Which Loco is your favourite?

Run_to_da_hills

trad wrote: »

Interesting thread. As an apprentice in Inchicore I worked on all the locos on the poll except for the 201 class.

The A and C classes were horrible to work on with the GM engine shoehorned into the engine bay. The GM's were much better with loads of access. I was there when the 071's were delivered and lay unused for over a year until the drivers agreed to drive them. They were terrible to start even them, you could spend 2 or 3 days just trying to get one engine started and they absolutly ate batteries and starters before even covering a mile.

My Dad was a driver and he was very fond of the old diesel railcars before they became push pulls. i have many fond memories of time on the "footplate".

I see no one has mentioned they Maybachs (D and E class). Probably not the best loco in the world but at least we had a go at building them.

You must remember that the A & C Class were originally designed for Crossley motors and GM had no part in the original Metrovic design or lay out of the engine bay.

What you were working was a bastardized loco from two separate manufacturers, one sorting out another's mess. CIE were blessed at the time that GM would even touch them.

Run_to_da_hills

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

What you were working was a bastardized loco from two separate manufacturers, one sorting out another's mess. CIE were blessed at the time that GM would even touch them.

They were extremely reluctant to. CIÉ were pressuring them for several years. CIÉ even experimented with Maybach engines in the C class, probably as a plan B in case GM wouldn't budge.

CIE

trad wrote: »

Interesting thread. As an apprentice in Inchicore I worked on all the locos on the poll except for the 201 class

What about the 101-class? I heard some non-conclusive things about propositions to re-engine those with GM engines, even though their Sulzer engines were reliable enough reportedly. Those were always interesting to me, being Ireland's only A1A-A1A diesels; they seemed like they were too short-lived though, the first examples having been withdrawn after a mere thirteen years of service.

trad wrote: »

The A and C classes were horrible to work on with the GM engine shoehorned into the engine bay. The GMs were much better with loads of access

Looks like the preference for "hooded" engines goes all over the world versus an all-over car body. Still and all, the life of those engines were increased to an average of three decades due to the rebuild.

trad wrote: »

I was there when the 071s were delivered and lay unused for over a year until the drivers agreed to drive them. They were terrible to start even them, you could spend 2 or 3 days just trying to get one engine started and they absolutely ate batteries and starters before even covering a mile

But after that, they seemed to be ubiquitous. Did they improve, or was tolerance for maintenance increased? Turbocharged 645s seem to last forever, so I'm guessing the former.

trad wrote: »

My Dad was a driver and he was very fond of the old diesel railcars before they became push pulls. i have many fond memories of time on the "footplate"

Hope I didn't misunderstand you, but it almost sounds like you're making the original 2600s out to be good-running stock prior to their being converted to 6100-6300 push-pulls. I suppose after the evisceration of the railway network in the 60s, they had to find something for the re-engined C-class to operate, but it sounds like a job creation scheme...

trad wrote: »

I see no one has mentioned they Maybachs (D and E class). Probably not the best loco in the world but at least we had a go at building them.

Given where they worked, they weren't the most visible classes either. I got to see a lot of action from the E-class in particular in the early 70s as a youngster, because I had a good view of the upper part of Spencer Dock from the Royal Canal near my grandmother's house on Seville Place.

CIE

CIE wrote: »

What about the 101-class? I heard some non-conclusive things about propositions to re-engine those with GM engines, even though their Sulzer engines were reliable enough reportedly. Those were always interesting to me, being Ireland's only A1A-A1A diesels; they seemed like they were too short-lived though, the first examples having been withdrawn after a mere thirteen years of service.

I heard this too. If it's true I can only assume it was due to the lack of economies of scale with such a small fleet, considering that all of the other A and B class locomotives used GM engines at that stage. They were apparently popular with drivers in the south, often being used on Limerick to Tralee and Mallow to Waterford services.

Rud

Don't know if anyone is bothered but here's a pic i took of my exact favourite loco in the country,082,of the 071 class,taken in my hometown station of Athy on a DFDS liner from Waterford,earlier this year.When she is in full flight she is one loud,rumbling fcuker!

Rud

Rud wrote: »

Don't know if anyone is bothered but here's a pic i took of my exact favourite loco in the country,082,of the 071 class,taken in my hometown station of Athy on a DFDS liner from Waterford,earlier this year.When she is in full flight she is one loud,rumbling fcuker!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGi2DAzb1IE

trad

CIE, I remember travelling on the old railcars with my father. They had to be driven as opposed to turning a knotching handle. They had a gear selector, you had to change gears coupled to the engine revs so it took a bit of effort to drive them well, which is why he probably liked them.

As to the 101's there's a sneaking suspicion that the cab insulation led to the early demise of many a driver. My father died of lung diesase as did many of his work colleagues.

As quoted from http://www.irishtractiongroup.com/ITG_locos/loco_103.htm

However, during 2003, a “dodgy looking” grey substance was found inside one of the cab doors. Further analysis revealed that this substance was asbestos. Asbestos was also found in the bulkheads between the cabs and engine room. A suitably qualified contractor was recommended by Iarnród Éireann, and the offending substance was professionally removed in March 2004.

Losty Dublin

My Dad drove the A1A class locos years ago and drivers were indifferent to them overall. They were a rushed order built after an earlier order had been cancelled courtesy of the Milne Report and were only built after Sulzer had asked for the balance payment of their associated parts that had laid untouched for several years. Coupled with early issues with the A class, CIE hastily had had 12 locos built instead of the initial 6 twin engined turbo charged units they had ordered and put them to work as a stopgap measure to increase availability. While reliable enough engine wise and comfortable to drive, they were tricky to work and were prone to fecky electrical failures that annoyed drivers more than the out and out engine deaths or brake pressure issues that the A and C class were infamous for.

When the 141 class eliminated steam and the branch lines were culled in the early 60's, the 101's number was up and they ended up their days on light duties and transfers.

On the 2600's, the reason why they had a manual gear was because they used two bus engines; a reliable automatic gear box hadn't yet been developed at that stage. More modern DMU's have a similar set up as well with an automatic gear set up that makes life easier for drivers and aids traction and fuel economy.

I have a drivers manual for both a 101 and a 2600 around, I must dig same up for the crack.

corktina

Karsini wrote: »

As quoted from http://www.irishtractiongroup.com/ITG_locos/loco_103.htm

whilst there is some danger from inhaling any asbestos particles (and many other things) it is actually blue asbestos used to lag pipes and in particular in a Railway context,Boilers that posed the biggest threat.

Judgement Day

corktina wrote: »

whilst there is some danger from inhaling any asbestos particles (and many other things) it is actually blue asbestos used to lag pipes and in particular in a Railway context,Boilers that posed the biggest threat.

Back in the 1980's CIE had numerous carriages contaminated with blue asbestos. Many were cleaned up by contractors working in the old engine shed at Ballybrophy but many others lay open to the elements and vandals at Dundalk. Clouds of the blue stuff used to be blowing around in them and I was never tempted to enter looking for souvenirs.

CIE

trad wrote: »

CIE, I remember travelling on the old railcars with my father. They had to be driven as opposed to turning a notching handle. They had a gear selector, you had to change gears coupled to the engine revs so it took a bit of effort to drive them well, which is why he probably liked them.

As to the 101s there's a sneaking suspicion that the cab insulation led to the early demise of many a driver. My father died of lung disease as did many of his work colleagues.

Interesting. Very sorry about your late father; such a matter ought to be investigated deeper, even at this stage.

losty dublin wrote: »

On the 2600s, the reason why they had a manual gear was because they used two bus engines; a reliable automatic gear box hadn't yet been developed at that stage. More modern DMUs have a similar set up as well with an automatic gear set up that makes life easier for drivers and aids traction and fuel economy

That's interesting too. The Budd RDC over in America was using hydraulic torque converters as early as 1949. Sounds like a culture matter when it came to using manual gearboxes.

Chriscl1

I hate 71 class loco's. The brakes are crap, it's too loud in the cab, they are cold in the winter, wipers are brutal, can be very wobbly at high speed the list goes on. They are nice and powerful though I suppose.

CIE

Chriscl1 wrote: »

I hate 71 class loco's. The brakes are crap, it's too loud in the cab, they are cold in the winter, wipers are brutal, can be very wobbly at high speed the list goes on. They are nice and powerful though I suppose.

Well that settles it. Irish Rail should have used Class 43 engines with their Mark 3s from the very start! :rolleyes:

topnotch

Chriscl1 wrote: »

I hate 71 class loco's. The brakes are crap, it's too loud in the cab, they are cold in the winter, wipers are brutal, can be very wobbly at high speed the list goes on. They are nice and powerful though I suppose.

So what if there a bit noisy in the cab or the wipers aren't the best. They were the best locos available at the time by a mile and their the best locos irish rail have ever got their hands on. They have given year after year of reliable service and still perform well considering the standard of maintenance and their age. The fact that a dozen or so 201's built in 1995 are in storage while the 18 071's built nearly 20 years before are all out or under repair says it all.

Chriscl1

topnotch wrote: »

So what if there a bit noisy in the cab or the wipers aren't the best. They were the best locos available at the time by a mile and their the best locos irish rail have ever got their hands on. They have given year after year of reliable service and still perform well considering the standard of maintenance and their age. The fact that a dozen or so 201's built in 1995 are in storage while the 18 071's built nearly 20 years before are all out or under repair says it all.

I never said they weren't reliable did I. I'm talking from how I feel about them. Do you know why all them 201's are in the shed? Have you driven a 71?

Judgement Day

I have, and I never worked for CIE! Super locos but for noise give me an Ahhh Class any day.

Chriscl1

Chriscl1 wrote: »

I never said they weren't reliable did I. I'm talking from how I feel about them. Do you know why all them 201's are in the shed? Have you driven a 71?

The 201s that were stopped have been stopped because they can't operate push-pull passenger trains.

I've been in the cab of 078 but not while it was moving. Never drove any of the CIÉ locos, did drive the Lartigue Monorail loco though.

Cookie_Monster

they're not that reliable though and IRN frequently report them out of action and failed. Next to impossible to start in the cold also. At least one has been "under overhaul" for over 6 months now.

Don't see them as the best ever either, there are 141s still plugging away and these are a more flexible loco, lighter, and capable of operating in pairs to match the power of an 071 and longer lived. Maybe the 071s will outlive them...

topnotch

There not plugging much these days now to be fair, the 141's that did the heaviest work were completely re-engined.
There not really heavier either as they have the exact same axle load of 16.75 tonnes per axle. 100 tonnes over 6 axles as opposed 67 tonnes over four. In most countries it is considered advantageous to have 1 loco do the work of two switchers .
The 071's were produced in the mid 70's when GM were at the height of their powers churning out sd40-2 to beat the band their most successful locos ever. After they moved production to Canada :rolleyes: it was only a matter of time before GE took the lead

trad

Biggest fright I ever got was working in the running shed in Inchicore. We were installing fuel and water pipelines on top of the stone walls of the shed. The roof had been raised previously and we were walking on the walls above the lights in semi darkness (No health and safety then). I was crossing over one of the entrances as a GM loco was coming into the shed. Then the exhaust fan passed under me. It frightened 47 shades of sh1t out of me.

Run_to_da_hills

trad wrote: »

Biggest fright I ever got was working in the running shed in Inchicore. We were installing fuel and water pipelines on top of the stone walls of the shed. The roof had been raised previously and we were walking on the walls above the lights in semi darkness (No health and safety then). I was crossing over one of the entrances as a GM loco was coming into the shed. Then the exhaust fan passed under me. It frightened 47 shades of sh1t out of me.

As kids we use to walk home from school along the metals, one of the lads found a bucket of white paint and had the bright idea of pouring it over the roof of a passing train. This was pre Dart before all the bridges were raised. As a C series approached the idiot poured the paint on the loco roof, the fan threw the paint back up all over his face and destroyed his uniform.

newmug

Rud wrote: »

Don't know if anyone is bothered but here's a pic i took of my exact favourite loco in the country,082,of the 071 class,taken in my hometown station of Athy on a DFDS liner from Waterford,earlier this year.When she is in full flight she is one loud,rumbling fcuker!

I saw 082 in Connolly today:)

newmug

Just an observation: I dont travel by rail much, but today I decided to go to Dubli. I come from a railway barren part of Meath, so driving was my only option. When I got to Dunboyne, I said I'd check out the M3 parkway.

I couldnt believe the convenience of it all! Free parking, regular trains, and just E6 RETURN to Connolly, RETURN!!! It usually costs E5 per hour for parking in the Ilac! No traffic congestion worries, safe parking, table in front of me as the train sped along, I just hopped off again back at the M3 parkway with me shopping and loaded up the jeep, no lugging it around for ages and no battle with rush hour traffic! Straight onto me road home then!!!! Fair play to CIE for opening that station, badly needed and much appreciated (despite our previous minister for transports efforts at trying to stop rail coming to Meath!!!)

Judgement Day

Newmug - I don't think that CIE/IE should get much credit for reopening to Parkway as it was a political decision - they are merely the operators.

newmug

Well whoever did it, fair play to them. IMO it should be continued through Kilmessan, Trim, and on to Athboy. But as I alluded to there, our political corruption representative did everything in his power to STOP it being opened! People dont know the half of it!

CIE

newmug wrote: »

Just an observation: I dont travel by rail much, but today I decided to go to Dubli. I come from a railway barren part of Meath, so driving was my only option. When I got to Dunboyne, I said I'd check out the M3 parkway.

I couldnt believe the convenience of it all! Free parking, regular trains, and just E6 RETURN to Connolly, RETURN!!! It usually costs E5 per hour for parking in the Ilac! No traffic congestion worries, safe parking, table in front of me as the train sped along, I just hopped off again back at the M3 parkway with me shopping and loaded up the jeep, no lugging it around for ages and no battle with rush hour traffic! Straight onto me road home then!!!! Fair play to CIE for opening that station, badly needed and much appreciated (despite our previous minister for transports efforts at trying to stop rail coming to Meath!!!)

Yes...now imagine that going all the way to Navan as it did in the past.

DWCommuter

newmug wrote: »

Just an observation: I dont travel by rail much, but today I decided to go to Dubli. I come from a railway barren part of Meath, so driving was my only option. When I got to Dunboyne, I said I'd check out the M3 parkway.

I couldnt believe the convenience of it all! Free parking, regular trains, and just E6 RETURN to Connolly, RETURN!!! It usually costs E5 per hour for parking in the Ilac! No traffic congestion worries, safe parking, table in front of me as the train sped along, I just hopped off again back at the M3 parkway with me shopping and loaded up the jeep, no lugging it around for ages and no battle with rush hour traffic! Straight onto me road home then!!!! Fair play to CIE for opening that station, badly needed and much appreciated (despite our previous minister for transports efforts at trying to stop rail coming to Meath!!!)

Your observation is either biased or bonkers. It doesn't cost €5 an hour to park in the Ilac centre. There's no rush hour traffic on a bank holiday monday and your car is probably safer in the ilac centre than Pace. As for the table, well it was invented many moons ago, but well done for enjoying it on a train.

corktina

hmmm....how far did you have to lug the shopping to get to Connolly?

CIE

DWCommuter wrote: »

Your observation is either biased or bonkers. It doesn't cost €5 an hour to park in the Ilac centre. There's no rush hour traffic on a bank holiday monday and your car is probably safer in the ilac centre than Pace. As for the table, well it was invented many moons ago, but well done for enjoying it on a train.

Fond of those ad-hominems, eh. If the fellow made something up (doesn't appear to be an honest mistake), fair enough to call him on it because it'll undermine his argument in that respect, but to counter it with another opinion on top of the ad-hominem is overkill—there may not be rush-hour traffic on a bank holiday Monday, but there sure would be commercial shopping traffic if places like the Ilac Centre are such a draw. Never mind the Ilac Centre advertising their €2/hour parking rate (they say it's "now" that price) to encourage driving...and they still have their €2.80/hr rate/€35 daily rate if you come at the wrong time of day. And it's sure not like there's a motorway all the way there either.

hmmm....how far did you have to lug the shopping to get to Connolly?

Ooh scary, a 1-km walk to either Tara Street or Connolly, and maybe just as long of a walk from a local railway station. Everyone that badly out of shape nowadays, or just have the impulse to buy too much stuff they don't need and can't be carried by hand? If Broadstone were still the terminus for trains to/from Maynooth and/or the M3 park/ride, I wouldn't find it troublesome to walk there either (another kilometre away). How about the walk to/from the Busáras?

FTR, when I was younger, my late father once parked his car on Lotts (he worked around the corner on Middle Abbey Street) and once got the groceries robbed out of it for his trouble. Those were the days when it was more worth it to shop at Dunnes Stores on Mary Street than at the local Londis, and people did ride the train or the bus to procure those messages...and yes, you did the travelling on the train or the bus, with company if you needed extra stuff...