201 Class Locomotives

Captain Chaos · 06-08-2012 09:46PM

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Stopped 201's are stored in Inchicore and are started on a semi regular basis to charge batteries and to help prevent engines from seizing. Mark 3's are tendered for scrapping after no approaches were made to sell them on as working stock.

I reckon some of the stopped 201s have been stripped for parts to keep the others running.

204 spent a long time in the middle of the 141 scrap line next to the mainline at Inchicore during 2010. It was blocked right in the middle of about 5 or 6 of the withdrawn 141s, I was convinced that 204 was up for scrap and stripped of all useful spare parts at that stage.

06-08-2012 10:54PM

Captain Chaos wrote: »

I reckon some of the stopped 201s have been stripped for parts to keep the others running.

216 certainly has been stripped.

steamengine · 07-08-2012 11:58AM

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Back you up on something here, Dermo.

GM were liasing with CIE for over a decade about supplying loco's and CIE were very keen to purchase from them, even before Bulleid was around and he had a stiffy for their product. Only one thing stopped them from purchasing; a lack of $ to pay for the fleet as distinct to a lack of money. When the push to eliminate steam was made, the cash came from the cabinet coffers so effectively it was what they wanted to go for that decided what CIE got. GM's bid was superior to every other bid in what they offered and Inchicore knew they were the preferred bidder in every way bar being slightly dearer; CIE actually worked out that the GM bid would, in one year, save them more than the cost of the cheapest bid in operational economies. However, cabinet made the call and the gig went to Metro Vicks, Irish meat and dairy produce oddly being sold to the UK at the same meeting :roll eyes:

Anyway, the decision was made and CIE received the 96 loco's to complement their 2 homegrown Sulzers as well as the Birmingham built locos that became the 101 class. In fairness to the Metro Vick fleet, they were well built with good electrics and were largely favored by drivers but their primary fall down was in an engine that was proven to work but in boats and stationary generators, not motive vehicles. The fitters in Inchicore were only getting used to diesel by the time the first A Class engines were delivered (Some say quicker than the Metro Vick techies who built them!) but they adapted very well to the new beasts and kept them ticking over on the road for over 30 years.

It appears nevertheless that they stuck with the Crossleys for 10-14 years before re-engining. I think they were generally regarded as maintenance intensive, rather than being an outright failure, otherwise they couldn't have operated for that long. It must have come at some cost to keep them operational.

Losty Dublin · 07-08-2012 02:43PM

steamengine wrote: »

It appears nevertheless that they stuck with the Crossleys for 10-14 years before re-engining. I think they were generally regarded as maintenance intensive, rather than being an outright failure, otherwise they couldn't have operated for that long. It must have come at some cost to keep them operational.

It was more of a case of not being in a position to re-engine them and giving them time than wanting to stand by them. Even before the last specimens of A's were built, there was rectification of wholesale issues with the engines that required a lot of warranty shop time on them. Indeed, this low availability (50% at it's trough) led to Bulleid and his board getting their way with the Cabinet and making what was a panic order from GM (They offered a 10 month completion of the order) for what we now know as the 121 class and in 1961, the 37 members of the 141 class. CIE wanted to refit the A and C class fleet by then but the bigger problem was aquiring 96 powerheads, or more accurately, a willing supplier of same.

GM was the preferred choice after their orders were seen to be highly reliable but they, like most other companies, wanted to supply whole units if possible but certainly not powerheads for fear of association with the Metro Vick brand. Maybach supplied two engines for C's but they weren't much better than what they replaced while Mirlees and Sulzer, two other interested parties and companies that CIE hadn't been too happy with given past experiences. Eventually, GM agreed to the order of 60 engines for the A's and 30 for the C's (233 and 234 being Maybach powered by then) along with the supply of what were the 181 class to help sweeten them up.

Overall, the experience was a success with the GM order and it expanded the A and C's operational flexibity given their larger power to rail capability, faster speeds and general availability.

dermo88 · 07-08-2012 03:08PM

Losty Dublin

Maybach supplied two engines for C's but they weren't much better than what they replaced while Mirlees and Sulzer, two other interested parties and companies that CIE hadn't been too happy with given past experiences.

The Maybachs were only a small two engine batch. Its possible down to the use of shunters (E401/E421) that they got ordered.

Mirlees, would'nt touch with a bargepole.
Sulzer, is the best choice of a European manufacturer instead of GM. But even then, in terms of reliability, it does not come close.

In fairness to the Metro Vick fleet, they were well built with good electrics and were largely favored by drivers but their primary fall down was in an engine that was proven to work but in boats and stationary generators, not motive vehicles.

The electrics and build was superb, apart from the engine, which while fine in a Marine environment was not suited to the rough and tumble of stopping and starting on a railway. Their longevity bears testament to that.

Though.....I'll never understand the thinking behind a 550hp BoBo. It seems distinctly underpowered for its remit.

Losty Dublin · 07-08-2012 04:01PM

dermo88 wrote: »

The Maybachs were only a small two engine batch. Its possible down to the use of shunters (E401/E421) that they got ordered.

You are almost right; apparently they pretty much gave CIE two engines at a good price to try out after CIE weren't too willing to talk to them about it. They were a bit easier on fuel than a GM but they were an awkward 4 stroke cycle and they went down a fair bit.

dermo88 wrote: »

Sulzer, is the best choice of a European manufacturer instead of GM. But even then, in terms of reliability, it does not come close.

The Sulzer units in the 101 class were not very reliable but they were a pre war design. Something else that the Sulzer had was a turbocharger and to a mid speed low weight system, this wasn't essential so a supercharged engine was going to be cheaper to fuel. As an bythought on this, the engine supplied for the A class was virtually identical to that in an 071 bar for the turbo; the A was capable enough in it's own right.

dermo88 wrote: »

TThough.....I'll never understand the thinking behind a 550hp BoBo. It seems distinctly underpowered for its remit.

The C Class were earmarked for lighter branch work on the likes of Ardee, Foynes, Ballinrobe etc. The thought was that 550Hp was an increase of what most steam engines offered at rail so that's what was fitted.

dermo88 · 07-08-2012 10:35PM

Losty Dublin

I learned more off you in a few days than 7 years of self opinionated bull excrement expressed by myself on IRN between 2001-2009. Your Dad was an engineer in Inchicore, and despite my horrifically right wing nonsense over the years, you are NOW giving me, and others a clue of the realiy. For that, thanks....

Frankly speaking, please accept my apologies for my past right wing stance. The ones I really wanted shot are CIE management. Not the workers.....

Christ........no wonder I got banned for 6 months....I knew too little, yet spoke too much. An internet A Class engine tackling Maedhbh

Sligo Quay · 07-08-2012 11:16PM

dermo88 wrote: »

Losty Dublin

I learned more off you in a few days than 7 years of self opinionated bull excrement expressed by myself on IRN between 2001-2009.

Christ........no wonder I got banned for 6 months....I knew too little, yet spoke too much.

About time:D

dermo88 · 08-08-2012 10:14PM

Sligo Quay

Please do not be under any illusions that I have seen some railroad to Damascus. There are all kinds of namby pamby theories on how Iarnrod Eireann could work better. My preference will be towards lousy basic pay but decent bonuses if management and workforce perform. Thats fine in theory, reality is another matter.

Now...meanwhile, back on topic, the 201's. Probably the best looking locomotives to grace Irish Rails, although the A Class with the Iarnrod Eireann white stripe likely win in my eyes.

Cookie_Monster · 08-08-2012 10:19PM

dermo88 wrote: »

What survived, and was successful:

Class 20, Class 37, Class 50 - All 3 are English Electric, although the 50's did have problems with their electronics.

There've been a few more than that, those above are the most successful, particularly 37s but class 08 are everywhere, even now (78 listed on Wikipedia as still in mainline service, not to mention industry). Class 47 and 57 are still around and of the newer ones class 60s still achieve much of the super heavy work. 66 are everywhere but are of course not UK made.

In the 2nd level 24,25,26,27 and 31s all lasted successfully a fair while until multiple units and lack of light freight started to kill them off. Indeed 31s are still around for Network Rail.

Not to mention the Detics, one of which is back in service now

Oscar Bravo · 08-08-2012 11:10PM

The 201s are quicker on Freights than the 071s,then can get away quicker and come in harder if ya no what i mean!

corktina · 09-08-2012 12:32PM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

There've been a few more than that, those above are the most successful, particularly 37s but class 08 are everywhere, even now (78 listed on Wikipedia as still in mainline service, not to mention industry). Class 47 and 57 are still around and of the newer ones class 60s still achieve much of the super heavy work. 66 are everywhere but are of course not UK made.

In the 2nd level 24,25,26,27 and 31s all lasted successfully a fair while until multiple units and lack of light freight started to kill them off. Indeed 31s are still around for Network Rail.

Not to mention the Detics, one of which is back in service now

over 1000 class 08s built with a good few hundred of their earlier bretherin , similar to D class in looks

steamengine · 16-08-2012 04:44PM

UP Enterprise through Howth Junction at 14:30 approx today.
207 pushing !!!

Jamie2k9 · 16-08-2012 06:47PM

208 operating Cork services today.

101sean · 30-08-2012 10:23PM

According to the Irish View page in this weeks online Railway Herald, IE has put some 201s up for sale on a worldwide stock listing site. http://railwayherald.com/magazine/preview/328

Captain Chaos · 30-08-2012 10:51PM

101sean wrote: »

According to the Irish View page in this weeks online Railway Herald, IE has put some 201s up for sale on a worldwide stock listing site. http://railwayherald.com/magazine/preview/328

Wouldn't surprise me at this stage but who would want them. All they are good for is a private freight operator trying to set up here and that's not going to happen. Other than that EMD have been selling the standard gauge and more powerful class 66s around Europe for years and there are even versions operating in Egypt on freight and passenger work.

Those 11 stored 201s are only good for spare parts and scrap now, no international operator would consider them.

dowlingm · 31-08-2012 02:17PM

I seem to remember that 201s were also considered high axle weight for UK use, limiting their network reach - ring a bell with anyone? Also: is there a restriction on using 201s on the Navan branch? One never sees anything other than 071s/112 in sighting reports.

There was a previous rumour about the 201s being shopped around a couple of years ago - one that I thought might have legs was them going to Israel for use on their pushpull train order but they went with something else.

31-08-2012 03:23PM

The main problem with 201s on the Taras is that the traverser in Dublin Port is too short to accommodate one. I'm not sure if there's any restrictions on them running to Navan otherwise.

goingnowhere · 31-08-2012 04:04PM

No restriction to Navan

dowlingm · 31-08-2012 04:55PM

Karsini - thanks. Is that an ore only limitation or are 201s with containers obliged to hand them off to 071s to take them the rest of the way in?

@goingnowhere thanks.

31-08-2012 06:07PM

dowlingm wrote: »

Karsini - thanks. Is that an ore only limitation or are 201s with containers obliged to hand them off to 071s to take them the rest of the way in?

@goingnowhere thanks.

It would be ore only. The traverser is in the separate Tara Mines unloading complex. It was originally built for the A class locos and had to be modified to take 071s.

Oscar Bravo · 31-08-2012 08:52PM

Loco 218 worked the Westport-Waterford timber today passing through Manulla Junction@ 1655. 226 is in Ballina for the weekend after working the Northwall-Ballina liner there earlier.

steamengine · 31-08-2012 09:29PM

dowlingm wrote: »

I seem to remember that 201s were also considered high axle weight for UK use, limiting their network reach - ring a bell with anyone? Also: is there a restriction on using 201s on the Navan branch? One never sees anything other than 071s/112 in sighting reports.

There was a previous rumour about the 201s being shopped around a couple of years ago - one that I thought might have legs was them going to Israel for use on their pushpull train order but they went with something else.

I think the problem with the 201's is more of a bogie issue than axle weight. I was reading last night Pattersons's history of the GNR(I) in which he states that the max. axle weight for the old 'V' class compound steam locos as in 'Merlin' was 21 tons. 201 would be less than 20 tons if you divide 112 tonnes by six.

Elsewhere on a 'discussion' forum and where exactly I can't recall, it was stated that the 201 bogies were operating to the limits concerning track forces. Apparently the traction motors are nose-hung and add to the unsprung weight. Another opinion expressed was that self-steering bogies would have been a better option.

Captain Chaos · 01-09-2012 07:01PM

steamengine wrote: »

I think the problem with the 201's is more of a bogie issue than axle weight. I was reading last night Pattersons's history of the GNR(I) in which he states that the max. axle weight for the old 'V' class compound steam locos as in 'Merlin' was 21 tons. 201 would be less than 20 tons if you divide 112 tonnes by six.

Elsewhere on a 'discussion' forum and where exactly I can't recall, it was stated that the 201 bogies were operating to the limits concerning track forces. Apparently the traction motors are nose-hung and add to the unsprung weight. Another opinion expressed was that self-steering bogies would have been a better option.

I don't think axle weight of the 201s would be a problem on the UK network. The Class 66s are almost 20 tons more than the 201s and work almost everywhere. It may well be a bogie design issue, the bogies used on the Class 66 look more beefier than our 201s even the the ones on the older Class 59s built before the 201s look more impressive from an engineering standpoint.

CaptainFreedom · 02-09-2012 12:42AM

Captain Chaos wrote: »

I don't think axle weight of the 201s would be a problem on the UK network. The Class 66s are almost 20 tons more than the 201s and work almost everywhere. It may well be a bogie design issue, the bogies used on the Class 66 look more beefier than our 201s even the the ones on the older Class 59s built before the 201s look more impressive from an engineering standpoint.

It could be that its down that the 59 is the same track gauge as the SD50 that it is based on so the bogies are the same, whereas the wider gauge here may have allowed a re-design. Only what I think though.

The 201's would be out of gauge for running on the UK network, being just over 4 inches taller than the 59/66. The UK loading gauge is smaller than here or the rest of Europe.

CIE · 02-09-2012 01:28AM

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Wouldn't surprise me at this stage but who would want them. All they are good for is a private freight operator trying to set up here and that's not going to happen. Other than that EMD have been selling the standard gauge and more powerful class 66s around Europe for years and there are even versions operating in Egypt on freight and passenger work.

Those 11 stored 201s are only good for spare parts and scrap now, no international operator would consider them.

If that doesn't happen, then that means that Irish Rail is suppressing competition, as well as suppressing it for the road haulers' benefit.

Quite a few JT42CWRs are running in Germany particularly. And they're only 50 horsepower more powerful than Ireland's JT42HCW.

CaptainFreedom · 02-09-2012 09:26AM

CIE wrote: »

If that doesn't happen, then that means that Irish Rail is suppressing competition, as well as suppressing it for the road haulers' benefit.

Its been like that for a while, hence 121/141/181's being quickly withdrawn and cut up and Mk3's left to rot

Captain Chaos · 02-09-2012 12:10PM

CIE wrote: »

Quite a few JT42CWRs are running in Germany particularly. And they're only 50 horsepower more powerful than Ireland's JT42HCW.

HP is only part of it. It's the gearing ratio that's the big difference. Our 201s are set up as mixed traffic locos. They can do freight and express passenger with 100mph running. But no way can they haul the loads of the other JT42CWRs, one (A Class 59 working in Germany) has even set a European record for the heaviest load ever hauled by a single locomotive. The 66s in the UK are limited to 75mph and some of the later heavy haul versions are 65mph limited but can haul even heavier trains.

dowlingm · 02-09-2012 02:56PM

Is changing the gearing ratio that hard though? F40PHs have been known to find their way to freight railways in the US and Canada like Montreal Maine & Atlantic once replaced by Tier 2/3/4 locomotives by systems like Amtrak and AMT. Given the train lengths they pull on this continent hard to believe they are being left as is.

corktina · 02-09-2012 03:03PM

there was a documentary on SKy somewhere not long ago about a firm in the US who break locos and refurbish parts for resale. Engines went for unbelievable amounts of dosh, so I suspect the 201s will sell alright, as they have not exactly been worked to death!

Can you put up some details of that article as Im not a subscriber and cant see much in your link

201 Class Locomotives

Comments