Joy to the world, a 66 is dead :)

divydave31 · Post by **divydave31** » Tue Aug 19, 2003 10:32 pm

If it is vandalism then this really should be delt with in a serious way, if the vandels can get to a locomotive that easy, well i will leave it to your imaginations, but, i tell you something i think the depots really need to reassess there security.

As for the class 66 i rather think there quaint locomotives.

n863dwt · Post by **n863dwt** » Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:12 am

i have said it before i hate the class 66 why could they not have modeled it on the excelent class 67..

mind you they say that there are gonna be changes cos they need to adapt them for new emission levels so perhaps we will yet see a semi non ugly unit....possible,....?

isambardkingdombrunel · Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:21 pm

I like the 66`s ,at least they are proper loco`s.We get them alot down here and they make a nice change from the glorified buses on rails,or 2 car 158`s .

ForburyLion · Post by **ForburyLion** » Wed Aug 20, 2003 3:42 pm

I read that new GM 66 model will feature a new cab and other improvements.... Whether any operators in the UK will order it remains to be seen and if they do who knows if it will be classed as a class 66.

If the changes are only cosmetic then it probably will - like the newer Chiltern class 168's which feature a different cab end to the older units.

doownyl · Post by **doownyl** » Wed Aug 20, 2003 6:48 pm

ForburyLion wrote:I read that new GM 66 model will feature a new cab and other improvements.... Whether any operators in the UK will order it remains to be seen and if they do who knows if it will be classed as a class 66.

If the changes are only cosmetic then it probably will - like the newer Chiltern class 168's which feature a different cab end to the older units.

On the other hand, class 90s, under the 'bonnet' ARE to all intents and purposes class 87s. Throughout development they were to be '87/2s' but it was decided that because they were cosmetically so different they would be given a different TOPS class, namely 90.

TOMMO79 · Post by **TOMMO79** » Wed Aug 20, 2003 6:58 pm

We might not even have the sheds if it weren't for the 59's and they were built to specifications set by BR and Foster Yeoman with a lot of their input, to my eyes they are esentially a British loco with an American power unit. The first batch of 56's were built in Romania, the Warships were based on a German loco and the westerns had German designed power units so not all loco's in the past have been truly British. Even if we didn't have the sheds the rules on noise and emmisions are still the same so we would have something equally boring and maybe not so reliable because the 59's like the Warships were based on a proven design. Modern cars don't have the character of some of the older stuff but are much faster, safer and reliable so thats why most of us would rather spend our money something newer (Probably not British) and send our old rustbuckets to the big scrapyard in the sky. As for vandalising 66's its way out of order and I hope whoever did it is found out and charged. I'm not a big fan of the GM's but wouldn't go as far as wrecking them in the hope that the fleet will be abandoned

ThinLizzy · Post by **ThinLizzy** » Wed Aug 20, 2003 7:37 pm

I was only joking with the joy to the world, of course its not funny when some jackass vandalises you're loco in that way.
Heard a report it was back in traffic today though. I like older locos, like 37's, 47's, and 73's, but when i want to get something from A-B, i'll take a 66 anyday.
As for Buffy, what i say in my spare time is my buisness, i can now tell you now, SWT employees, football holigans, racists and a few rampton cases, but because they dont let it affect their work, SWT cant do anything.

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 6:49 pm

ThinLizzy wrote:As for Buffy, what i say in my spare time is my buisness, i can now tell you now, SWT employees, football holigans, racists and a few rampton cases, but because they dont let it affect their work, SWT cant do anything.

Yawn, are you still talking ?

ThinLizzy · Post by **ThinLizzy** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 6:51 pm

buffy500 wrote:
ThinLizzy wrote:As for Buffy, what i say in my spare time is my buisness, i can now tell you now, SWT employees, football holigans, racists and a few rampton cases, but because they dont let it affect their work, SWT cant do anything.
Yawn, are you still talking ?

Moderator to the general discussion forum please

LucaZone · Post by **LucaZone** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 7:47 pm

southcoasttrains · Post by **southcoasttrains** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 8:15 pm

66's have go to be the best locos about, you have got to love thier distinctive "ying ying ying ying" sound. The 67's look very ugly and were pointless making, but thier cab design is better than the 66.

doownyl · Post by **doownyl** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:33 pm

I would not describe the 67s as worthless! They have given the Aberdeen and Inverness sleepers 100% reliability and a massive increase in punctuality - the EWS 47s used to give about a 50/50 chance of reaching their destination. Similarly almost alone they made the Royal Mail the most punctual service in the country. Now that that ain't gonna happen anymore, they look set to power 125mph Anglo-Scottish freights - exploiting one of rail's greatest advantages over road to the full - speed.

Also, if the 'S' in 'SRA' means anything, they could - should - be seen next summer with Mk3 ex-WC sets taking holidaymakers to Cornwall from the North and Scotland.

Not to mention charters, diversion power, thunderbirds...

I think it is definately worthwhile having a powerful, reliable, ETS fitted passenger locomotive in the country!

micksasse · Post by **micksasse** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:41 pm

doownyl wrote:I would not describe the 67s as worthless! They have given the Aberdeen and Inverness sleepers 100% reliability and a massive increase in punctuality - the EWS 47s used to give about a 50/50 chance of reaching their destination. Similarly almost alone they made the Royal Mail the most punctual service in the country. Now that that ain't gonna happen anymore, they look set to power 125mph Anglo-Scottish freights - exploiting one of rail's greatest advantages over road to the full - speed.

Also, if the 'S' in 'SRA' means anything, they could - should - be seen next summer with Mk3 ex-WC sets taking holidaymakers to Cornwall from the North and Scotland.

Not to mention charters, diversion power, thunderbirds...

I think it is definately worthwhile having a powerful, reliable, ETS fitted passenger locomotive in the country!

Captain Deltic says "I'll drink to that!"

mattvince · Post by **mattvince** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 10:06 pm

Doownyl:
Absolutely spot-on. We can't have our railways clogged up with defective Duffs, trashed Tractors, and grisly Grids, particularly when time is of the essence. Yangs may be ugly - blame it on Alstom - but they do the job, and do it well. They can, and do, haul virtually anything within limits, and can go at speeds up to 125mph, almost anywhere. What more flexible locomotive exists? In today's Britain of 100mph+ lines, a locomotive capable of shifting high value, low weight goods reliably and quickly is valuable tool to the company using it. The 67s time is coming, and I'm sure it will be the railway's 'secret weapon' in the battle against road freight.

southcoasttrains · Post by **southcoasttrains** » Thu Aug 21, 2003 10:48 pm

91's are reliable, never known them to breakdown, very rarely if i'm correct.