201 Class Locomotives

end of the road · 02-09-2012 05:24PM

CIE wrote: »

If that doesn't happen, then that means that Irish Rail is suppressing competition

IE would shut and lift the lot before they would allow any competition.

CIE wrote: »

suppressing it for the road haulers' benefit.

now this i don't get, what benefit would IE get by doing such a thing? it wouldn't surprise me, but i couldn't see them doing it unless they were benefitting from doing it, unless of course the shutting of the railways altogether is that benefit?

101sean · 02-09-2012 06:06PM

I tried to copy and paste the article but it won't let me. Nothing much else to read anyway and there was no link to the locos for sale or any other detail.

CIE · 02-09-2012 07:28PM

end of the road wrote: »

IE would shut and lift the lot before they would allow any competition

The EU is about to put the squeeze on them regarding Directive 91/440 officially next year. Shutting all the railways would be suspect, yes?

end of the road wrote: »

now this i don't get, what benefit would IE get by doing such a thing? it wouldn't surprise me, but i couldn't see them doing it unless they were benefitting from doing it, unless of course the shutting of the railways altogether is that benefit?

They're just doing what their bosses above them are telling them to do. What benefit has arisen from the recent reductions in service and closings, as well as shortening DARTs (after spending all sorts of money to make stations accommodate eight-car trains), never mind the big reduction in railfreight haulage, with fare rises on top of it all? A negative benefit.

Captain Chaos wrote: »

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 100 mph 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 65 mph limited but can haul even heavier trains

Those are slower drag-freight engines. There is still a role that the JT42HCW can play (so long as the HEP is removed, which will add horsepower for traction) for faster freight trains; and it can still haul long trains in an economic fashion when in multiple working, as Union Pacific's 8000-class SD40-2H "Fast Forties" did when needed (those were geared to run at 90 mph).

The Class 59 is the analogue to the USA's SD40-2/SD50, with its 16-cylinder engine. At 126 tonnes and a maximum TE of 508 kN, I don't think it'd be allowed on any Irish railway, unless of course IE drastically upgrades their railways from the last century that is.

Chrisplayfair · 05-09-2012 10:10PM

230 operated a 1230 York Road / Dublin Connolly LE movement whilst 209 worked a 1455 Dublin Connolly/Belfast LE movement today. 209's first visit north in almost 2 years!

Millem · 05-09-2012 10:35PM

Is 216 a thing of the past? Passed through inchicore a couple of weeks ago and she appears to be stripped of a good few parts. (think it was 216 anyway)

If it is the case the likelihood is presumably that she won't be back?

Captain Chaos · 05-09-2012 10:38PM

Millem wrote: »

Is 216 a thing of the past? Passed through inchicore a couple of weeks ago and she appears to be stripped of a good few parts. (think it was 216 anyway)

If it is the case the likelihood is presumably that she won't be back?

216 has been in that state a long time now. About two years I think. Doubt it will be back out again, ever.

Oscar Bravo · 06-09-2012 04:18PM

223 worked this mornings Northwall-Ballina liner. 226 worked the Ballina-Northwall liner.

comradestalin · 10-09-2012 01:32PM

On an aside, most will be aware of the Irish governments' decision not to request a further derogation from the EU requirement that track maintenance firms are kept separate from train operating companies. I think this implies that the government is interested in opening the road to competition.

This is a very significant change and I am surprised people are not talking more about it. It will now be possible for firms to enter the market and operate their own freight and passenger services. It will face prosecution if it attempts to block the entry into the market or if it is seen to be swinging in favour of Irish Rail. If Irish Rail are selling their rolling stock and locomotives it would seem like a good opportunity for someone to buy these up, refurbish them and introduce competing services on the mainline, especially along the Dublin-Belfast corridor.

With respect to the Enterprise one wonders what implications this has in Northern Ireland and whether or not Translink will be extending their own derogation.

dowlingm · 10-09-2012 07:19PM

comradestalin:

there's a recent opinion from the Advocate General of the ECJ which leads me to suspect some backsliding in EU thinking:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/policy-legislation/single-view/view/directive-91440-does-not-require-institutional-separation.html

101sean · 11-09-2012 10:46AM

Lord Berkeley's comment page in this months's Railway Magazine suggests that IE's policy of scrapping unwanted locos and MK3s ASAP is so that any incoming operators have nothing to run

He reckons that they government should get a leasing company in to sort them out. He's chairman of the UK Rail Freight Group but I'm not sure he understands the way Ireland works

corktina · 11-09-2012 11:54AM

101sean wrote: »

Lord Berkeley's comment page in this months's Railway Magazine suggests that IE's policy of scrapping unwanted locos and MK3s ASAP is so that any incoming operators have nothing to run

He reckons that they government should get a leasing company in to sort them out. He's chairman of the UK Rail Freight Group but I'm not sure he understands the way Ireland works

but its not really the case is it? If it were IE would have put a Hymac through the coaches by now and stripped the "for sale" 201s to a point where it wouldn't be economical to re-instate them. Sure the Mk3's now need a major re-build, but they do that all the time to their Brothers in the UK. recently there were several ex-restaurant mk3s rebuilt to standard TSO layout for instance. If ther really was some private operator anxious for a small slice of our very small cake, they would have swooped on the Mk3s by now. Obviously they also have the option of bringing in stock from the UK and elsewhere and just doing a bogiwe swap...theres a lot of good 5'3" bogies lying around after all.

comradestalin · 11-09-2012 01:33PM

Lord Berkeley's comment page in this months's Railway Magazine suggests that IE's policy of scrapping unwanted locos and MK3s ASAP is so that any incoming operators have nothing to run

I really find these conspiracy theories ridiculous. If the government really want to introduce private competition they are not going to be stopped by IÉ cutting up under-maintained rolling stock. They'd simply set up a leasing company and take over all the stock (remember - who paid for it?) and lease it back to the train operators, including IÉ who would bid for it. If there wasn't enough stock for all the operators who wanted to run services they'd buy more.

I don't see how IÉ would get away with scrapping the 201s. There would be questions in the Dáil about why these machines are being cut up half way through their specified operating lifespan. Someone would be for the chop if that happened. This aspect of the conspiracy immediately falls over when you note how many of the 071 class have been retained and indeed heavily overhauled in recent years. If they wanted to squeeze out potential competitors it would be a lot easier to get away with scrapping the 071s and using the non push-pull 201s for freight and infrastructure work.

I would imagine that heavy maintenance on the Mk3s was wound down from the point shortly before the Mk4s were delivered, and this is why the Mk3s are in such a poor state. IÉ can't justify spending a lot of public money maintaining and overhauling stock which is not being used, not even on the basis of auctioning off the stock - who on earth would buy it ? Translink have a surplus of stock now that the 4000 class delivery is complete.

The reality is that the Mk3s are the victim of a decision by a cash-flush Irish government to upgrade the rolling stock on the Cork line before they were life-expired. They were doomed as soon as the ink dried on the Mk4 purchase order.

dermo88 · 11-09-2012 03:01PM

comradestalin

I don't see how IÉ would get away with scrapping the 201s. There would be questions in the Dáil about why these machines are being cut up half way through their specified operating lifespan.

Agree, and I will point out that every locomotive fleet sees some being lost due to attrition or cannibalisation for spares. Its the nature of any transport operation that this will take place. For example, by the mid 1970's, around 10 of the A Class, bought in 1955 had already been withdrawn, and from the early 1980's onwards, withdrawals took place for various reasons at the pace of 1 per year from a fleet of 60. The 201's are 18 years old now.

Cookie_Monster · 11-09-2012 09:37PM

comradestalin wrote: »

I don't see how IÉ would get away with scrapping the 201s. There would be questions in the Dáil about why these machines are being cut up half way through their specified operating lifespan. Someone would be for the chop if that happened.

No real questions asked about the mk3, or the 8200s or the 2700s. All of which had fairly short life spans and were junked (or in the case of DART simply not returned under warranty) with little justification and zero political questioning of motive and reason and costs.
The clowns in the Dail wouldn't even know what a 201 was if a report landed on their desks, or what the lifespan should be I'd wager and would have little interest.

comradestalin · 11-09-2012 10:01PM

Cookie Monster,

There are no questions to be answered regarding the Mk3. They were purchased in the early 1990s when the state had very little money. They were replaced in the mid 2000s when the state was flush with cash to spend on upgrading major public transport links. I don't really see what is hard to understand about that.

I think the 2700s had a similar fate; replaced by the 22000s, a major upgrade purchased when the state had far more money. The 8200s are perhaps less forgiveable but it sounds to me as if the DART fleet requirements simply doesn't necessitate the additional overhead of maintaining parts and doing maintenance for a very small separate class.

corktina · 12-09-2012 02:11AM

i think you'll find the mk3s are older than that.

Cookie_Monster · 12-09-2012 02:35AM

comradestalin wrote: »

There are no questions to be answered regarding the Mk3.

there's an entire thread dedicated to this already so I won't go into detail

They were purchased in the early 1990s when the state had very little money. They were replaced in the mid 2000s when the state was flush with cash to spend on upgrading major public transport links. I don't really see what is hard to understand about that.

They were introduced in 86, even if lasted until today that's only 26 years, well short of a 30 year+ minimum lifespan. A heavy overhaul would have given them another 15 years at least but the cash was wasted on expensive new units rather than maintenance and upgrades of current stock (across the board)

I think the 2700s had a similar fate; replaced by the 22000s, a major upgrade purchased when the state had far more money.

Again a wasteful upgrade, cash could have been used for real improvements like bringing lines up to speed etc but (too many) new toys came first.

The 8200s are perhaps less forgiveable but it sounds to me as if the DART fleet requirements simply doesn't necessitate the additional overhead of maintaining parts and doing maintenance for a very small separate class.

No, indeed they don't but these have been a complete disaster from day one and should have been handed back without cost. No railway in the world will be stupid enough to buy these if they are actually aware of the history. These units alone warrant serious political questions as to IE motives, why were they simply left there unused and not returned or fixed by the manufacturer at their own cost?

dowlingm · 12-09-2012 04:39AM

The 8200s were used, but were deprecated once the 8100s were all back.

There's a similar situation unfolding at Amtrak where it's rumoured they will pull the HHP8s out of the line ahead of the AEM7s, despite the fact that the AEMs are paid off (being up to 33 years old) and the HHPs still requiring lease payments to be made, when the ACS64s arrive.

corktina · 12-09-2012 09:27AM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

They were introduced in 86, even if lasted until today that's only 26 years, well short of a 30 year+ minimum lifespan. A heavy overhaul would have given them another 15 years at least but the cash was wasted on expensive new units rather than maintenance and upgrades of current stock (across the board)

?

it should be added in case anyone doesn't know that the Mk3s were updated versions of UK vehicles which are STILL in front line 125mph service now and will be for some time to come. (I rode in a couple the other week and very comfortable they are, in stark contrast to our spartan Mk4s.)

Cookie_Monster · 12-09-2012 10:11AM

dowlingm wrote: »

of the AEM7s

wow they are hideous looking loco's. Which is funny cos I kinda like them...

CaptainFreedom · 12-09-2012 02:20PM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

wow they are hideous looking loco's. Which is funny cos I kinda like them...

They were rebuilt and now look like this

The reason they look a bit different to your average American locomotive is that they are based on a Swedish design, despite being built by EMD at LaGrange Illinois, where every Irish GM loco apart from the 201's were built

BTT

corktina · 12-09-2012 02:37PM

looks just the same to me

steamengine · 13-09-2012 03:52PM

207 storming past the Lady's Stairs bridge earlier today with the 11.00 dep. Enterprise from Connolly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU3vZRyGVwg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU3vZRyGVwg

Jamie2k9 · 13-09-2012 07:14PM

217 and 219 at Heuston attacked to 2 mark 4 sets. Not sure if one of these was operating the 08.00 this morning and failed near Heuston.

Not sure of the number but the one thats in the current Enterprise colours (same as carrages) transfered from Connolly to Heuston at lunchtime.

Oscar Bravo · 15-09-2012 05:28PM

226 and 229 are sitting side by side in Ballina yard this weekend.

Chrisplayfair · 16-09-2012 11:54PM

The northern line for 201s -

Sun 16th -
209 1500 Belfast / Connolly
227 1600 Belfast / Connolly
208 1900 Belfast / Connolly
231 Spare @ York Road

17-09-2012 12:00AM

Chrisplayfair wrote: »

The northern line for 201s -

Sun 16th -
209 1500 Belfast / Connolly
227 1600 Belfast / Connolly
208 1900 Belfast / Connolly
231 Spare @ York Road

Is the EGV still on one of the sets?

Chrisplayfair · 17-09-2012 12:03AM

89604 (IE 7604) on the 1500 x Belfast today with 209...Sounding in fine form!

Tamper · 19-09-2012 01:18PM

I thought I seen you on that Chris...

Today sees 208 on the 0935 Dublin/belfast
227 1100 Dublin/Belfast (Van attached 89604)

Captain Chaos · 19-09-2012 02:24PM

Tamper wrote: »

227 1100 Dublin/Belfast (Van attached 89604)

So is 209 back as a spare or is it out giving it's HEP a go for the first time in 2 years?

Also does anyone have any close up pics of the couplings between the EGV and 201 and the EGV and DD stock? I think the 201s are using a buckeye to the EGV but I don't know if they fitted a drop head Dellner to the other end of the EGV for the DD stock.

201 Class Locomotives

Comments