Atomic Systems

I keep hearing stories about the class 66's only having a design life of 7 years ... not sure whether I believe them or not, but the unit cost of the locomotives are consistant with that.

Most freight locomotives still require heavy overhauls, I expect that newer designs will be more in the 'pitstop' maintenance regime. The time for an overhaul will also vary between different designs but I expect that 3-4 months, as you suggest, is the normal time.

Regards,

Dan

BR7MT wrote:I keep hearing stories about the class 66's only having a design life of 7 years ... not sure whether I believe them or not, but the unit cost of the locomotives are consistant with that.

Blimey - and they've been around since 1998! Since they are EMD products, perhaps the design life is based on them being ploughed across the States continually with less frequent maintenance than that required by HMRI?

Speaking of overhauls, I once heard from an ex-pat Kiwi contact that NZR ordered a series of diesels which use standard truck or generator engine - one mass produced on a huge scale - on the basis that when said engine reached overhaul time, it would be thrown out and replaced with a brand-new one. Inefficient it sounds, but apparently cost-effective.

Well, US locomotives tend to have short design lives - their attitude is very much "use 'em and lose 'em" over there. While they might consider 20 years to be a long lifespan, here we expect more like 35-40. On the continent, this is even higher - 60+ years in some cases (especially Switzerland) - the BLS still have the 1944 Ae4/4 class in regular service. I think, however, that a good maintainance regime for locomotives will keep a well built locomotive in serrvice almost indefinitely (this may well be lacking in the US)!

Nick

allypally wrote:Had nationalisation carried on throughout the 90s, I dare say we'd have more Networkers (that don't work properly, bar the 365s), still have clapped out locomotives on Cross Country that fail every 24 minutes and so on. There just isn't enough money in the pot to upgrade the network nationally, and if you ask me, since the Voyagers are likely to actually GET somewhere, I'd rather have a 220 thats slightly too small and smells a bit funny than have to rely on a clapped out duff that's more likely to drop down dead than the dodo.

Cheap coming from someone working on the GCR who's diesel groups are hell bent into making there loco's as claggy and smelly as possible during a diesel gala.

At least crosscountry loco hauled service's could actually get passed Dawlish, and if the Air con stopped working the internal sliding doors and Door window's were opened, where as a voyager would have to be cancelled because they dont have emergency aircon window's as fitted to 158's where the guard opens them.

Don't look at me - I don't touch the locomotives.

Yes, they might get passed Dawlish - usually with something else on the front of them mind!

never heard of a loco hauled breaking down in the west country my lad, laira looked after there 47's its only mr branson's fault they kept breaking down and supplying us growler basher's something decent to ride.

alexnick wrote:Well, US locomotives tend to have short design lives - their attitude is very much "use 'em and lose 'em" over there. While they might consider 20 years to be a long lifespan, here we expect more like 35-40. On the continent, this is even higher - 60+ years in some cases (especially Switzerland) - the BLS still have the 1944 Ae4/4 class in regular service. I think, however, that a good maintainance regime for locomotives will keep a well built locomotive in serrvice almost indefinitely (this may well be lacking in the US)!

Nick

Ah, not really Nick. What usually happens is that the Class 1's, NS, UP CSX, BNSF etc., will buy or lease new and run their locomotives hard for 10-15 years and then either rebuild them (there are a number of companies that do only that) or hand them down to regional lines or short lines. There are thousands of these 20, 30 or even 40 year old machines still running on short lines or yard duty.

US locomotives live a completely different life to European machines. They haul heavy, mile long freights through mountainous terrain, accross deserts and over vast distances, day after day. They're bound to wear faster - it's amazing how long they do last in Class 1 service.

I love English locos, a Deltic fan through and through. Different animal, though.

Regards, Stu.

OK, Thanks Stu, point taken.

However, I would not say that operating conditions are much harder for US locomotives. Some European lines provide tough conditions which wear stock out fairly quickly.

If you think of the harsh winters in central Europe, then look at operating styles (esp. Swiss, Austrian, German), it appears that even engines employed on local passenger trains are required to accelerate and decelerate rapidly, which adds to wear and tear on them. There are also long-distance heavy frieights - long intermodal trains head from Holland and Germany to Italy over the Alpine passes. Scandinavia is similar, in that conditions are testing, and lengthy heavy freight trains are moved long distances by fairly elderly locomotives (Oslo-Bergen line/LKAB in Swedish Lappland).

To use a British example, think of the Junipers. They wore out quickly in SWT service due to the intensive starting and stopping on local services, yet they are far more reliable on Gatwick Express duties.

All I'm pointing out is that the life of a European locomotive can be strenuous too.

Nick

The SWT Juniper's did not 'wear out' - there was very little interest at SWT to actually get them working, due to contractual disputes between Porterbrook and Alstom over the delivery and specification. It took them a long time to even try and get decent performance out of them.

Gatwick Express were more eager to solve the teething problems as they run a prestige service.

Regards,

Dan

Hi
I am right in saying, I read it somewhere, Gatwick Express have lost their franchise,or their paths?.....so passengers will use normal services and the Junipers will be broken down and mixed in with other stock.
Cheers
Jon

The SRA-produced Brighton Line Route Utilisation Study concluded that the existence of Gatwick Express was no longer economical in view of the growth of commuting into London - to put it crudely, Gatwick Express are running half-full trains in the height of the morning peak, whilst Southern's parallel services are packed out. Clearly on a network where every path counts, running a half-full train is wasting capacity that could be used to run extra services to relieve the others. That GatEx's AM peak demand is based almost wholly on the wind patterns over the Atlantic means it is impossible to calculate two years, or even twelve weeks, in advance. So the general plan is that GatEx will disappear as a franchise, and Southern's services recast. It doesn't help that GatEx are making a loss - NEG would rather be rid of them.

As to the eight '8-GAT' units - who knows? Unfortunately they really cannot go anywhere - they don't even have a roof-well for a pantograph so will have to remain on the DC, else Kineton/Long Marston it will be. A few of us here would like to see the 'Brighton Belle' revived, using them (with some vehicles out of the 4-JOPs to make 12-GATs).

Meanwhile, elsewhere on the joined-up-railway(TM), the ORR is giving paths to 4 car DMUs where 9 car electric trains could operate. Every path counts, so we don't want to run short trains do we? Oh...

What will happen to the 460s? Well, you can be sure it won't be anything that makes use of thier large luggage space. Perhaps they could continue on from Gatwick to Brighton, providing a 1-stop Victoria to Brighton service.

I don't think the 460s have anything of a future - who wants them? They might still be used on the Brighton line, thoug I don't know if they are needed - they could be used as express units, though I don't think that there is any need for it.

However, I heard that the Gatwick Express is being removed to free-up Victoria station - possibly to develop property over the station.

This is the problem with privatisation, going back to the original issue, that stock like the 460s can only be used for the Gatwick Express, and there is no way of solving the issue. However, BR would have probably made provisions not to have something with such a singular purpose.

Nick

We need the big four again plus others (North British, North East, Lancs & Yorks, etc). Private companies but hopefully with regional authorites as shareholders amongst others.

They would wholly own their own tracks, trains, stations and other associated infrastructure therefore making big long term investment much more likely.

Samd22 wrote:We need the big four again plus others (North British, North East, Lancs & Yorks, etc). Private companies but hopefully with regional authorites as shareholders amongst others.

They would wholly own their own tracks, trains, stations and other associated infrastructure therefore making big long term investment much more likely.

That's a much better vision of privatisation! If only someone had told the Tory government that! - not that they'd have listened anyway - they just wanted rid of the railways. Remember everything Thatcher said about Britain being a 'motoring nation'?

Nick