The drivers 'mate' is the secondman! Bet more than fingers were crossed as I've driven 56s when the old 'weak field' kicks in. It's no fun,especially heading up grade!! Great video.
@@kenmcdowell5325 Basically a drop in power when on full power due to overload of the traction motors. A nightmare when you don't want it to happen. JG.
a weak field is equal to changing gear in a car , the traction motors become saturated with back EMF , so resisters are put in to the traction motor field coils , so full power can be resumed , field diversion/weak field occurs at 48 mph on the class 56 . field reversion occurs at 44 mph , i never had any problems with weak fields on the class 56 unlike the class 47 , later class 47`s had electronic speed equipment (hawker siddeley ) which worked very well weak field speeds were 32, 45 , 60 mph . power offloading occurs from 85 onwards to avoid traction motor flash overs due to the higher voltage at speed @@kenmcdowell5325
agreed, but on the other hand, it performed an (almost) standing start from the steepest part of the bank after coming to all but a stop. Something i know class 66's arnt capable of doing from experience. Fair play to the 1970's technology!
Furthermore, the Class 56's TE is 61.000 lbs with maximum haulage capacity of 2287 tons but in a Class 66s, its suprisingly 92.000 lbs but is usually limited to hauling 2.000 tons or slightly more.
I gota say, i grew up with all the old power in the late 70's, early 80's mate. Dont get me wrong, i though it was great along with everyone else but i could see where UK railfreight was headed when we struggled our nuts off trying to maintain life expired equipment. Im in a rail industry engineering backround, i guess i now see this newer stuff differantly. Sure, the 66 aint the best looking thing in world by a long way, but it does what it was designed to do fairly well from an engineers view.
I needed to know why don’t dig a tunnel and do an extension for the main line Train so that they can extend the unused abandoned underground stations. Why couldn’t they use the part D78 Stock train doors on the sides and also restructure the front face of the A60 and A62 stock and that includes the class 313, class 314 and class 315 remix and make them all together and also redesign them an overhead line and also make them into Five cars per units and also having three Disabled Toilets on those Five cars per units A60 and A62 stock trains and also convert the A60 and A62 stock trains into a Scania N112, Volvo TD102KF, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Engines and also put the Loud 7-Speed Voith Gearboxes even Loud 8-Speed Leyland Hydra cyclic Gearboxes in the A60 and A62 stock, class 313, class 314, and class 315 and also modernise the A60 and A62 stock and make it into an 11 car per unit so it could have fewer doors, more tables, computers and mobile phone chargers. A Stock Trains and also having 8 Disabled Toilets on those A stock trains. why couldn’t we refurbish and modernise the waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel and make it bigger and extend it to the bank station, making it into a Triple-Track Railway Line so those 4 European countries such as Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden to convert the waterloo and city line Triple-Track Train tunnel into a High-Speed train? The Third Euro tunnel Triple-Track Train line to make it 11 times better for passengers so they could go from A to B. then put the modernised 11 car per unit A Stock and put them on a bigger modernised waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel so it could go to bank station to those 4 European countries such as Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. The modernised refurbished 11 cars per unit A stock could be a High Speed The Third Triple-Track Euro Tunnel Train So it is promising and 37 times a lot more possible to do this kind of project that is OK for London Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. oh by the way, could they also tunnel the Triple-Track Railway Line so it will stop from Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex so that the Passengers will go to Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden and also extend the Triple-Track Railway Line from Bank to Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex Stations so that more people from there could go to Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden Easily. Why couldn't they extend the Piccadilly line and also build brand-new underground train stations so it could go even further right up to Clapton, Wood Street and also make another brand new tunnel train station in Chingford could they extend the DLR? All of the classes 150, 155, 154, 117, 114, 105, and 106, will be replaced by all of the Scania N112, Volvo TD102KF, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Five carriages three disabled toilets are air conditioning trains including Highams Park for extended roots which is the Piccadilly line and the DLR trains. Could you also convert all of the 1973 stock trains into an air-conditioned maximum speed 78 km/hours (48 MPH) re-refurbished and make it into a 8 cars per unit if that will be alright, and also extend all of the Piccadilly train stations to make more space for all of the extended 8 car per unit 1973 stock air condition trains and can you also build another Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive Companies and they can order Every 17 Octagon and Hexagon shape LNER diagram unique small no.13 and unique small no.11 Boilers from those Countries such as Greece, Italy, Poland, and Sweden, can they make Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive speeds by up to 117MPH so you can try and test it on the Original Mainline so it will be much more safer for the Passengers to enjoy the 117MPH speed Limit only for HS2 and Channel Tunnel mainline services, if they needed 16 Carriages Per units can they use those class 55’s, class 44’s, class 40’s and class 43HST Diesel Locomotive’s right at the Back of those 18 Carriages Per Units so they can take over at the Back to let those Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s have a rest for those interesting Journeys Please!!, oh can you make all of those Coal Boxes’s 16 Tonnes for all of the 117MPH Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s so the Companies will Understand us PASSENGER’S!! so please make sure that the Builders can do as they are Told!! And please do something about these very important Professional ideas Please Prime Minister of England, the Prime Minister of Sweden, the Prime Minister of Germany, the Prime Minister of Italy, the Prime Minister of Poland and that Includes the Mayor of London.
If we are talking just on the Lickey the class 58s were one of the best climbers from a stand and the 45s for constant speed after a run up, theres a few things to consider like locos in different states of repair etc and use of wheel sanding, ive seen lots of class 47s slip to a stand on the Lickey only to see a class 37 pull the same weight slowly over the top, thats why pairs of class 37s were mostly used to bank and not 47s as the later had no sand, Class 56s do a good job even today
It has been considered that despite the Class 56s patchy reliability and higher maintenance costs, some say that they are able to power far heavier trains than a Class 66.
The class 66s were built for 60-75 mph freight leaving the class 60s to work the realy heavy stuff that needs low end power, the 66s lack the low end power of a class 56 due to the class 56s having a different type of traction motor developing more low end grunt, while the 66 trumps the 56 once you get over 15mph as the EMD design has lots of mid range power for pulling freight at speed. Trouble is EWS and now DBS expect the class 66s to do everything well. 66s ARE a very versatile loco
Hello There Again it is Mr Cannadine T. Boxill-Harris, I have another interesting idea for most of you Class 313, Class 314 and that also is including those interesting Class 315 Fans out there, rather than scrapping most of those Class 313's Class 314's including the Class 315's maybe you guys can convert them and including the refurbishment into those Leyland 680 Engine, Volvo B10M Engine, Cummins M11 Engine, Gardner 6LXC Engine, Gardner 6LXB, Engine, Gardner 8LXB Engine, Class 313's, Class 314's and the Class 315's and convert all of them into a 2 Carriages and Three Carriages of the Class 313's, Class 314's and that is including those Class 315's for most of us Class 314's and the Class 315's Diesel Train Fans Pretty Please Are you still going to do this interesting type of Project for all of us out there Please?
Of couse the first 30 Class 56s were Romanian built. The reason for this was due to lack of assembly capacity at Brush whom were the designers. They employed Swiss-designed SLM bogies classified by BR as CP2 and were Reista-assembled in Romania whereas the ones for 56058/62-90 and 56091-135 were from Derby and Crewe.
One more point to add is the British loading gauge is much smaller than America making it very difficult to house all the equipment needed for more powerfull locos.
EWS wanted to do away with the 60s altogether and did try double heading class 66s which proved too costly, the super 60s are just overhauled and completely rewired and perform like they did when new, the only reason no other company uses them is that DBS wont sell them because they dont want them used by a rival company, the 60s that were put up for sale by DBS were not suitable for further use as they had major engine defects or fire damage and they were too expensive for the scrap dealers
To be fair as an enthusiast and driver of most Traction British or EMD nothing will outpull the class 60 which even match class 70s for tons hauled from a standing start, the class 66 is a good tool but the design is the same as the 59s due to the tight UK loading gauge which gave us a £10 tin can with a million pound computer in it, the EMD factory could not believe that they were producing the same tech for some class 66 components as they did 20 yrs ago or more.The Lickey is a great leveler
To be picky, did it really "slip to a stand", or was it a case of struggling with the gradient after it tried to do the diesel-electric equivalent of changing up a gear? Looks like the train simply lost the battle with gravity after the field change. Q. Are these re-built 56s still geared for 80mph? Lower gearing would have certainly helped. Thanks for sharing the film!
Locomotive haulage capacity does not depend entirely on starting tractive effort figures. Since I've learnt that despite the Class 37 being higher than a Class 40, the latter easily manages a load a higher cruising speed whereas the 37 would struggle due to being lighter and lower powered. A Class 52 despite its 72.000 lbs cannot be used for heavy freight turns hence, a Class 56s would manage far heavier trains due to being more powerful and surefooted.
class 66 would move a heavier train from a standing start than a 56. I heard it was further up the speed range that a 56 would be superior as the tractive effort of the 66 drops off faster. so say at 50mph a 56 would be producing more tractive effort than a 66 at that speed.
So how hard would it be to upgrade a fleet of these engines to run Distributed Power so the driver in front controls what the banking engine does in real time? Or is it already in use?
To be honest ive never had a class 59 on the Lickey, but comparing them to the class 60s on the coal circuit the latter has the edge on power and haulage. I will say that the class 59s are more reliable and that they have a lot more guts than a class 66. From a standing start a 59 is as good as anything British built.
I am aware about that but space is limit to provide further information. EMD is no longer owned by GM having sold it to Caterpillar and laid off the 66 workforce in their thousands and closed the London Ontario plant. So how do the 56s fare with the 66s? Maximum haulage capacity is 2287 tons and that's slightly heavier,
The most heavy haulers are only two classes - class 59.001 to 005,59.101 to 104 and class 70!class 68 is a passenger loco not suitable for heavy trains!!
Class 56s 61.8001bs starting tractive effort figure is beaten by the Class 66s 92.000lbs but these figures can be misleading due to characteristics in traction motors and gear wheels sizes and the superiority of the Swiss designed bogies in the 56s means that they can pull heavy trains at lower horse power outputs than a 66. Class 40s 52.0001bs is somewhat beaten by 55.5001bs of the 37 but due to less weight and power of the latter, they struggle a bit.
ONLY ON ONE ENGINE, REAR ENGINE DEAD IN TOE AND LOSING ITS GRIP ON FULL POWER SO YOU NEED TO KNOCK THE POWER OFF AND POWER UP SLOWLY TO REGAIN TRACTION. NO SLIPPING TO A STAND HERE.
Had the good fortune to get up close and personal with 312 at Railfest - she was a bit quieter that day, which was a shame as I think it would've livened the place up a little!
Interested in some of the comments. Don't really know a lot about the traction just that I think that it is a shame having passed Toton a few times seeing all those 60's just dumped there rusting away. Interested to know what is involved in the super 60 mod's and if they are as powerful as people say why arn't Operators using more of them?
Overloading on continuous TE is now a thing of the past with AC motors. That's why the yanks regularly haul 15'000 ton unit trains over 3% grades using new EMD's and GE loco's with AC motors. 6 loco consists putting down about 140'000 lbs continuous each is nothing unusual. They can crawl up grades at walking pace mile after mile at full power! I don't think we have anything here with AC traction motors though as far as I know.
Why is it the case that 66's cannot restart on the Lickey while 56's apparently can, given that the 56's develop 61,800 lbs TE while the 66's develop 91,900?
I would find it staggering, that a better designed bogie would make up for a ca. 30,000lb tractive effort deficit, plus not having the EMD super series adhesion system. 66s are geared for a slightly lower top speed so should also gain a slight advantage. They are also I think slightly heavier. So, a 56 and 66 on the same train and the 66 struggles while the 56 performs? Strange!
I wouldn't take diesel starting tractive effort too seriously unlike steam traction as the latter is much easier to understand. That depends on the gear ratios between standard versions and lower geared Class 66/6. The standard Class 66 is usually limited to 1800 tons according to Freightliner website whereas the 56 is 2287 tons. The regular coal Class 66 tonnages with 20 wagons actually weigh 1540 tons.
The limit is more often on the route there is no 1800 ton limit on standard class 66 . 66,s regularly haul well over 2200 tons up santon bank . Also haul 3200 tons via Lincoln Nottingham makes mockery of the 1800 ton limit
Maximum tractive effort figures also certainly can be misleading. I'm sure the figures quoted for a "regeared" 66/6 show a tractive effort that is the same as a Class 60, and as I'm sure we all know, a Class 60 can easily outhaul a regeared 66/6. The 60's can also haul trains that 59s can't, as proven by the unsuccessful tests of 59/2's being unable to haul the LBT's.
kinda true but the difference between a 37 and a 40 would surely be very small? 40 is only a bit more powerful but it is very heavy with unpowered axles. the axle loading on the driving axles is only slightly higher than a 37 and its got about 30 tonnes of 'dead' weight that is worse than useless when going uphill. I've always thought that a 37 can almost equal a class 40 for this reason but I may be wrong.
What we brits tend to forget though, (or choose to ignore through ignorance) is that the yanks have been in the bussiness of hauling far heavier trains for alot more years than our little island ever will and their knowledge is second to none hence why we import freight loco's now. I liked our old and temprimental stuff to but its time to move on!
As all knowledge about building trains and locos has been thrown on the trash heap in Britain, and the yanks undercutting the British factories, they won. Are the class 66 really superior
In steam traction, its tractive effort is explained simple mechanism with wheels sizes and perhaps cylinder steam pressure and reducing the risk of hammer blow. In diesels, its more complicated and sometimes be dismissed as meaningless but think about the risk of hammer blow. The Class 50 too has a lower starting TE than the 37 but should have no problem with 12 coaches on Dainton whereas the 67 was even lower but managed 13 coaches from a standstill of Rattery,
Most British built engines trail behind the yanks for loads of reasons. So many diesels were built in the 1950s and 1960s and numerous train builders went bust or merged and seeked alternative business once their work dried up and the 1970-80s saw limited traction developements and refinement coupled with BR's reliance on ancient (and expensive) four stroke engines and increasingly troublesome D/C electrics dating 20-30 years before.
In steam, starting tractive effort figures are much easier to understand but diesels, I've been encouraged for 30 years not be mislead by such figures. The Class 37's TE is slightly more than the Class 40 but struggles a bit due to being lighter with less power. The maximum haulage capacity in a Class 66 (except for 66/6) is 1800 tons whereas a Class 56 is 2287 meaning they can pull heavier trains.
Well I understand the USA have continued to refine and refine even further but Britain doesn't have much chance to refine its traction. The Class 56 is AC and I seem to notice they work a lot harder in Hungary and Romania than their British counterparts. In Britain, more passenger trains run and they don't run freight in that sort of practise as the USA rail systems run through vast, rugged and unpopulated terrain where far fewer passenger trains operate.
True it seems it seems to be here and furthermore, EWS choosed to favour leased Class 66 motive power in its books and consign its own motive power into the scrap. The Class 60s on the other hand, are in need of re-engining as their Mirrlees engines are worn out and non-standard with spare parts issues.
MAN now own Ruston and mirrlees and so have a base in Stockport so spares shouldn’t be a problem. Plus the engines are used in the worn out caladonian McBride ferries and have had terrible and I mean Terrible reliability with the ferries. Don’t use them. Condor ferries have the ruston rk 270 20V engines and have them in their high speed catamarans. They sound awesome.
You could always do what i do mate, look over the pond for your thrash since all the good stuff has gone from here, the EMD SD40-2's and Alco's etc, awesome machines! And no silencers.
@@formidable38 so you're telling me a 245 litre v16/V20 engine is just let rip with straight through pipes? Just listen to a bike or car without a silencer it's a massive racket. I'm sorry but I don't want to get into an argument about it but I just don't believe that. There HAS to be some sort of muffler/silencer/baffle plate Can somebody else please clarify
@@bonkeydollocks1879 There are plenty of loco's with no silencers, Class 50's, Class 37's, Class 31's, Class 20's have no silencers and a 50's powerunit is 245 Litre. I work on preserved Class 50's BTW, in case you want to dispute that too. Probably been inside more locomotives over the years than you've had hot dinners.
@@formidable38 hey calm down, now your getting all fired up because you are starting to doubt yourself. Give me some proof, back up what you think is true. I've been around diesel locos too for 40 years so err, game on. Prove what you say. You are one of those bores who thinks only he knows about diesel prime movers, well I've got news for you, you don't.
What I'm trying to work with this is that a Class 52 Western with 72.600 lbs can only manage little over 900 tons due to being a lightweight hydraulic hence, it cannot fully sustain this.
I get what you are saying about diesel starting tractive effort but I can't see a reason why a 56 would have a higher starting tractive effort. do not the EWS class 66 coal train formations have a trailing load of about 2180 tonnes?
Good interesting vid... but my attention couldn't help falling on, well my real q is ..... what's with the Teddy Bear sitting on the crossing post?……Hᴜɢʜ….Lɪᴋᴇᴅ…..ツ
Bloody Amateur, us Holbeck men would have got up here with no problems - in steam days, we never whistled for a banker, just got stuck in to it.... Excellent footage though.
Sad for one very simple reason - the driver doesn't understand his loco and it's characteristics. No self respecting BR driver would have slipped to a near stand like this, why? Because the driver knew about the weak field, and how, if the speed continued to drop, he would ease of the power slightly, by a quarter. That's how you overcome these problems. But the so called drivers of today don't know or understand a thing about weak fields or anything else these days.
56,s quite capable locos but moving train from standstill the 66 is better due to traction control systems Class 56 wheel slip system very basic as it was in days before electronic control I have seen plenty of class 56 wheel slip boards just few current/voltage sensing coils and relays ie basic stuff We did have experimental 56 in our area with electronic wheel creep system had speed sensors in all TM,s . Was quite successful would think it would give 66 run for its money probably beat it
And there's the different gearing to - the 56 is geared higher to run at 80mph, which makes it harder to pull at lower speeds. Class 60's are geared for 60mph top speed so that allows them to pull more than a 66 from a standstill.
Gearing is not really the issue they are geared for 80 mph only 5 mph more than class 66 . Class 60 could run at 75 mph with out re gearing just remove 60 mph limit and maybe alter field current ramping . 56 has very basic wheel slip control ,been on the one with electronic wheel slip control and was very impressive. You can give it full power on wet greasy rail and leave loco to sort its self out . Also class 60 is still surprisingly good with wheel creep switched out (auto sand iso) with good driver will still easy out do a 66
Are the current/voltage sensing coils and relays in the 56's original wheelslip control system linked to the fuel rack somehow? What is it that reduces the engine RPM when wheelslip is detected, how is it all connected? It sounds awesome anyway!
The engine governor controller,s the fuel rack same as most loco,s Power can be reduced unloading main alternator excitation as well by reducing engine rev,s via reg air .I think the 56 will actually will actually cut traction power when slip detected as it has to react fast so its very basic system . Been few years since worked on a class 56 would have look as schematic to see exactly how it works
With all due respect, thats bullshit as a 66 has a higher starting tractive effort than a 56 at 92'000 lbs. I know its nice to think that everything British is the best in the world but im sorry, its just not like that anymore, once maybe, but not anymore. The 56 was a good tool in its day, but it cant compete with the HTCR bogie under a 66 ton for ton. Its designed to transfer the loco's weight onto the front wheelset when starting and so lessening the likelyhood of slip unlike older power.
Stop arguing lads, its a fascinating piece of footage that one day will be very rare footage.
Correct pal
The drivers 'mate' is the secondman! Bet more than fingers were crossed as I've driven 56s when the old 'weak field' kicks in. It's no fun,especially heading up grade!! Great video.
Excuse my ignorance what is the 56s weak field? I've never heard of it before
@@kenmcdowell5325 Basically a drop in power when on full power due to overload of the traction motors. A nightmare when you don't want it to happen. JG.
@@railfreightdrivergallagherGBRf
Cheers thanks a lot.
You've just educated me never heard of it before
@@kenmcdowell5325 No probs. Even on a day off I'm still talking railways haha. JG.
a weak field is equal to changing gear in a car , the traction motors become saturated with back EMF , so resisters are put in to the traction motor field coils , so full power can be resumed , field diversion/weak field occurs at 48 mph on the class 56 . field reversion occurs at 44 mph , i never had any problems with weak fields on the class 56 unlike the class 47 , later class 47`s had electronic speed equipment (hawker siddeley ) which worked very well weak field speeds were 32, 45 , 60 mph . power offloading occurs from 85 onwards to avoid traction motor flash overs due to the higher voltage at speed @@kenmcdowell5325
Love the sound on these!
Great footage. Many thanks indeed.
agreed, but on the other hand, it performed an (almost) standing start from the steepest part of the bank after coming to all but a stop. Something i know class 66's arnt capable of doing from experience. Fair play to the 1970's technology!
Thtat's pretty impressive. starting the train from a standstill without a banker.... Nice video :)
The sound was too!
They are called 'Grids' for a reason mate! :D
Who heard the Nuthatch calling an all 👍🏻
Class 56 (Grid Irons) nothing like them as workhorses and the thrash they produce. Great filming.
Furthermore, the Class 56's TE is 61.000 lbs with maximum haulage capacity of 2287 tons but in a Class 66s, its suprisingly 92.000 lbs but is usually limited to hauling 2.000 tons or slightly more.
I gota say, i grew up with all the old power in the late 70's, early 80's mate. Dont get me wrong, i though it was great along with everyone else but i could see where UK railfreight was headed when we struggled our nuts off trying to maintain life expired equipment. Im in a rail industry engineering backround, i guess i now see this newer stuff differantly. Sure, the 66 aint the best looking thing in world by a long way, but it does what it was designed to do fairly well from an engineers view.
seems from the video only the first class 56 was under power
I needed to know why don’t dig a tunnel and do an extension for the main line Train so that they can extend the unused abandoned underground stations.
Why couldn’t they use the part D78 Stock train doors on the sides and also restructure the front face of the A60 and A62 stock and that includes the class 313, class 314 and class 315 remix and make them all together and also redesign them an overhead line and also make them into Five cars per units and also having three Disabled Toilets on those Five cars per units A60 and A62 stock trains and also convert the A60 and A62 stock trains into a Scania N112, Volvo TD102KF, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Engines and also put the Loud 7-Speed Voith Gearboxes even Loud 8-Speed Leyland Hydra cyclic Gearboxes in the A60 and A62 stock, class 313, class 314, and class 315 and also modernise the A60 and A62 stock and make it into an 11 car per unit so it could have fewer doors, more tables, computers and mobile phone chargers.
A Stock Trains and also having 8 Disabled Toilets on those A stock trains. why couldn’t we refurbish and modernise the waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel and make it bigger and extend it to the bank station, making it into a Triple-Track Railway Line so those 4 European countries such as Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden to convert the waterloo and city line Triple-Track Train tunnel into a High-Speed train?
The Third Euro tunnel Triple-Track Train line to make it 11 times better for passengers so they could go from A to B. then put the modernised 11 car per unit A Stock and put them on a bigger modernised waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel so it could go to bank station to those 4 European countries such as Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. The modernised refurbished 11 cars per unit A stock could be a High Speed The Third Triple-Track Euro Tunnel Train So it is promising and 37 times a lot more possible to do this kind of project that is OK for London Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden.
oh by the way, could they also tunnel the Triple-Track Railway Line so it will stop from Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex so that the Passengers will go to Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden and also extend the Triple-Track Railway Line from Bank to Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex Stations so that more people from there could go to Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden Easily.
Why couldn't they extend the Piccadilly line and also build brand-new underground train stations so it could go even further right up to Clapton, Wood Street and also make another brand new tunnel train station in Chingford could they extend the DLR?
All of the classes 150, 155, 154, 117, 114, 105, and 106, will be replaced by all of the Scania N112, Volvo TD102KF, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Five carriages three disabled toilets are air conditioning trains including Highams Park for extended roots which is the Piccadilly line and the DLR trains.
Could you also convert all of the 1973 stock trains into an air-conditioned maximum speed 78 km/hours (48 MPH) re-refurbished and make it into a 8 cars per unit if that will be alright, and also extend all of the Piccadilly train stations to make more space for all of the extended 8 car per unit 1973 stock air condition trains and can you also build another Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive Companies and they can order Every 17 Octagon and Hexagon shape LNER diagram unique small no.13 and unique small no.11 Boilers from those Countries such as Greece, Italy, Poland, and Sweden, can they make Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive speeds by up to 117MPH so you can try and test it on the Original Mainline so it will be much more safer for the Passengers to enjoy the 117MPH speed Limit only for HS2 and Channel Tunnel mainline services, if they needed 16 Carriages Per units can they use those class 55’s, class 44’s, class 40’s and class 43HST Diesel Locomotive’s right at the Back of those 18 Carriages Per Units so they can take over at the Back to let those Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s have a rest for those interesting Journeys Please!!, oh can you make all of those Coal Boxes’s 16 Tonnes for all of the 117MPH Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s so the Companies will Understand us PASSENGER’S!! so please make sure that the Builders can do as they are Told!! And please do something about these very important Professional ideas Please Prime Minister of England, the Prime Minister of Sweden, the Prime Minister of Germany, the Prime Minister of Italy, the Prime Minister of Poland and that Includes the Mayor of London.
Pretty Massive Load Of Wagons on that Train,reckon the Front Grid was Wheel Slipping.
Sounding amazing, great catch!
If we are talking just on the Lickey the class 58s were one of the best climbers from a stand and the 45s for constant speed after a run up, theres a few things to consider like locos in different states of repair etc and use of wheel sanding, ive seen lots of class 47s slip to a stand on the Lickey only to see a class 37 pull the same weight slowly over the top, thats why pairs of class 37s were mostly used to bank and not 47s as the later had no sand, Class 56s do a good job even today
It has been considered that despite the Class 56s patchy reliability and higher maintenance costs, some say that they are able to power far heavier trains than a Class 66.
I'm sure the Merey-Go-Round coal services they were built for were heavier - 35 to 40 100tonners... 👍
The class 66s were built for 60-75 mph freight leaving the class 60s to work the realy heavy stuff that needs low end power, the 66s lack the low end power of a class 56 due to the class 56s having a different type of traction motor developing more low end grunt, while the 66 trumps the 56 once you get over 15mph as the EMD design has lots of mid range power for pulling freight at speed. Trouble is EWS and now DBS expect the class 66s to do everything well. 66s ARE a very versatile loco
yes second engine was dead. only first 56 was working
Hello There Again it is Mr Cannadine T. Boxill-Harris, I have another interesting idea for most of you Class 313, Class 314 and that also is including those interesting Class 315 Fans out there, rather than scrapping most of those Class 313's Class 314's including the Class 315's maybe you guys can convert them and including the refurbishment into those Leyland 680 Engine, Volvo B10M Engine, Cummins M11 Engine, Gardner 6LXC Engine, Gardner 6LXB, Engine, Gardner 8LXB Engine, Class 313's, Class 314's and the Class 315's and convert all of them into a 2 Carriages and Three Carriages of the Class 313's, Class 314's and that is including those Class 315's for most of us Class 314's and the Class 315's Diesel Train Fans Pretty Please Are you still going to do this interesting type of Project
for all of us out there Please?
Of couse the first 30 Class 56s were Romanian built. The reason for this was due to lack of assembly capacity at Brush whom were the designers. They employed Swiss-designed SLM bogies classified by BR as CP2 and were Reista-assembled in Romania whereas the ones for 56058/62-90 and 56091-135 were from Derby and Crewe.
One more point to add is the British loading gauge is much smaller than America making it very difficult to house all the equipment needed for more powerfull locos.
EWS wanted to do away with the 60s altogether and did try double heading class 66s which proved too costly, the super 60s are just overhauled and completely rewired and perform like they did when new, the only reason no other company uses them is that DBS wont sell them because they dont want them used by a rival company, the 60s that were put up for sale by DBS were not suitable for further use as they had major engine defects or fire damage and they were too expensive for the scrap dealers
To be fair as an enthusiast and driver of most Traction British or EMD nothing will outpull the class 60 which even match class 70s for tons hauled from a standing start, the class 66 is a good tool but the design is the same as the 59s due to the tight UK loading gauge which gave us a £10 tin can with a million pound computer in it, the EMD factory could not believe that they were producing the same tech for some class 66 components as they did 20 yrs ago or more.The Lickey is a great leveler
gotta love a scream from a grid
To be picky, did it really "slip to a stand", or was it a case of struggling with the gradient after it tried to do the diesel-electric equivalent of changing up a gear? Looks like the train simply lost the battle with gravity after the field change.
Q. Are these re-built 56s still geared for 80mph? Lower gearing would have certainly helped.
Thanks for sharing the film!
Locomotive haulage capacity does not depend entirely on starting tractive effort figures. Since I've learnt that despite the Class 37 being higher than a Class 40, the latter easily manages a load a higher cruising speed whereas the 37 would struggle due to being lighter and lower powered. A Class 52 despite its 72.000 lbs cannot be used for heavy freight turns hence, a Class 56s would manage far heavier trains due to being more powerful and surefooted.
Damn turbo charger going all out!
Would have loved to see a couple of GWR 72xx tackle this .
class 66 would move a heavier train from a standing start than a 56. I heard it was further up the speed range that a 56 would be superior as the tractive effort of the 66 drops off faster. so say at 50mph a 56 would be producing more tractive effort than a 66 at that speed.
awesome shot there great catch
So how hard would it be to upgrade a fleet of these engines to run Distributed Power so the driver in front controls what the banking engine does in real time?
Or is it already in use?
Struggled or had a red..?? 🤔
To be honest ive never had a class 59 on the Lickey, but comparing them to the class 60s on the coal circuit the latter has the edge on power and haulage. I will say that the class 59s are more reliable and that they have a lot more guts than a class 66. From a standing start a 59 is as good as anything British built.
No electric wires I know was a long time ago
I am aware about that but space is limit to provide further information. EMD is no longer owned by GM having sold it to Caterpillar and laid off the 66 workforce in their thousands and closed the London Ontario plant. So how do the 56s fare with the 66s? Maximum haulage capacity is 2287 tons and that's slightly heavier,
What's the most powerful British mainline diesel locomotive today?
DRS Class 68s, 3800hp at 1740 rpm.
Cheers
The most heavy haulers are only two classes - class 59.001 to 005,59.101 to 104 and class 70!class 68 is a passenger loco not suitable for heavy trains!!
Aa forgot class 60 also excelent for heavy trains!!
those turbo chargers must have been glowing red hot
Class 56s 61.8001bs starting tractive effort figure is beaten by the Class 66s 92.000lbs but these figures can be misleading due to characteristics in traction motors and gear wheels sizes and the superiority of the Swiss designed bogies in the 56s means that they can pull heavy trains at lower horse power outputs than a 66. Class 40s 52.0001bs is somewhat beaten by 55.5001bs of the 37 but due to less weight and power of the latter, they struggle a bit.
That's why the 37s have been with us for so long. Tractive Effort Winners:-))
I know what I can hear, an old fashioned mechanical zoom lol
ONLY ON ONE ENGINE, REAR ENGINE DEAD IN TOE AND LOSING ITS GRIP ON FULL POWER SO YOU NEED TO KNOCK THE POWER OFF AND POWER UP SLOWLY TO REGAIN TRACTION. NO SLIPPING TO A STAND HERE.
Wheel slip did occur, not captured too well though. My bad
Great catch, good stuff.
Had the good fortune to get up close and personal with 312 at Railfest - she was a bit quieter that day, which was a shame as I think it would've livened the place up a little!
Hellfire sound !!
Romania's finest - with a little help from BREL.
I wonder if Romania's equivalent loco suffered from the same 'Weak Field' issue?
Interested in some of the comments. Don't really know a lot about the traction just that I think that it is a shame having passed Toton a few times seeing all those 60's just dumped there rusting away. Interested to know what is involved in the super 60 mod's and if they are as powerful as people say why arn't Operators using more of them?
Unfortunately the 60 suffers from being too slow. That massive traction effort easily out hauling a 66 but at the expense of lower gearing.
Overloading on continuous TE is now a thing of the past with AC motors. That's why the yanks regularly haul 15'000 ton unit trains over 3% grades using new EMD's and GE loco's with AC motors. 6 loco consists putting down about 140'000 lbs continuous each is nothing unusual. They can crawl up grades at walking pace mile after mile at full power! I don't think we have anything here with AC traction motors though as far as I know.
Wasn't the banker on duty?
The banker is DBS operated so no favours here
Lots of experts on here lol
Just how steep is this grade?
1 in 37
@@lickeyincline I thank you very much, cheers.
Train crew should have eaten more pies :)
Driver properly thought a banker is for noobs and that his train will be able to handle the steepest incline in Britain
what happened to the use of sand??
Why is it the case that 66's cannot restart on the Lickey while 56's apparently can, given that the 56's develop 61,800 lbs TE while the 66's develop 91,900?
where were the bankers?
I would find it staggering, that a better designed bogie would make up for a ca. 30,000lb tractive effort deficit, plus not having the EMD super series adhesion system. 66s are geared for a slightly lower top speed so should also gain a slight advantage. They are also I think slightly heavier. So, a 56 and 66 on the same train and the 66 struggles while the 56 performs? Strange!
Did the 2nd crewman stick his fingers up at you?
He made a gesture to suggest they may not get to the top 🤣
I wouldn't take diesel starting tractive effort too seriously unlike steam traction as the latter is much easier to understand. That depends on the gear ratios between standard versions and lower geared Class 66/6. The standard Class 66 is usually limited to 1800 tons according to Freightliner website whereas the 56 is 2287 tons. The regular coal Class 66 tonnages with 20 wagons actually weigh 1540 tons.
The limit is more often on the route there is no 1800 ton limit on standard class 66 . 66,s regularly haul well over 2200 tons up santon bank . Also haul 3200 tons via Lincoln Nottingham makes mockery of the 1800 ton limit
@nounoufriend it was once suggested by Freightliner website but they were wrong. The driver's points of differ.
Maximum tractive effort figures also certainly can be misleading. I'm sure the figures quoted for a "regeared" 66/6 show a tractive effort that is the same as a Class 60, and as I'm sure we all know, a Class 60 can easily outhaul a regeared 66/6. The 60's can also haul trains that 59s can't, as proven by the unsuccessful tests of 59/2's being unable to haul the LBT's.
kinda true but the difference between a 37 and a 40 would surely be very small? 40 is only a bit more powerful but it is very heavy with unpowered axles. the axle loading on the driving axles is only slightly higher than a 37 and its got about 30 tonnes of 'dead' weight that is worse than useless when going uphill. I've always thought that a 37 can almost equal a class 40 for this reason but I may be wrong.
What we brits tend to forget though, (or choose to ignore through ignorance) is that the yanks have been in the bussiness of hauling far heavier trains for alot more years than our little island ever will and their knowledge is second to none hence why we import freight loco's now. I liked our old and temprimental stuff to but its time to move on!
As all knowledge about building trains and locos has been thrown on the trash heap in Britain, and the yanks undercutting the British factories, they won.
Are the class 66 really superior
why do DBS only get bankers?..but really ther was 2 56s and ther powerful locos so why did they struggle to haul emptys up the incline?
well how can we be behind if the yanks are in charge in of our railways anyway?
Why didnt they start up the other 56 rather than just having 1 doing all the work?
In steam traction, its tractive effort is explained simple mechanism with wheels sizes and perhaps cylinder steam pressure and reducing the risk of hammer blow. In diesels, its more complicated and sometimes be dismissed as meaningless but think about the risk of hammer blow. The Class 50 too has a lower starting TE than the 37 but should have no problem with 12 coaches on Dainton whereas the 67 was even lower but managed 13 coaches from a standstill of Rattery,
Most British built engines trail behind the yanks for loads of reasons. So many diesels were built in the 1950s and 1960s and numerous train builders went bust or merged and seeked alternative business once their work dried up and the 1970-80s saw limited traction developements and refinement coupled with BR's reliance on ancient (and expensive) four stroke engines and increasingly troublesome D/C electrics dating 20-30 years before.
6500hp there, should have cruised up the lickey
The rear engine had broken
In steam, starting tractive effort figures are much easier to understand but diesels, I've been encouraged for 30 years not be mislead by such figures. The Class 37's TE is slightly more than the Class 40 but struggles a bit due to being lighter with less power. The maximum haulage capacity in a Class 66 (except for 66/6) is 1800 tons whereas a Class 56 is 2287 meaning they can pull heavier trains.
according to Wikipedia they are still capable of 80mph
And the rest! Had 91mph out of a grid(downhill albeit).
by weak field, is that the same as the field divert on traction motors?
no bankers for this working Philip as it isnt an DBS working
thinks... empties? Good job it weren't Fullies.
It says empties at the start of the video and in the description
what about the 59?
i thought the 56 bogies wer romainian as the first 30 wer built in romainia?? so the bogies wer swiss built?
I agree, plus the fact we don't really have the call for such things here due to lack of long gradients (in comparison!) and far lighter trains.
cheat you used the fence as a tripod so you could take a still lol
Thanks for the info.
Well I understand the USA have continued to refine and refine even further but Britain doesn't have much chance to refine its traction. The Class 56 is AC and I seem to notice they work a lot harder in Hungary and Romania than their British counterparts. In Britain, more passenger trains run and they don't run freight in that sort of practise as the USA rail systems run through vast, rugged and unpopulated terrain where far fewer passenger trains operate.
Perhaps if the second loco had been on line rather than just adding dead weight, it might have helped ...
Err it was broken
True it seems it seems to be here and furthermore, EWS choosed to favour leased Class 66 motive power in its books and consign its own motive power into the scrap. The Class 60s on the other hand, are in need of re-engining as their Mirrlees engines are worn out and non-standard with spare parts issues.
Rubbish you can easily get them as they are British built engines.
MAN now own Ruston and mirrlees and so have a base in Stockport so spares shouldn’t be a problem. Plus the engines are used in the worn out caladonian McBride ferries and have had terrible and I mean Terrible reliability with the ferries. Don’t use them. Condor ferries have the ruston rk 270 20V engines and have them in their high speed catamarans. They sound awesome.
@cidertom They certainly did suffer from undue neglect under EWS. Some of them blew up. However, my points of view is ten years ago.
56313&56312 didn't have a very good day
You could always do what i do mate, look over the pond for your thrash since all the good stuff has gone from here, the EMD SD40-2's and Alco's etc, awesome machines! And no silencers.
They have silencers
@@bonkeydollocks1879 All the old SD40-2's, SD45-2's and Alco's dont have silencers. The newer generation stuff like the SD70's and GE'S do though.
@@formidable38 so you're telling me a 245 litre v16/V20 engine is just let rip with straight through pipes? Just listen to a bike or car without a silencer it's a massive racket. I'm sorry but I don't want to get into an argument about it but I just don't believe that. There HAS to be some sort of muffler/silencer/baffle plate
Can somebody else please clarify
@@bonkeydollocks1879 There are plenty of loco's with no silencers, Class 50's, Class 37's, Class 31's, Class 20's have no silencers and a 50's powerunit is 245 Litre. I work on preserved Class 50's BTW, in case you want to dispute that too. Probably been inside more locomotives over the years than you've had hot dinners.
@@formidable38 hey calm down, now your getting all fired up because you are starting to doubt yourself.
Give me some proof, back up what you think is true.
I've been around diesel locos too for 40 years so err, game on.
Prove what you say.
You are one of those bores who thinks only he knows about diesel prime movers, well I've got news for you, you don't.
call in the WDG6G. he can take this incline at 80km/h with ease.
great video
What I'm trying to work with this is that a Class 52 Western with 72.600 lbs can only manage little over 900 tons due to being a lightweight hydraulic hence, it cannot fully sustain this.
y is he taking a picture of you from his cab
+sandydogy He is crossing his fingers.
I get what you are saying about diesel starting tractive effort but I can't see a reason why a 56 would have a higher starting tractive effort. do not the EWS class 66 coal train formations have a trailing load of about 2180 tonnes?
Do they run these trains in 2013?
They are still running in 2019. They are operated by Colas Rail.
Its the Lickey Incline mascot
Good interesting vid... but my attention couldn't help falling on, well my real q is ..... what's with the Teddy Bear sitting on the crossing post?……Hᴜɢʜ….Lɪᴋᴇᴅ…..ツ
Give me a Deltic any day.
Love the video and liked, seen as its my name sake ;)
Shoulda went in multi.
yea but not a 60 or 59
awesome
Put a 9F on the back!
@3:53 was he flashing gang signs at you!?! CLASS 56 OR DEATH?
Bloody Amateur, us Holbeck men would have got up here with no problems - in steam days, we never whistled for a banker, just got stuck in to it.... Excellent footage though.
Sad for one very simple reason - the driver doesn't understand his loco and it's characteristics. No self respecting BR driver would have slipped to a near stand like this, why? Because the driver knew about the weak field, and how, if the speed continued to drop, he would ease of the power slightly, by a quarter. That's how you overcome these problems. But the so called drivers of today don't know or understand a thing about weak fields or anything else these days.
56,s quite capable locos but moving train from standstill the 66 is better due to traction control systems
Class 56 wheel slip system very basic as it was in days before electronic control
I have seen plenty of class 56 wheel slip boards just few current/voltage sensing coils and relays ie basic stuff
We did have experimental 56 in our area with electronic wheel creep system had speed sensors in all TM,s . Was quite successful would think it would give 66 run for its money probably beat it
And there's the different gearing to - the 56 is geared higher to run at 80mph, which makes it harder to pull at lower speeds. Class 60's are geared for 60mph top speed so that allows them to pull more than a 66 from a standstill.
Gearing is not really the issue they are geared for 80 mph only 5 mph more than class 66 . Class 60 could run at 75 mph with out re gearing just remove 60 mph limit and maybe alter field current ramping .
56 has very basic wheel slip control ,been on the one with electronic wheel slip control and was very impressive. You can give it full power on wet greasy rail and leave loco to sort its self out . Also class 60 is still surprisingly good with wheel creep switched out (auto sand iso) with good driver will still easy out do a 66
Are the current/voltage sensing coils and relays in the 56's original wheelslip control system linked to the fuel rack somehow? What is it that reduces the engine RPM when wheelslip is detected, how is it all connected? It sounds awesome anyway!
The engine governor controller,s the fuel rack same as most loco,s
Power can be reduced unloading main alternator excitation as well by reducing engine rev,s via reg air .I think the 56 will actually will actually cut traction power when slip detected as it has to react fast so its very basic system . Been few years since worked on a class 56 would have look as schematic to see exactly how it works
With all due respect, thats bullshit as a 66 has a higher starting tractive effort than a 56 at 92'000 lbs.
I know its nice to think that everything British is the best in the world but im sorry, its just not like that anymore, once maybe, but not anymore. The 56 was a good tool in its day, but it cant compete with the HTCR bogie under a 66 ton for ton. Its designed to transfer the loco's weight onto the front wheelset when starting and so lessening the likelyhood of slip unlike older power.