70012 SCRAPPED ON ARRIVAL err.. rumour has it!

I have one thing to say about this: Ah HAR HAR HARR

 

That was when Leeds had an engineering industry.....

 

My understanding of the insurance aspect from some years ago is that as soon as the cargo is over the ships rail, the liability falls on the ships insurance. I was involved with a large lathe that fell half and half many years ago, can,t remember the outcome but an insurance company did cough up eventually.

 

I think you are correct. I was working for a UK manufacturing company (no longer manufactures in the UK now of course) that had a skid dropped when it was being loaded. The docks/shipping company said it was our companies insurance companies liability. We inspected the very broken skid at the docks, and saw the point of impact on the concrete. We then noticed the crumpled handrailing on the deck of the ship, as it had hit this before impacting on the dock. In this case the goods had crossed to the ship, so the liability was on the ship owners insurance company.

Someone could always start a class 70 preservation society....

 

When I saw this thread I rubbed my eyes, had someone saved another Brit from somewhere!!!!

Thank goodness I was wrong.....................

 

I'm just glad that it wasn't one of the repatriated 8Fs that got 'dropped'! I couldn't give a ..... about a new Class 70 being err, modified, as it were!

 

..... and Sheffield supplied the steel

 

Why oh why do these railway companies buy locos, run them for a couple of years, then get rid? How many 'modern' diesel locos have been laid up (eg 56, 58, 60 etc) due to political differences, rather than just being plain life expired?
Look at the Class 20's, 37's and 47's that are still going strong decades after being built, whereas there are these modern locos and units which are not up to the job.


What has gone wrong with the railway systm

 

The simple answer is money! The ultimate owners of most of the railway system are banks and various other asset management organisations. Their interest is not in running an efficient railway system but in maximising their profit. The managers of these organisations are primarily concerned with maximising their personal gain by fulfilling the terms of their bonus agreements.

 

Now I've always considered myself to be a fairly gentle person, but if somebody does that I WILL have to commit murder!:lol::lol::lol:

 

So I guess this makes 70012 one of the hardest to get mileage behind

 

LOL! Not the prettiest or most reliable locos this country has made! If you imagine a modern development of the class 37 with 3.5kbhp that I'm sure EE would have done had it not been swallowed up into GEC and vanished would be every bit as good as a 70, and from what I've heard a damn sight more reliable too.

 

That just about sums up everything that has gone wrong with industry in the UK. Quick buck and sod the future.

 

Cast your minds back to when the initial Class 59s were brought over, I heard a story many years thet they came into the country because their reliability record far exceeded the Class 6Os at the time, then we had the 66s.
This was the effectively the end of building main line locos in this country.

 

Hope its insured, or there could be a P45 coming somebody's way.

 

Well, you would be right about that story. When the class 59s arrived in early 1986 the class 60s hadn't even even built, so their reliability record could hardly be worse.

 

How far did the loco fall? First news story was 12' onto the quay side, then it became 15' straight back into the hold, now the OP of this thread makes it 30'. I read elsewhere the locos would have been the uppermost load and beneath them was a hold containing grain, so the ship's hull wasn't damaged.
I'm always bumping into people who claim to have spotted 66521 during it's three weeks of use, so how many people in future years will claim to have been at Newport that day and seen 70012?
As for who pays for the damage, was the crane operated by the ship's crew or was it a shore based one used by dock workers?

 

Ships crane was being used according to the froth on wnxx.

dropped it back into the hold.

As to the class 59s they were introduced because of the unreliability of the 56s and other locos in the fleet.

The 60s were built here due to political pressure but the truth is the Uk has prodcued few diesels that have worked straight out of the box like the 66s and there it is little wonder the industry has disappeared.

 

Being fair..

The Class 60 was a new design, the class 59 (1985) was only a new body placed around a design already 13 years old when introduced (it's power unit EMD 16-645) being used in the SD40-2 dating back to 1972 and was therefore tried and tested, and mass produced in quantity of over 3000 and was almost at the end of it's production life when built for the UK.

It's chances of not working straight out of the box were almost minute.

Comparing the sucess of the 59 would be more appropriate to comparing new build class 47s.. (or Class 55's even as the HP is the same)

Comparing the class 66 to Class 60 may be more fitting however, the Class 66 design (1996 dates only to 1993 and the SD70), but the decision to buy the class 66 over the 60 may not have just been down to reliability