Page 1 of 1
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 14:32 #111557 | |
ajax103
1104 posts |
After playing 58050's 1991 York timetable which had both in (for some reason I only had Class 56s though) it got me thinking about the pros and cons of both types. Wikipedia states and I quote: Since they were introduced in the early 1980s, the 58s saw service on a variety of freight duties. Despite claims made at the time, their performance was actually inferior to Class 56s on many types of freight train due to their increased tendency to wheelslip, largely as a result of bogie design. Although originally allocated to coal traffic, their arrival coincided with the miners' strike, and British Rail apparently only tolerated the construction of so many because the components were already on order. As a result, the 58s could also be seen working other types of freight traffic. With the advent of privatisation in the 1990s, Class 58s greatly extended the geographical scope of their operations and were used on general freight traffic until withdrawal. In their day, Class 58s were powerful and capable freight locomotives, although not without their flaws. However, by the turn of the century they compared unfavourably with the new generation of locomotives and were quickly supplanted by Class 66s. In comparison, Class 58s were expensive to maintain and operate, and delivered much lower availability. My question is if in their day that the Class 58s were indeed powerful and capable freight locos then that seems to be a opposite view to their performance being inferior to Class 56s on many types of freight train due to their increased tendency to wheelslip, largely as a result of bogie design. Also when the 66s were first introduced, were they both expensive to maintain and operate, and as a result delivered much lower availability? So which was the better loco? Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 15:34 #111559 | |
58050
2650 posts |
Class 58 locos were a modular design whereby the cabs could be exchanged easier & also the power unit along with the auxiliary equiptment, whereas with other types of loco such as the Cl.56 it was a far more complicated job & more expensive. During my time on the footplate I drove both types on MGR trains & personally I preferred the Cl.58 as it was a much smoother riding loco & for me seemed to pull the loaded train better on the mainline compared to the Cl.56. That said however the Cl.56 seemed to operate better discharging the coal n slow speed compared to the Cl.58. Both locos suffered from wheel slip on slow speed, but the Cl.56 seemed to hold its feet better. You mention my York 1991 timetable. What you need to understand is that MGR trains from Sc. R & the North East were hauled by Cl.56 because no traincrews in Scotland nor in the north east were ever trained on Cl.58 locos & you'd only see Cl.58 locos working in from Toton with Toton men as they only signed as far as York Yard North. Obviouslt if you speak to drivers at other depots such as Bescot where I was trainmaster they seemed to prefer the Cl.56, but it's a case of each to there own. When I was loco controller for the Yorkshire/Humberside & East Midlands regions 1996-2001the Cl.58 availability was the highest in the country & certainly out-stripped any other class of loco(eletric & diesel) in the terms of miles covered per casualty. Another irony with regards to the Cl.58 is that it was designed for export & yet no other country bought any so we had all 50 at Toton TMD. Strange that since 2004 there are now more Cl.58s working in Europe than in this country. I hope one day they will all come back here to where they belong hauling freight trains. Even my username sake is still in Spain. That loco is part of the national collection & is destined for York NRM as it was the last locomotive built at Doncaster Works. I used its number as my username because when I was on the footplate it was always undergoing 'SPEX' trials out of Toton TMD & was actually the last Cl.58 I needed to ride on which I finally achieved at Bescot in 2005. We on the loco control at Nottingham ROC(Mainline Freight) nicknamed that loco 'pride of the fleet' as it was named 'Toton Traction Depot'. Worksop men also loved them, but when the Cl.66 came it was a death knell for the Cl.58 & Cl.56 locos & to an extent the Cl.60 as well. Not because they couldn't pull the trains it was more to do with the fact that EWS built the HTA 102 tonnes GLW bogie coal hopper & they were built with buckeye couplings & so only Cl.66 loco could work them. As time progressed less & less MGR trains ran & as a resultthe main workload of the Cl.58, Cl.56 & Cl.60 on coal trains dried up & they were diagrammed to work other services. Also you need to realise that Toton TMD had had the Cl.58 locos from new & when they were transferred to Eastleigh from Toton TMD in 2001 the availability dropped severly, paartly due to the fact that the fitters at Eastleigh weren't experts on Cl.58 loco unlike the fitters at Toton TMD who knew them intimately. I've ridden on a whole number of diesel & eletric locos during railway carerr & by a long way the ride on a Cl.58 was by far the best. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: ajax103 |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 16:09 #111562 | |
jc92
3629 posts |
Pascal didn't you allocate the first 66 off Toton to recover a failed 60? I'm sure there was an interesting story about that somewhere?
"We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 16:22 #111563 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
May have done, can't remember that far back now Joe. But what I do remember was having the 1st Cl.66 in the country at Toton TMD in 1997. That loco was 66004 as I remember doing the 'T' cards for the fleet of Cl.66 locos. The loco controls on BR & later for Mainline Freight & for a short while with EWS engines were not only controlled through TOPS, but the power desks had massive 'T' card boards. On the board would be a large 'T' card with the loco diagram numbers, plus associated columns in the 'T' card board headed by cards:- Toton TMD Locos Out Of Service, then under those was Toton TMD Locos On Hand OK & lastly Locos Allocated to Arrive. So every depot or stabling point within your geographical area pf control had a column. Then underneath each section would be the 'T' card with the individual loco numbers. The board should in reality mirror what's shown on TOPS, but more importantly you could look at the board & see what the state of play was at any prticular depot in respect of available power. The individual loco 'T' cards would also have metal tabs placed on them for locos with pre-assigned exams or repairs so you'd know wht loco to work away to meet it's pre-assignment & as a loco controller ou'd placed a small red tag on engines with less than 14 'A' exam hours on th clock as it was a big NO NO to allocate a loco onto a diagram without having enough hours left on the clock. Cl.58locos were the last ones done in hours. Cl.56 & Cl.58 locos had a max of 80 hours when coming off exam. Cl.60 & Cl.66s were done in cycle days & not hours. I took my partner's son trainspotting to Bletchley 10 days ago & remembered seeing 66075 going on the Up Slow with a liner & I thought those locos are 20 yearsold now. I wonder if they will be treated like there BR predessors such as the Cl.40, Cl.45 etc etc. Cos to be honest they seem to be getting a bit long in the tooth after 20 years of constant thrashing. Last edited: 27/08/2018 at 16:23 by 58050 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 16:39 #111564 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
jc92 in post 111562 said:Pascal didn't you allocate the first 66 off Toton to recover a failed 60? I'm sure there was an interesting story about that somewhere?Your thinking about Warrington when I was covering the North West & Scotland power desk. All of the Fiddlers Ferry Power Station coal trains were diagrammed for Cl.60 locos so they could haul 45 loaded MGR wagons up the sever bank at Strand Road on there way to Tuebrook Sdgs to RR for there onward movement to Fiddlers Ferry The biggest replacement loco I had at Warrington was a Cl.66, but no one had produced any loading for Cl.66s from Gladstone Dock to Fiddlers Ferry. After having a chat with the Maintenance Control(who sat opposite the power controllers at the CSDC) & also the NW ops desk it was decided to send the Cl.66 with 40 empty MGR wagons which was the lesser of the two eveils. The other option was to cancel the train. Anyway to cut a long story short the train set off to Gladstone Dock to load. In the meantime the word went about in the north west that I'd sent a Cl..6 vice a Cl.60 on a Fiddlers Ferry MGR train.So the whole of the NW management team descended on Tuebrook Sdgs to see if the Cl.66 would make it up the bamk or slip to a stand & request assistance for being over-poweredby the weight. Needless to say the Cl.66 managed it easily & from that point on a loading was set up for Cl.66 locos from Gladstone Dock to Fiddlers Ferry power Station of 40 loaded MGR wagons. Railtrack confirmed this as they too has sent representative to Tuebrook Sdgs to see if the Cl.66 was capable bearing in mind that these locos at that time were new & a complete unknown quantity. But like at that time if you try you don't know. Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 16:55 #111565 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
ajax103 in post 111557 said:After playing 58050's 1991 York timetable which had both in (for some reason I only had Class 56s though) it got me thinking about the pros and cons of both types. I wouldn't take everything you read on Wikipedia as gospel. here's something you didn't know about these locos. Back in 1995 when Freightliner 1995 was formed after breaking away from RfD they(Freightliner)inherited all the worst Cl.47 locos RfD had on its books. What I mean by the worst I mean the ones that tended to fail alot & the most unreliable or the ones that needed Works overhauls. This in effect made Freightliner approach us at Trainload Freight South East/Mainline Freight with a view of hiring in 3 or 4 Cl.58 locos to be out-based at Ipswich to cover freightliner trains between Ipswich - Felixstowe FLTs - Ipswich. As a result a handful of drivers were trained on Cl.58 kicis at ipswich for tests. At the end of ther tests Freightliner were so impressed with the performance of the Cl.58 on there liner trains that they wanted to sign a deal to hire in 3 or 4 of them until there fleet of Cl.47 locos had gone through Works overhauls. This never happened as we Trainload Freight South East/Mainline Freight couldn't spare them, hence the reason why Freightliner ended up hiring in 6 Loadhaul Cl.56 locos off Thornaby TMD. But from the convrsations I had back then with drivers at Ipswich they much preferred the Cl.58 to the Cl.56 on there liner trains. For me certainly one of the best locomotives this country has ever built & certainly very reliable in the mid to late 1990s better than anything else in the country Last edited: 27/08/2018 at 22:02 by 58050 Reason: corrected typo Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 18:50 #111570 | |
|
ajax103
1104 posts |
You have to remember I don't recall much if any of the freight stuff before the 66s came, my memory was InterCity Swallow HSTs/91s or Regional Railways North West Sprinters. Hence why when Wikipedia states this, I like to check first after all far better to check then assume right? The other thing I wanted to ask you was did you have anything to do with Rail Express Systems Class 47s at all, were their 47s really so unreliable? Last edited: 27/08/2018 at 18:54 by ajax103 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 20:02 #111576 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
ajax103 in post 111570 said:You have to remember I don't recall much if any of the freight stuff before the 66s came, my memory was InterCity Swallow HSTs/91s or Regional Railways North West Sprinters. To answer your question about did I know anything about RES Cl.47/4s the answer is yes & no. I never actually covered the RES power desk at the CSDC at Doncaster, but sat next to that desk. In that I said yes when I was Senior Traction Controller at Liverpool Street RCO 1990-1993 I did allocate the Cl.47/4 locos at Stratford to work 1V66 parcels Southend Victoria - Reading each weekday as well as other Cl.47/4s off Cambridge depot working NPCCS trains to King's Cross during the week. I've driven dozens of different Cl.47s during my time on the footplate. You ask about whether they were that unreliable. The problem the Cl.47 suffered with throughout there working lives was coolant loss(Serck Oil) which drove the radiator fans on the cooler group of which there were two. I've known crews on Cl.47s shut the engine down on engineering possession only to find after a few hours when they come to re-start the engine the engine wouldn't start due to the loss of coolant. That's why during severe frpst you leave the engines running so the joints in the engine room don't contract & lose coolant. The last time at Bescot when we carried out frost precautioon I started the Cl.47/4 on the loco holding sdgs whilst the other driver went & started the Cl.66s. When Wisconsin Central purchased RES & the other freight TOCs to form EWS they particularly didn't like the fact that Cl.47 locos tended to drip oil & various other lubricating oils all over the track because there US locomotives didn't tend to do that. Hence the reason why there was a concerted effort to get rid of them. They were originally built as a mixed traffic loco designated 2750hp, but due to the violent shaking of the power unit on full power for long periods of time they were de-rated to 2580hp. As a mixed traffic loco they were pretty good, but the main reason they lasted so long was the fact that pretty much every depot signed them. Although we did say that had the Cl.45/1 been used instead of the Cl.47/4s on mail trains the Royal Mail train performance levels would have been far higher with peaks & not one mail train would have ever of run late as the Cl.45 was a far better locomotive in every respect(probably the best diesel BR ever built), but sadly that never happened & the Cl.45 locos had all gone by 1990. If you ever went inside the engine room on a Cl.47 where the exhausters & compressors were housed you used to walk on metal grates raised above the engine room floor because it would be always swimming in oil, you couldn't see the engine room floor on that part of the engine room because of where oil had leaked from various parts of the machinery housed in that section of the engine room. Compare that to the engine room floor of a Peak Cl.45 loco which had no oil or other material on the engine room floor it was considerably clean. Last edited: 27/08/2018 at 22:04 by 58050 Reason: corrected typo Log in to reply The following user said thank you: ajax103 |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 20:29 #111578 | |
|
ajax103
1104 posts |
With the RES services, when you diagrammed the ones when you were responsible for them could you diagram a Non ETH fitted loco or were they always from the RES pool? Reason I ask is as you pointed out that the 47/4s weren't that reliable for reasons above, I do wonder why EWS didn't go with 66s fitted with ETH to haul the mail trains instead of getting the 67s especially as the mail trains were booked to run at 80mph so no idea why they brought 125mph locos? As always, it's interesting hearing your memories 
Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 20:45 #111579 | |
postal
5190 posts 
|
ajax103 in post 111578 said:. . .especially as the mail trains were booked to run at 80mph so no idea why they brought 125mph locos?Only the TPOs were timed at 80mph as they were carrying staff who were on their feet sorting the mail into the fittings and moving the mail bags up and down the train. Anything over 80mph and the ride sometimes became a little bit bumpy when people were trying to work. IIRC, these are normally shown as "Postals" in the WTTs. The loco hauled unmanned trains of BGs and GUVs and the 325 units (normally shown as "Mails" ) could all be timed at 100mph. It would have made more operational sense to design the 325s for 125mph running but that would have meant a bespoke design rather than an existing design modified for mail use and the extra cost couldn't be justified within the business case for Railnet. “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Last edited: 27/08/2018 at 20:46 by postal Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 20:52 #111580 | |
Steamer
3921 posts |
58050 in post 111564 said:I recall reading on another Forum that some 60s were specifically retained to work coal trains out of Liverpool Docks as they could take more than 66s. Is there any truth to this? "Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 21:08 #111582 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
ajax103 in post 111578 said:With the RES services, when you diagrammed the ones when you were responsible for them could you diagram a Non ETH fitted loco or were they always from the RES pool? A couple of things I'd say here:- 1. When RES started the former LMR RCO at Crewe took over the allocation of the RES Cl.47/4 locos. If one had failed they usually had another one available to step ino diagram.If you go back further to the late 1980s to the early 1990s if a Cl.47/4 failed for whatever reason & wasn't going to make it's booked departure time off depot then the usual arrangement was for either a Cl.31/4 to step into the diagram or another Cl.47/4 from another sector was used. 2. Cl.66 locos are geared fr heavy freight & not express passenger or mail trains. As John has mentioned TPOs, like sleepers & the former newspaper trains on BR all ran at 80mph so as to give the people on the train a smoother ride. Personally I've never liked Cl.67 locos, they should have been built as a Co-Co rather than a Bo-Bo, but because of axle loadings they were built as Bo-Bo so they could run on lines into mid Wales to Aberystwyth & such like, but they'd struggle big time to get to 100mph let alone 125mph. I once spoke to A RES driver who was on the same train as me from Bedford going to London to work a mail train out of King's Cross & I asked him if he ever managed to get to 100mph heading north out of King'Cross. His answer was you'd be exetremly lucky to get to 100mph even on full power all the way. Amother comparison similar to this is whats best between a Cl.47 & a Cl.57. Now I remember the night when the first Cl.57 was working a liner from Ipswich to Leeds FLT - Ipswich. At this time the EWS loco control was located in the JARVIS building at the north end of Doncaster station on the 1st floor. I was keeping an eye on its progress & when it was approaching Doncaster station we went to the smoking room & opened the window to listen to the new sound of a Cl.57. Sure enough the train went through & then returned back to Ipswich a few hours later. Several of the driver I know from when I was trainsmaster at Bescot have been trained on Cl.57 locos whilst driving for Freightliner & they've all said pretty much the same. The Cl.47 is a stronger loco & pulls better than the Cl.57. It really depends on what type of traffic the loco is working & in some cases it's a match made in heaven whereas in other cases it definately isn't. The other thing to bear in mind when talking about RES was the fact that for every minute delay to a mail train that would cost EWS £1,000 hence the priority EWS placed on RES trains. because it wouldn't take long for the bill to mount up if the delay was down to us(EWS) as opposed to another TOC or Network Rail. Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 21:15 #111584 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
Steamer in post 111580 said:58050 in post 111564 said:I recall reading on another Forum that some 60s were specifically retained to work coal trains out of Liverpool Docks as they could take more than 66s. Is there any truth to this? The maximum loading or Cl.60 loco from Gladstone Docks to Fiddlers Ferry Power Statopn was always 45 MGR wagons.So when I sent the first Cl.66there that day it went with 40. Now I left the loco control at CSDC Doncaster in 2001 to go to Bescot, so I don't know if he loadings for Cl.66 locos ever went up to 45. AFAIK if it didn't then the Cl.60 could take an additional 5 loaded MGR wagons. However once the HTA 102 tonne GLW bogie coal hopper came on stream & the MGR wagons were withdrawn from service all that became academic. What you need to realise is that every power station in the country at some point had to change there discharging terminals so they could handle the new 102 tonne GLW bogie coal hoppers as opposed to dealing with MGR wagons which had been in service since the late 1960s. So bit by bit MGR trains no longer ran to power stations as they couldn't deal with the MGR wagons once there discharging facilities had been altered to cater for the bogie coal hoppers. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Steamer |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 23:05 #111596 | |
|
jc92
3629 posts |
Quick partially related question. With sectorisation, did parcels and passenger 47/4/7/8s interwork? It seems like a waste of traction to have parcels locos sat around doing nothing all day waiting to work their evening trains, ditto for passenger locos overnight. Similar question with the handful of 31/4s. We're they standby locos for a failure or did they have regular booked turns? "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 27/08/2018 at 23:32 #111600 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
jc92 in post 111596 said:Quick partially related question. With sectorisation, did parcels and passenger 47/4/7/8s interwork?The answer to that is definately NO. Once sectorisation came in each & every sector had their own resources(locos & traincrew) & unless one sector was prepared to pay for the use of another sectors resources(locos & traincres) then it wouldn't run until such time as that sector had the resources to run it even if it was several hours late. Bear in mind track access charges & the associate rubbish involving delay attribution didn't come in until after April 1994 when Railtrack was born. So trains could run several hours late without being penalised. Obviously everything changed once Railtrack came about & the amount of paperwork increased big time to run trains which to alot of us railwaymen then made no sense at all. I used to go to Swindon once a month with some member of staff from Westbury train planning office to argue the toss with Railtrack Great Western about who was to blame for this, that & the other delays. Some we'd(Trainload Freight South East/Mainline Freight) accept & others we;d reject & also Railtrack Great Westyern did the same. All the ones that we both wouldn't accept responsibility for were resolved by another group meeting. The same thing also happened when we rcv'd requests for the hire of drivers or locos when another ROCs trains failed. Nothing happened until the requesting authority had signed for the provision of another loco & driver. Once I'd rcv'd the signed document then we'd notify the depot concerned to dispatch the driver & engine to assist the failed train. The railway from that point on ran on paper. Nothing moved unless somone in authority had signed for it & the provider knew they qwould be getting paid for the use of their resources. Welcome to the privatised railway. Sectorisation was the prelude to the privatisation of BR. Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 28/08/2018 at 14:37 #111611 | |
|
Steamer
3921 posts |
58050 in post 111600 said:So trains could run several hours late without being penalised.Unless, one assumes, it was a revenue-earning train, in which case the paying customer would not be happy... "Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 28/08/2018 at 14:58 #111614 | |
|
jc92
3629 posts |
Steamer in post 111611 said:58050 in post 111600 said:Maybe not but there was no delay repay. Possibly the one good thing to come from privatisation.So trains could run several hours late without being penalised.Unless, one assumes, it was a revenue-earning train, in which case the paying customer would not be happy... I remember a programme about 37 bashers where a 37/4 has failed before working a NWC service at crewe and it take ages to borrow a 37/5. The passengers were basically told it was tough. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 29/08/2018 at 09:32 #111628 | |
kbarber
1712 posts |
Steamer in post 111611 said:58050 in post 111600 said:But it did mean you could choose which customers to make the unhappiest. Like the time when HM was making a 'private' visit from Sandringham to London; for that sort of thing there were some MkII carriages in the royal train fleet, so they'd hang one of them on the back of a service train (in this case Lynn - Liverpool St). Unfortunately the cl47 on the front decided to expire somewhere in the fens. So they took the engine off a down road to power HM into London, leaving the Lynn-bound passengers waiting in the middle of nowhere until a spare could be turned out. I wonder how happy those loyal subjects were at being thus delayed for the sake of their monarch's greater convenience...So trains could run several hours late without being penalised.Unless, one assumes, it was a revenue-earning train, in which case the paying customer would not be happy... Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 29/08/2018 at 13:34 #111633 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
kbarber in post 111628 said:Steamer in post 111611 said:Know that all too well Keith when she was travelling to & from Sandringham. We'd have a standby loco at Bishops Stortford, Audley End, Cambridge & Ely. I did hear one story about her returning from Sandringham on as you've mentioned a Mk.2 coach attached to the rear of a London bound service from King's Lynn(but remember the coach would be locked off from the rest of the train). When the train arrived at Liverpool Street(whilst Liverpool Stgreet was being re-modneriased) the Queen was photograped walking down the platform amidst a complete building site. One things for certain you'd never see a Cl.56 or Cl.58 working the Royal train ever. The only freight engines that worked it were Cl.20 locos when it went to Aberystwyth.58050 in post 111600 said:But it did mean you could choose which customers to make the unhappiest. Like the time when HM was making a 'private' visit from Sandringham to London; for that sort of thing there were some MkII carriages in the royal train fleet, so they'd hang one of them on the back of a service train (in this case Lynn - Liverpool St). Unfortunately the cl47 on the front decided to expire somewhere in the fens. So they took the engine off a down road to power HM into London, leaving the Lynn-bound passengers waiting in the middle of nowhere until a spare could be turned out. I wonder how happy those loyal subjects were at being thus delayed for the sake of their monarch's greater convenience...So trains could run several hours late without being penalised.Unless, one assumes, it was a revenue-earning train, in which case the paying customer would not be happy... Log in to reply |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 29/08/2018 at 14:32 #111635 | |
|
jc92
3629 posts |
Imagine a royal saloon being attached as tail traffic on a DMU...
"We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply The following user said thank you: kbarber |
| Class 56 vs Class 58 29/08/2018 at 16:41 #111641 | |
|
58050
2650 posts |
jc92 in post 111635 said:Imagine a royal saloon being attached as tail traffic on a DMU...Can't ever re-call that happening, let alone seen a photo of it, but technically it could do it. Although they have used the 'General Managers' Inspection Saloon vice the royal train. Namely when Charles & Diana got married the SR General Managers saloon was used hauled by Cl.73 to Broadlands IIRC. Log in to reply |