Talk:British Rail Class 58

Class 58 history

In the late 1970s, British Rail was keen to develop a new, low-cost, easily maintainable freight locomotive that would handle the predicted rail freight growth during the 1980s as well as having the potential as an export design. Once a design for the new Class 58s had been approved by the British Rail Board, the contract to build the locomotives was awarded to British Rail Engineering Limited (BREL) in Doncaster where work started on a major multi-million pound upgrade of ‘E2’ shop where the locomotives would be manufactured.

BREL dropped traditional locomotive construction methods in favour of an entirely new approach – an innovative modular design. This offered savings on construction and maintenance compared to previous locomotive builds.

The first locomotive, 58001, was handed over to British Rail at Doncaster Works on the 9th of December 1982 and delivery of the remainder of the locomotives swiftly followed. 58050 was temporarily fitted with a SEPEX wheelslip control system, but this was deemed a failure and removed before the locomotive entered traffic with BR in 1987. After delivery of the locomotive, the expected orders for export designs never came and so the jigs at Doncaster were dismantled and 58050 became not only the last Class 58 to be built, but the last diesel locomotive to be built at ‘The Plant’.

Since they were introduced in the early 1980’s, the 58s have gone about their duties quite happily. Mainly concerned with the Midlands MGR coal traffic, they would be just at home working other services – Freightliners, Speedlinks, steel, automotive traffic, enterprise and even the occasional passenger rail tour services!

During the late 1990s, it was almost certain that the entire Class 58 fleet would see in the next millennium as working locomotives. Quoted as "EWS' most reliable and consistent Type 5s", it came as a shock to many when in 1999 it was announced a large number of Class 58s were going to be placed into long term store: 58017 was the first to be stored, quickly followed by 58022.

Since then, the remainder of the Class 58s were stored at various points around the country. This was not really helped with the introduction of 250 Class 66s. The last few Class 58 locomotives were simply switched off in September 2001 after working the last charter train, the “Bone Idol” from King’s Cross to Skegness and return.

In 2000, it was announced by EWS that five Class 58s were going to be sent to the Netherlands on hire to Dutch container train operator ACTS. Since then, some members of the Class 58s fleet have also been sent to Spain (on hire to Spanish infrastructure operator GIF) and more recently, a large number of Class 58s (alongside Class 56s) will operate in France for Fertis, TSO and Seco. With the lack of orders for export designs of the locomotives at their construction stage, it now seems ironic that these fine locomotives have been sent abroad to work.

So, what does the future hold for the remaining locomotives here in the UK? With more and more plans for hiring as many as forty-four of the 50-strong fleet abroad, the future is certainly looking bright…! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58002 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[deleted my comment - my issue has already been covered] 621PWC (talk) 16:24, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Models

See here for a discussion of whether including the models section is a good idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabdiel (talk • contribs) 10:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

deletions

I going to propose that both Template:UK Diesel Train Technical and Template:British Rail Diesel Loco/Info 58 are deleted - they were only ever used here as far as I can tell. That's what the infobox does - I understand that some might not light the format of the infobox but it is a standard with many options (see Template:Infobox locomotive for more info)

Mddkpp (talk) 01:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

EWS criticism?

Re: [1] I haven't read it, but does the article actually criticise DB Schenker/EWS (quote ?)

There's a deeper issue here in that the Class 58s didn't actually work on the services they were intended for ie coal. They had serious issues with wheel slip due to a design flaw (for reasons unknown they connected all the motors in series for low speed work) - that as far as I know as never fixed.

It's described in the article (Unfortunately this isn't a free source - I can copy any relevant bits if needed under 'fair use' criteria if necessary.)

• http://pid.sagepub.com/content/200/2/135 (DOI: 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1986_200_173_02)
• British Rail Class 58 Diesel Electric Locomotive (Etwell 1986) Institution of Mechanical Engineers

It's (the wheelslip issue on 58s) also a well known thing in the rail industry. That probably isn't a problem on LGV lines under construction where the rails are fresh and covered in ballast dust. (or maybe not [2] "On hire from EWS, 58046 bank a train laying ballast on the new TGV-Est line. note the rear wheel of the Class 58 glowing red hot with wheel slip." .. )

In many ways the 58's were a step backwards from the 56s (which worked). One of the reasons mainline locomotives aren't made in this country anymore - the class 58 traction system problems were a demonstration to the entire world of (unchecked) incompetence somewhere within BREL. (opinion)Prof.Haddock (talk) 18:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Also you may need to confirm in the Preservation list because it's says that 58012 and 58023 are now at the Battlefield Line, Trooper201 (talk) 09:51, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Update on Preservation list

Hi I have given it an update however given the update of 58022 that its chassis is to be used in the replica of LMS 10000 and also 58012 and 58023 as well at the Battlefield Line, states they're preserved their now and plans are to restore 58023 to working order, Trooper201 (talk) 10:00, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

You need to provide sources, see WP:V, and avoid speculating on what might happen, see WP:CRYSTAL. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:04, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually it is true what it said about Class 58's 58012 and 58023 read The Railway Magazine, June 2016 issue, it confirms at Battlefield Line on the page Classic Traction Track Record that two Class 58's got secured to the Battlefield Line, only 58023 is to be restored to working order, Trooper201 (talk) 12:16, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Then you need to cite the source. If you don't know how, see WP:CITEBEGIN. Remember that WP:V is policy. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:22, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

hi added sources in and fully confirmed. both 58012. 58022. 58023. 58048. confirmed preserved. Trooper201 (talk) 07:51, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

23 Scrapped diesels

@Murgatroyd49 How are these videos that literally show the diesels before and after being scrapped not reliable sources https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LVy1zp2U9s&feature=youtu.be https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fl0NVajb5zI&feature=youtu.be Notanonymous1 (talk) 21:04, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

See WP:YOUTUBE. Danners430 (talk) 22:00, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

So what about those videos violates any of those rules? Notanonymous1 (talk) 11:16, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:UGC Murgatroyd49 (talk) 13:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

YouTube is not listed among those sites, and one of the current citations used in the article is from Twitter Notanonymous1 (talk) 13:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on the tweet, I've removed it and replaced it with a CN template. Also going to do a quick pass on all the cites to make sure it's up to scratch... there are a few which might warrant closer inspection. Danners430 (talk) 13:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

If you prefer tweets over YouTube videos, here’s an actual tweet with photographic proof of the Class 58s in Alizay being dismantled, the same yard showcased in both videos

https://twitter.com/801rail/status/1663109269930098689 Notanonymous1 (talk) 13:12, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Tweets and YouTube videos are both user generated content, as defined in WP:UGC. A few exceptions exist, namely for official company accounts (eg. The LNER Twitter account posting about themselves), as you’d expect them to have the same editorial oversight as a news outlet.

Enthusiasts posting videos on YouTube and Twitter are quite the opposite of editorial oversight… Danners430 (talk) 13:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok, but it’s literally photos and videos of them before, during, and after being scrapped Notanonymous1 (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

That doesn’t mean it’s a reliable source, which is required for content on Wikipedia. We’ve linked you to the policy multiple times at this point. Danners430 (talk) 14:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Is this enough proof for you? It has finally been printed.

https://www.railexpress.co.uk/13687/whats-inside-the-august-issue-of-rail-express/ Notanonymous1 (talk) 17:23, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Just to reiterate - it's not proof we're after, it's verifiable sources. And that meets every criteria as a reputable, published source, although it only states that there have been "some" class 58s scrapped - to quote… "We also have images of the scrapping of Class 58s in France" Danners430 (talk) 17:39, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/rail-express-9L24/20230418/281814288149437 Notanonymous1 (talk) 13:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)