• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

West Highland 37s - THE END?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Techniquest

Veteran Member
Joined
19 Jun 2005
Messages
21,674
Location
Nowhere Heath
Seth said:
AlexS said:
He might have a point though - it is rather annoying at times to have others continually try to change your outlook on things, it's unlikely to happen.

I accept that. However, I think it would be easier to accept Julian's opinion if he rounded it off with a little less hostility.

So we've spent at least a quarter of a page on this thread discussing my 'hostility'? It's the sort of topic that's better off in MSN. However, during my absence from the forum yesterday, I'll take this chance to thank AlexS for pointing out what was meant by my final part of my post.

For the record, what I meant, without using a whole 12-sentence paragraph to do it, was that my view is NOT subject to suggestive discussion, ie a discussion which set out to change my opinion on things. Quite simply, to sum up in one sentence my view, stop moaning about 67s, they're rather enjoyable locomotives on heavy loads and at speed, not forgetting the excellent Highland gradients! To make it two sentences then, as one is insufficient, 37s are enjoyable, but let's not let progress stop us enjoying the future of locomotive haulage.

Now to move on to answer to yorkie's lengthy moan/reply/confused with the facts:

Regarding the weight of the 67s, this only comes from the requirement to have super power to hit high speeds quickly, surely?

Establishing this, we should consider the extreme likiness that more equally heavy and powerful frieght locomotives will be here in the future. A lot of the network is not passed for the 67s due to the axle loading on the track. Fair enough, it would take some time to clear the network for such a thing. Bearing in mind we could have more 67s (not too likely) or equally good locomotives (let's face it, there are a lot of loads that 60s and 66s can't pull, the former will be going in a few years completely) coming over to do freight work in the next 5 years or so.

Now, think for a moment about how difficult it would be to have to clear the route for 67s on the Robeston to Theale Murcos. It would remain 60-hauled for a while yet anyway due to the weight and the 66's insufficient pulling power. However, the tracks are in no way ready for 67s all over the route. Obviously, track work would have to be done to clear the route. Considering the fact we'll have more 67s (or whatever by 2010) on freight work, should it really be EWS' responibility to pay for most of the network to be cleared for their locomotives? That's not fair. NR are in charge of maintaining the network, they should be the ones paying to allow better locomotives (in terms of haulage capability), because let's face it, freight will get heavier, trains longers, more power and weight will become envitable for future locomotives. Not to mention passenger trains, which one day will be long enough for the job, packed with capacity and will no doubt be faster and heavier, due to more powerful engines needed to storm the Highlands of Scotland at 80mph and Shap at a full 140mph (some dreams coming in there). Passengers won't put up with bad track quality and ride. If nothing else, that would be the driving force to fix up the routes.

yorkie, you say 37s are reliable? Not in a couple of years time they won't. I daresay 67s aren't too reliable at the moment due to maintenance and lack of work. This will change hopefully. My point about 37s failing en-masse is a pretty realistic vision of what will happen eventually. They're ready to go to retirement now, let them do so. But send them off properly.

That is all I can be bothered to say right now, my keyboard is ready to collapse under all the hammering away of opinion on it.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Julian G

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Messages
3,545
37s will still be operating with Eurostar though as one has been overhauled
So why is everyone is fussing about cl37s being withdrawn from passenger services then ,Go on a Charter which involves cl37s
(it's not that difficult)
Seriously the big question is..
Why do you keep wanting to do the cl37s when You have done already?*





*Yorkie, don't answer back
 

Met Driver

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
1,734
1288gaje said:
So why is everyone is fussing about cl37s being withdrawn from passenger services then ,Go on a Charter which involves cl37s
(it's not that difficult)

That's all very well and good, but railtours can be expensive and don't take place on a regular basis, at least not with 37 haulage.

1288gaje said:
Why do you keep wanting to do the cl37s when You have done already?

Generally speaking, when someone does something that they enjoy, they want to do it again. A bit like you and your Junipers, eh?
 

16CSVT2700

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2005
Messages
1,837
Location
Gdansk
1288gaje said:
Why do you keep wanting to do the cl37s when You have done already?

Exactly.

After reading this thread through and through its clear to me that the majority here want to keep the 37/4s on the sleeper. Granted it'd be nice that they stayed BUT not even us enthusiasts can stop the march of techology even if we tried! The 67s will replace the 37s eventually, if you don't like it, tough!! You want to keep the 37s? You pay for them then!

Stop debating this over and over, to me 37s are boring (shock horror I've upset you all, meh) mainly because I've seen so many of them pre- and post-privitisation (yes I was spotting when I was 8!!).

I've done a 37 for haulage, seen the 37/4s that were on the Rhymneys etc, now it's time to move on. The ONLY locos I will continually do for mileage is 50031 and 50049, mainly because 50049 is my pet locomotive and also not to mention 50031 was one of the first 50s I had on a service train.

If you want to get 37 haulage, go to a preserved line, theres loads of preserved examples out there.
Wait, a preserved line isnt a "proper" railway because they're limited to 25mph blah blah blah. Big deal! It's still a bloody railway!

This is the thing with the majority of enthusiasts, they don't like change. Its just like when CR painted the HST power car in Hornby red and with the logo, they started knocking Cotswold Rail. So they done it for advertising? Wow I'm so upset they've painted a HST a different colour.. wah wah wah!

TOUGH! The reason why they knocked them was because they were blinded by their enthusiasm, as from what I've read on this site, alot of you are.
 

joy54.gen

Member
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
613
So your arguement for getting rid of the 37s is the march of technology. Hmm... more expensive, heavier per axle and slower. You can keep the march of technology if thats what it is bringing.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
50149 said:
[After reading this thread through and through its clear to me that the majority here want to keep the 37/4s on the sleeper. Granted it'd be nice that they stayed BUT not even us enthusiasts can stop the march of techology even if we tried! The 67s will replace the 37s eventually, if you don't like it, tough!! You want to keep the 37s? You pay for them then!
Pay for what? If you read the topic you'll discover that the 37s cost considerably less to run.

EWS want to turn an efficient (relatively speaking!) operation into a very inefficient one.

50149 said:
Stop debating this over and over, to me 37s are boring (shock horror I've upset you all, meh) mainly because I've seen so many of them pre- and post-privitisation (yes I was spotting when I was 8!!).
Joining in a debate by asking people not to debate? Interesting.

But this isn't about whether 37s are boring or not, it's about what is more efficient, what is more suitable. I don't think that "37s are boring" is a good reason to put 67s on, nor would the reverse argument be a good reason for keeping 37s on.
50149 said:
I've done a 37 for haulage, seen the 37/4s that were on the Rhymneys etc, now it's time to move on. The ONLY locos I will continually do for mileage is 50031 and 50049, mainly because 50049 is my pet locomotive and also not to mention 50031 was one of the first 50s I had on a service train.
I hardly think that the decision should be based on what bashers want for mileage purposes.
50149 said:
If you want to get 37 haulage, go to a preserved line, theres loads of preserved examples out there.
Wait, a preserved line isnt a "proper" railway because they're limited to 25mph blah blah blah. Big deal! It's still a bloody railway!
But, again, that's not a valid reason for taking 37s off this route, it doesn't address any of the issues.
50149 said:
This is the thing with the majority of enthusiasts, they don't like change. Its just like when CR painted the HST power car in Hornby red and with the logo, they started knocking Cotswold Rail. So they done it for advertising? Wow I'm so upset they've painted a HST a different colour.. wah wah wah!
I am all for change, if it's to actually improve the service and make it more comfortable and efficient. Sadly this change will not improve anything!
50149 said:
TOUGH! The reason why they knocked them was because they were blinded by their enthusiasm, as from what I've read on this site, alot of you are.
How am I "blinded"? If you have an issue with anything I've posted, then let's debate that particular point.

Do you deny that 67s cost more in access charges?

Do you deny that 67s will be subject to some hefty speed restrictions?
 

86242

Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
558
Location
Waiting in some far corner of the country for a 37
50149 said:
If you want to get 37 haulage, go to a preserved line, theres loads of preserved examples out there.
Wait, a preserved line isn't a "proper" railway because they're limited to MPH blah blah blah. Big deal! It's still a bloody railway!

A preserved line is hardly any more interesting than a model railway in someones back garden. Anything preserved no longer has an use other than for fans so it is not by any means the real thing.

I'm sure if you travel on the sleeper while its still a 37 you will want to do it again. No preserved line is 100 miles through the middle of nowhere with a Class 37 on the front. Most preserved lines are full up of 'kettles' and anyway and no 37/4s are preserved (apart from 414 which will take years before its back)

A 67 has a higher track access charge and the train will have to be slowed down due to TSR - Progress I think NOT
 

16CSVT2700

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2005
Messages
1,837
Location
Gdansk
joy54.gen said:
Hmm... more expensive, heavier per axle and slower. You can keep the march of technology if thats what it is bringing.

As I said, enthusiasts don't like change, and you've just backed up my point.

Keep your 37s, but instead of staying in the past with the current track standards, I'd like to seem them upgraded and improved to handle the 67's higher axle loading coupled with their high speed (which causes the damage). It'll have to happen eventually, why not now?
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
50149 said:
joy54.gen said:
Hmm... more expensive, heavier per axle and slower. You can keep the march of technology if thats what it is bringing.

As I said, enthusiasts don't like change, and you've just backed up my point.

Keep your 37s, but instead of staying in the past with the current track standards, I'd like to seem them upgraded and improved to handle the 67's higher axle loading coupled with their high speed (which causes the damage). It'll have to happen eventually, why not now?
Have you travelled on the West Highland Line?

To suggest it is "staying in the past with the current track standards" is ludicrous, sorry. It's a rural line used by not that many people, relatively speaking. I hardly think it makes economic sense to upgrade the line for higher speeds. It doesn't "have to happen eventually".

We're lucky to have the WHL still, and I'd be happy if it's maintained to current standards. It's never going to be a higher speed route.
 

Sprog

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Messages
1,315
Location
SPM
I think he was referring to Standards ie. Maintenance and Track type and strength of bridges and structures - not nessicarily the overall speed limits on the route... :idea:
 

16CSVT2700

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2005
Messages
1,837
Location
Gdansk
spm_43030 said:
I think he was referring to Standards ie. Maintenance and Track type and strength of bridges and structures - not nessicarily the overall speed limits on the route... :idea:

That is exactly what I was getting at. Where have I suggested that the linespeeds be increased? I have only stated I'd like to see the track upgraded to handle the 67s, therefore no speed restrictions etc.

I haven't travelled on the WHL, I plan to with spm43030, and to be honest I don't care whats on the front, 37 or 67, it makes no difference.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
50149 said:
spm_43030 said:
I think he was referring to Standards ie. Maintenance and Track type and strength of bridges and structures - not nessicarily the overall speed limits on the route... :idea:

That is exactly what I was getting at. Where have I suggested that the linespeeds be increased? I have only stated I'd like to see the track upgraded to handle the 67s, therefore no speed restrictions etc.

I haven't travelled on the WHL, I plan to with spm43030, and to be honest I don't care whats on the front, 37 or 67, it makes no difference.
But improving the route to take more track-damaging locos at existing linespeeds would be prohibitively expensive.

Currently the line makes a loss, and this is subsidised by the Scottish Executive, who have reportedly said "no" to paying more to meet the increased costs (and we're talking about both initial capital AND higher running costs), so where will the money come from? Should cuts be made to train services in England to pay for 67s to traverse the WHL?
 

joy54.gen

Member
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
613
You said in your first statement 50149 that enthusiasts should pay to keep the 37s, but it seems that you want someone to pay for the use of 67s on the WHL, well why don't you take your own advice and pay for them yourself.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
joy54.gen said:
You said in your first statement 50149 that enthusiasts should pay to keep the 37s, but it seems that you want someone to pay for the use of 67s on the WHL, well why don't you take your own advice and pay for them yourself.
At the end of the day, we all will through higher fares, whether we like it or not.

If costs on the WHL increase significantly, cuts may have to be made elsewhere, as no more taxpayers money is to made available for it (Unless they change their minds - but I can't see that happening, after all why should they pay higher subsidy if there's no improvement?)
 

Sprog

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Messages
1,315
Location
SPM
Arghh...hes not saying he wants 67s

Hes saying that hes accepted the fact, that unltimatly, skips are gonna replace tractors.

Ive said my bit..im not going to debate ths anymore..

My final opinion is, that if 37s stay on the WHL, all very well and good!! But if the 67s oust them, then..phh..itll be a shame, but i certainly wont be crying about it...as long as the 37s are used somewhere else, or cared for after they have been retired and not just dumped in the back of a depot somware, as EWS has done all to often...:x

Im officially retiring from this debate...have fun.. :!:
 

16CSVT2700

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2005
Messages
1,837
Location
Gdansk
Yep, my whole argument is based on my acceptance that 67s cometh whether we like it or not.

I'm retiring from this too, have fun continually arguing about it for another 10 pages or whatever..
 

Sprog

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Messages
1,315
Location
SPM
50149 said:
Yep, my whole argument is based on my acceptance that 67s cometh whether we like it or not....

Starting to sound abit like god there dude!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

joy54.gen

Member
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
613
Who said people aren't accepting there going, I'm just making the point of the stupidity of them being withdrawn, evidently 50149 has his favourite locos 50s and would be argueing just the same if it was 50s on the WHL, but as it is a loco he calls 'boring' apparently hes seen so many. Well there aren't so many now. Anyway when/if you travel on the line behind 37s maybe you'll see what people see in the locos.
 
Joined
30 Jul 2005
Messages
43
joy54.gen said:
Who said people aren't accepting there going, I'm just making the point of the stupidity of them being withdrawn, evidently 50149 has his favourite locos 50s and would be argueing just the same if it was 50s on the WHL, but as it is a loco he calls 'boring' apparently hes seen so many. Well there aren't so many now. Anyway when/if you travel on the line behind 37s maybe you'll see what people see in the locos.

they don't have that much character. i've had better EEs overseas (india, malaysia, ireland, and i hear those in australia were good too)
 

joy54.gen

Member
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
613
Again a great arguement, which is... basically that they don't have much character and apparenlty they weren't made for the WHL, which I can't remember saying???
 

Jim

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
3,398
Location
Wick
Watcher In The Rye said:
when are u kids gonna realise that trains aren't made/built/hauled by certain locomotives for enthusiasts?


I don't do 'Text' Language.


Having read though the post's, it has become clear to me that 37's are just as good as 67's (in realiability :? ) but it WILL be cheeper to run tractors, on WHL. At the end off the day, they will LOOSE money from enthusiasts on there, (which is what is happening on the Valleys). This means the fares will go up. Surley anyone wanting 67's should foot the bill, as it isn't fare on people like us who will pay for these. This means EVEN LESS passengers will go on the sleeper
 

86242

Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
558
Location
Waiting in some far corner of the country for a 37
Jim said:
Having read though the post's, it has become clear to me that 37's are just as good as 67's (in reliability :? ) but it WILL be cheaper to run tractors, on WHL. At the end off the day, they will LOOSE money from enthusiasts on there, (which is what is happening on the Valleys). This means the fares will go up. Surly anyone wanting 67's should foot the bill, as it isn't fare on people like us who will pay for these. This means EVEN LESS passengers will go on the sleeper

Someone says some sense at last! ;)
 

Jim

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
3,398
Location
Wick
Jonathan said:
Jim said:
Having read though the post's, it has become clear to me that 37's are just as good as 67's (in reliability :? ) but it WILL be cheaper to run tractors, on WHL. At the end off the day, they will LOOSE money from enthusiasts on there, (which is what is happening on the Valleys). This means the fares will go up. Surly anyone wanting 67's should foot the bill, as it isn't fare on people like us who will pay for these. This means EVEN LESS passengers will go on the sleeper

Someone says some sense at last! ;)

What are you saying about me :!: ;)
 

metrocammel

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2005
Messages
954
Location
Ashton, Lancashire
Talking a Fort William driver last year (who was anti - 67 anyway) he mentioned how there were talks with FSR & EWS about 67's coming (and there were unsuccesful trails) but he said at the end of the day, it would either cost millions and millions for every bridge alon the WHL (and theres a lot of them!) to be strengthend (due to the axle load, mainly due to 67's being Bo-Bo rather than 37's weight spreading Co-Co wheel arrangement) or the other option was to run the sleeper (with the 67's at a much slower speed - with permanent 5 mph TSR's on nearly all brigdes) when they did that the sleeper trial with the 67 on it was about 2 hours late, so that would mean an 11am arrival in Fort Willliam - which is very unlikely to be welcomed by passengers.

So basically, he was worried for his job, as if they do withdraw 37's, there is no real suitable replacement, and if 67's had to suffice, he said they'd run - down the sleeper until the Fort William section would dropped. Lets face it, the FW portion was once load 9 i belive, with 3 sleeper coaches, 2 passenger coaches a motorail van & a full brake . Now it is load 4 with a half brake. So in BR days it was already being "run-down", but 67's could be the nail in the coffin as with them the service would be destroyed timetable wise. Anybody for a 66 with an "ETHEL2" - thats what they did before ETH 37/4, just an old class 25, and a no heat 37- pretty dreadful!!

PALMZ
 

AlexS

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2005
Messages
2,886
Location
Just outside the Black Country
The Fort William sleeper can't be any longer because the convoy down to Euston is at max size in terms of platforms. It's also why the lounge car and seated cars are Mk2 instead of Mk3 - they're shorter.

At the end of the day, if the service depends on enthusiast patronage, and the traction that is attracting the enthusiast is at the age of the 37s (where there's only so much an overhaul can do, and at what cost) then maybe it's time for it to say goodbye. Far more used and useful rail links have in the past been dropped, whats to make this sleeper service (which has outlasted the vast majority of other more useful sleepers and overnight trains) special in that it is being run purely because it has a 37 on the front. The 37s are going to drop some time soon and there's nothing else to replace them with as EWS have the contract but 67s. Using 67s is cheaper for EWS than overhauling the half dead 37 fleet.
 
Joined
4 Oct 2005
Messages
207
Location
WERE EVER I WANT TO BE !
Who would go to Fort William Behind a Very quite 67 i wouldn't i would go for the Load Full Power THRASH off a 37!!!!!!!!!!!!. actually how many people bar enthusiasts use the sleeper. i wouldn't have thought that many would go to Fort William from london.
 

heart-of-wessex

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
3,008
Location
Trowbridge
im not worried about the 67 anyway, ok but to another point to talk about, what WOULD be a suitable replacement for the 37s, from a realistic view as we must admit, the 37 is not going to last forever, as nothing does, nor is fuel, so theres got to be some replacement, preferably a low effecient fuel tank for one..
 
Joined
3 Nov 2005
Messages
62
6M60 SEATON FLASKS said:
Who would go to Fort William Behind a Very quite 67 i wouldn't i would go for the Load Full Power THRASH off a 37!!!!!!!!!!!!. actually how many people bar enthusiasts use the sleeper. i wouldn't have thought that many would go to Fort William from london.

Well i dont quite go London although done the 37 one or twice before to Edinburgh and got it back.

At the end the day i'd still love to see a 37 on it. But would still go on it regardless of what was put on
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top