Talk:EMD Class 66

Trains: in UK / Locomotives High‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	March 8, 2022

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

Egypt Start‑class Low‑importance

	Egypt portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge[edit]

I'm merging the info from CD 66 into this page.

I will wait to delete (redirect the page) just in case...Carrolljon (talk) 16:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just do it! (People can always complain/revert later!). —Sladen (talk) 16:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As long as a subsection is kept for the CargoNet specifics, a merger is rather natural I think. Please keep the CD 66 page history (just redirect, don't delete) and update the rolling stock navbox while at it. Arsenikk ^(talk) 16:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everything in the CD 66 article is now in this page. the references, driver conditions etc, though some specifics are now in table form, as are all private operators..

I'll wait a bit before applying the redirect, in case some other info needs adding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carrolljon (talk • contribs) 16:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done I guess both of us were trying to do it at once (edit-conflicts), but now it succeeded, I've done the redirect at CD66. Arsenikk, could you check over things. —Sladen (talk) 17:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

operator table[edit]

Please help expand the details on this table (keep in brief!)Carrolljon (talk) 17:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fastline freight 5 (UK),SNCF Fret Benelux 3, Veolia 2, egypt 40 (+option 40),FL poland 8

I'll add these later if no-one gets there first - from railfan.nl again.

Possibly it's not worth trying to count the numbers in the small private operators as their fleets are quite fluid (?) and the list would never be up to date...87.102.126.244 (talk) 17:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a valid point, most of those "small operators" are out of a pool of 20(?) owned by Porterbrook and pimped out for a couple of years at a time as needed. —Sladen (talk) 17:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One solution to this would be to list the owner in the table under a renamed "operator" column ("owner") and list the companies that have leased them under "comments".

I think I can find this info somewhere on the web...(might take a while to happen)Carrolljon (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EMD terminology[edit]

Interestingly, EMD have seem to have gone back to calling it "Class 66"[1], I guess the name was just too well known despite what else they tried to call it! —Sladen (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I think the JT42 bit refers to anyhting with a EMD 710 engine in it - at least thats the pattern I've been seing ...

Likewise JT26 = anything with a EMD 645 engine in it ie the class 67 is a JT26 HW-HS' or something - very catchy.

Why 710=42 and 645=26 is a mystery to me - maybe it's the number of nuts and bolts in the prime mover or something - answers on a postcard to...Carrolljon (talk) 23:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Each digit actually stands for something, but don't know them all. E.g. The "2" of both JT42CWR & JT42HW-HS mean a 12-cylinder, similarly the "6" of JT26CW-SS means a 16-cylinder. An "8" means an 8-cylinder. The "H" means HEP. "SS" probably means Super Series wheel creep control. "HS" probably means High Speed, at least as defined in American terms. "J" probably means 2 cab loco, whereas "G" is single cab loco. Might be the makings of an item here for somebody who can decipher it all. Suckindiesel (talk) 16:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But PL42AC has 16 cyclinders! (better check that article)

I'd guess the R in JT42CWR stands for 'Radial bogie'

There are 6 axles JT42CW and 4 axles JT42BW so it seems likely that C is CoCo and B BoBo

Don't know any more..Carrolljon (talk) 17:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the PL42AC is Alstom's designation. Pretty certain re cylinder coding. Check some more original EMD built locos. Still think there's an article, or at least a para, in here. Suckindiesel (talk) 19:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was more that they were referring to it as Series 66 (hence the article naming). —Sladen (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting off the original point, all right. Widely known, even amongst euro operators as the Class 66, EMD may be trying to emphasise the difference between the Series 66 & the upcoming 66EU for the mainland euro market. Suckindiesel (talk) 19:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(reindent) re 26 and 42 - yes I think your right at least x6 means 16cylinder, and x2 = 12cyclinder, can't quite work out what the 42 and 26 bits stand for though there's a partial match (not all) between the 2 and 4 and the 645 and 710. As for US locomotives this doesn't work - only export.Carrolljon (talk) 20:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a fuller listing:

6=6-567, 8=8-567, 12=12-567, 16=16-567, 18=8-645E, 22=12-645E, 26=16-645E, 30=20-645E, 36=16-645F, 42=12-710G, 46=16-710G, 50=16-645F3, 70=16-710G3C, U=Narrow gauge traction motors, W=Export Model or Standard gauge traction motors or Welded Frame. Suckindiesel (talk) 22:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some more:

SC Six-hundred h.p., Cast frame. SW Six-hundred h.p., Welded frame (SW later meant switcher (shunter)). NC Nine-hundred h.p., Cast frame. NW Nine-hundred h.p., Welded frame. E Eighteen-hundred h.p. F Fourteen-hundred h.p. TR Transfer. BL Branch Line. GP General Purpose. SD Special Duty. F Full-width carbody (as in F40). DD D-D wheel arrangement. MP Multi-Purpose. M Wide nose and safety cab. I Partially isolated "whisper cab". MAC Wide nose and safety cab or whisper cab, plus an alternating-current (A.C.) drive system. ACe A.C. drive system meeting EPA Tier 2 emissions requirements.
But that's probably more than enough. Suckindiesel (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

table of operators[edit]

Create a new table .. see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=EMD_Series_66&diff=266840534&oldid=266836010

I can't help thinking it looks a mess... Carrolljon (talk) 22:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC) The figures are approximately correct - it really needs some 'interesting' info for the comments section. Thanks.Carrolljon (talk) 23:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect translation from German[edit]

"-verkehr" here doesn't mean "traffic" (the dictionary definition), it means "transport". The German federal MoT, for instance, is the "Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung", which the ministry itself, on its website, translates as "Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Affairs" - you don't usually get ministries of "traffic"!Maelli (talk) 13:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Fixed[2]. Thank you! —Sladen (talk) 14:07, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also: Great Britain is not a "county", nor even a "country", it's just an island. The state is the United Kingdom, or UK, and consists of four countries. BUT: I think the layout of the operator table is perfectly OK, after a few corrections (inc. the above, of course!)Maelli (talk) 14:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes/no/maybe. The United Kingdom consists of three countries (England, Wales, Scotland). The state is that of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which has the ISO 3166-1 country codes "GB" and "GBR". The contiguous 1,435-millimetre railway network only exists across the main islands (Great Britain and the Isle of Anglesey). Northern Ireland has a 1,600-millimeter gauge network which forms part of the Irish rail network. There is no connection between those and the network within Britain (where the Class 66s in question operate)... —Sladen (talk) 14:13, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian JT42CWRM[edit]

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2009/05/9601/commissioning_of_egyptian_jt42cwrm_begins.html Think this article needs a bit of re-write to fit these in, not for Europe and not for freight use! 195.152.136.101 (talk) 12:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC) oops, just seen the Egyption information in the article, still needs a bit or re-writing 195.152.136.101 (talk) 12:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology Change?[edit]

While reading through on websites, shouldn't EMD 66 Series be renamed as EMD JT42CWR? It's not an official designation from EMD and throughout it's company history all export locomotives have been referred with model designations.

66 Series only refers to the TOPS Classification, whereas there are three (soon four) versions of the locomotive:

JT42CWR
JT42CWR-T1
JT42CWRM

(talk) 22:05, 31 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We tend to use common names, see Wikipedia:COMMONNAME#Common_names

What is T1 - nothing to do with Tier 1 ??? Sf5xeplus (talk) 05:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Polish freghtliner locomotives[edit]

removed "custom built to polish requirements" - if it is true please reference with details, (corporate 'stuff' may not count) ThanksSf5xeplus (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ETCS eqipment[edit]

diff

Reliable references please, and also removed the list of locos .. the locos equipped may change over time (increase), also may not be suitable - perhaps as a note, if referenced.Sf5xeplus (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on EMD Class 66. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on EMD Class 66. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:40, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prime mover in infobox[edit]

An IP user insists on modifying the reference to the "prime mover" in the infobox. I consider this modification confusing, over-complicated and thus difficult to maintain, needless, and useless. I therefore reverted it but it was re-reverted. I invite all and sundry, but most of all the IP user at the root of this point, to offer comments, possibly justifying this modification. Jan olieslagers (talk) 15:04, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The IP editor hasn't "modified a reference". They've added a wikilink to Diesel multiple unit. But there's already a wikilink to there, further up in the infobox. Wikipedia policy is against repetitions of wikilinks. So I support your reversion. Maproom (talk) 15:55, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the added wikilink is to Electro-Motive Diesel rather than to Diesel Multiple Unit but that changes nothing to your argument of course. Thanks! Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:55, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This? Yes, they're doing it everywhere. I'm against it and would support a bulk revert. It places two different wls next to each other, which is poor navigational design. Also adjacent links for EMD and a specific EMD engine aren't adding anything useful. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:08, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for support, Andy. Yes, I saw similar things elsewhere. I would be all in favour of a bulk revert, however I think this will be little use as long as the IP has not been blocked. Besides, I have no beginning of an idea of how to do a bulk revert, I must leave that to the more versed. Jan olieslagers (talk) 17:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]