winning in terms of capital costs associated with them.

In businesses run as financial instruments, growth is not always the idea to maximise shareholder returns.