What is the future for class 67?

[bigdelboy]

• Displaced from mail trains long ago
• Soon to be replaced by class 68 on Chiltern
• Soon to be replaced by class 73 in Scotland
• Restricted RA8 heavy axle load and ight on loading gauge
• Wasn't the original EWS lease for 15 years? ... and that's nearly up
• 125 mph gearing probably non optimal for other work
• Appears to have no 125 mph work.
• Can only probably get a small train to 125 mph anyway

Apart from thunderbird and odd charter work and a couple of passenger trains in Wales they seem to have little work left.

Will they be sent abroad?
Will some useful passenger work be found for them?

Would re-gearing to a lower speed help a little. And perhaps even replacing the engine with a lighter model might even help; even if less powerful.

 

[fgwrich]

Heading off in a Skip......

(Coat well and truly taken!)

 

[Trainfan344]

Could they be used on any branches in East Anglia (wishful thinking)

 

[87019Chris]

Wouldn't the 68's be better suited to East Anglia seen as they are most likely going to be doing the drags to Yarmouth? So there isn't much potential for work on the network seen as loco hauled things are very rare maybe expansion on ATW services could be there only work other than a few test trains. they were primarily built for the mail trains and then it seemed that mail wasn't cost effective to move by train and so they became practically spare.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

And perhaps even replacing the engine with a lighter model might even help; even if less powerful.

Could that be done without falling foul of the emissions regs? Could some be physically converted to AC electrics? I know it wouldn't actually be done because of how much it would cost

 

[Ash Bridge]

• Displaced from mail trains long ago
• Soon to be replaced by class 68 on Chiltern
• Soon to be replaced by class 73 in Scotland
• Restricted RA8 heavy axle load and ight on loading gauge
• Wasn't the original EWS lease for 15 years? ... and that's nearly up
• 125 mph gearing probably non optimal for other work
• Appears to have no 125 mph work.
• Can only probably get a small train to 125 mph anyway

Apart from thunderbird and odd charter work and a couple of passenger trains in Wales they seem to have little work left.

Will they be sent abroad?
Will some useful passenger work be found for them?

Would re-gearing to a lower speed help a little. And perhaps even replacing the engine with a lighter model might even help; even if less powerful.

Would they be suitable locos for the Night Riviera sleeper? Certainly more reliable than the 57/6s I would have though.

 

[bigdelboy]

Would they be suitable locos for the Night Riviera sleeper? Certainly more reliable than the 57/6s I would have though.

My thoughts are:

If they were fit for this it may be surprising they are not doing it already ... but lease/hire cost may be a factor. West of Totnes I suspect they may not be optimal due to high gearing, brake issues, heavy gradients for a bo-bo with 9 carriages and high axle load. They could have modifications as per the Caledonian 67's but that limits them to 80 mph.

Indeed my understanding is the tractive effort of class 67 is far lower than class 57 .... something like ... 32000 lbs max as opposed to about 55000 ... and that may be a factor too (means possible poor acceleration).

 

[gazthomas]

It makes you wonder why they where geared for 125mph in the first place. Nice headline but in reality it has never been needed, even if the Royal Mail still used them.

 

[Ash Bridge]

It makes you wonder why they where geared for 125mph in the first place. Nice headline but in reality it has never been needed, even if the Royal Mail still used them.

If the railways had remained state owned under BR is it likely a locomotive of this specification would have seen the light of day in the first place?

 

[455driver]

It makes you wonder why they where geared for 125mph in the first place. Nice headline but in reality it has never been needed, even if the Royal Mail still used them.

For them to run at 125mph they also needed the fuel tank to be less than half full otherwise they were overweight for the higher speed, really good design, not!!!

 

[gazthomas]

For them to run at 125mph they also needed the fuel tank to be less than half full otherwise they were overweight for the higher speed, really good design, not!!!

How funny

 

[ainsworth74]

For them to run at 125mph they also needed the fuel tank to be less than half full otherwise they were overweight for the higher speed, really good design, not!!!

Doesn't this all come back to Alstom having to build them as Bo-Bo after they were unable to source a Co-Co bogie? My understanding was that if they'd been Co-Co as planned than issues like that wouldn't have existed.

 

[MK Tom]

I take it they're still going to be used on Arriva Wales services? If ATW expand their loco-hauled operations any further there could be more work there. I'm not aware of ATW getting any 68s unless I missed something?

 

[DownSouth]

They could be useful for rebuilding to get around the Tier 4 emissions standards for new locomotives.

Lighten them up, put in a Caterpillar 4-stroke prime mover with AC motors and you should get something reasonably useful as a mixed traffic loco which could be easily operated in pairs for heavier work.

If the railways had remained state owned under BR is it likely a locomotive of this specification would have seen the light of day in the first place?

Very likely, I would have thought. BR had a pretty spectacular record when it came to ordering lemon locos.

 

[JamesRowden]

I wonder if it would be worth building new DDA compliant carraiges so that '67+9XCarriages+67' formations could take over the London-Plymouth/Penzance services and allow the HSTs to be retired.

 

[richa2002]

Wouldn't the 68's be better suited to East Anglia seen as they are most likely going to be doing the drags to Yarmouth? So there isn't much potential for work on the network seen as loco hauled things are very rare maybe expansion on ATW services could be there only work other than a few test trains. they were primarily built for the mail trains and then it seemed that mail wasn't cost effective to move by train and so they became practically spare.

The drags are operated by Greater Anglia drivers so unless the agreement changes, GA drivers would need to be trained on 68s which there is no plan to do at the moment.

 

[Ash Bridge]

For them to run at 125mph they also needed the fuel tank to be less than half full otherwise they were overweight for the higher speed, really good design, not!!!

Let's hope the new Class 68 Eurolights prove to be better thought out machines, after all the're being constructed at the same plant as the 67s were.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I wonder if it would be worth building new DDA compliant carraiges so that '67+9XCarriages+67' formations could take over the London-Plymouth/Penzance services and allow the HSTs to be retired.

I have a feeling that the 67s would not offer any advantages over the HST... They're thirstier, heavier, slower if the above comments about design flaws are anything to go by, and the engines are older than the MTU lumps in the 43s! The Devon and Cornwall services will probably end up in the hands of bi-mode SET sets anyway.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

It makes you wonder why they where geared for 125mph in the first place. Nice headline but in reality it has never been needed, even if the Royal Mail still used them.

I think the idea was to replace the mail vans with something a bit faster (IIRC popular theory at the time was that Mk3s might be converted when Virgin finished with them, of course, that didn't happen and Royal Mail had other plans anyway).

Doesn't this all come back to Alstom having to build them as Bo-Bo after they were unable to source a Co-Co bogie? My understanding was that if they'd been Co-Co as planned than issues like that wouldn't have existed.

IIRC they did source a Co-Co design rated for 125mph, but the cost of acquiring the design was too high.

 

[ainsworth74]

IIRC they did source a Co-Co design rated for 125mph, but the cost of acquiring the design was too high.

Yes that might have been it. Wasn't the Co-Co design owned by a competitor who would only sell it for that high price you mention? I'm sure it was something along those lines. Either way it seems that the Class 67s issues come back to having to use a Bo-Bo design due to cost rather than a Co-Co.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Yes that might have been it. Wasn't the Co-Co design owned by a competitor who would only sell it for that high price you mention? I'm sure it was something along those lines. Either way it seems that the Class 67s issues come back to having to use a Bo-Bo design due to cost rather than a Co-Co.

Think it was Brush Traction that owned the Co-Co Bogie design that would not sell it IIRC (Type used on Class 89)

 

[Murph]

Think it was Brush Traction that owned the Co-Co Bogie design that would not sell it IIRC (Type used on Class 89)

The wonders of the competitive market, where you quite literally have to re-invent the wheel!

 

[ainsworth74]

Well not the wheel itself, just the thing it's mounted on

 

[JamesRowden]

I have a feeling that the 67s would not offer any advantages over the HST... They're thirstier, heavier, slower if the above comments about design flaws are anything to go by, and the engines are older than the MTU lumps in the 43s! The Devon and Cornwall services will probably end up in the hands of bi-mode SET sets anyway.

The reason that one 67 has lower tractive effort than two 43s is because it weighs less. Have two 67s and it would accelerate a rake of carriages off the line siginificantly faster than an HST does:

67: Max Tractive Effort = 144kN; Weight = 89T; Power at Rail = 1864kW

43: Max Tractive Effort = 80kN; Weight = 70.25T; Power at Rail = 1320kW

Nine Mark 4: Weight = 375T

Therefore:

67+9Carriages+67: Max Acceleration = 0.521 m/s^2; Power/Mass = 6.74kW/T

43+9Carriages+43: Max Acceleration = 0.310 m/s^2; Power/Mass = 5.12kW/T

 

[Ash Bridge]

The reason that one 67 has lower tractive effort than two 43s is because it weighs less. Have two 67s and it would accelerate a rake of carriages off the line siginificantly faster than an HST does:

67: Max Tractive Effort = 144kN; Weight = 89T; Power at Rail = 1864kW

43: Max Tractive Effort = 80kN; Weight = 70.25T; Power at Rail = 1320kW

Nine Mark 4: Weight = 375T

Therefore:

67+9Carriages+67: Max Acceleration = 0.521 m/s^2; Power/Mass = 6.74kW/T

43+9Carriages+43: Max Acceleration = 0.310 m/s^2; Power/Mass = 5.12kW/T

Iam sure you are correct about the increased performance 2x Class 67 would give but would this not be offset by other factors e.g. 455driver mentions the fuel tank problem, 61653 HTAFC the fuel consumption, also the 67s are probably not as kind to the track as Hst power cars. So overall significantly more expensive to operate than HST set.

 

[FQ]

I take it they're still going to be used on Arriva Wales services? If ATW expand their loco-hauled operations any further there could be more work there. I'm not aware of ATW getting any 68s unless I missed something?

The only problem is th coaches, which ATW don't have, but I guess when the HSTs come off the ECML and the GWML you could possibly get a few coaches from there, and a few DVTs from the MK 4s, and run a few services with 67s on ATW to free up some units.

So have 3 on Manchester to Milford Haven/Fishguard/Pembroke, 2 on Holyhead to Cardiffs, 2 on Manchester to Holyheads and 1 on the Holyhead to Brum.

 

[The Planner]

Cant see that happening, they drink like fishes and ATW would probably baulk at the cost.

 

[ExRes]

They should be converted into baked bean and dog food cans, that would be a fitting epitaph for the tin cans they are

 

[Whistler40145]

Sell the damn things to an overseas operator!

 

[David Goddard]

Well had Scotland gone independent they could have been part of the package: 90 odd distilleries, 400 oil rigs and 30 class 67s!