Caledonian Sleeper Class 92's

[wallan]

Thank you, Kind Sir. (I didn't realize that it was going to the Chunnel & therefore empty wagons
........)

The number of years this service has operated it,s a pity a Return Load could not be arranged

 

[TimboM]

The number of years this service has operated it,s a pity a Return Load could not be arranged

All the empty bottles have to get back somehow, though?!

 

[delticdave]

All the empty bottles have to get back somehow, though?!

Are said bottles glass or plastic?

Glass bottles could be reused in France or recycled in the UK, not so sure re. plastic bottles though.

 

[TimboM]

I was only joking... it's Evian if I recall correctly, so almost certainly plastic bottles that will (hopefully) end up in the end (UK) consumers' recycling boxes.

They are empty vans going back to France as far as I know. I guess it would need to be some high volume product that could go from Daventry to wherever it originates in France. It's also pretty much a daily flow, so there'd be the re-loading time to consider.

 

[Murray J]

I personally don't see the similarity to the other examples mentioned - 68s, 47s and 57s are all mixed-traffic locos. Class 92s are purpose built freight and sleeper locos. They also all belong to GB Railfreight to use as necessary to fulfil the contracts they have (compare that to, say, the TPE-liveried 68s which are sub-leased to TPE, or the 57s which were Virgin Trains' locos).

The colour of the paint on the outside doesn't change the fact it's a 6,700hp Co-Co freight machine owned by a Freight Operating Company. When it comes to hauling freight on Network Rail, the CS, GBRf and grey one(s) are all the same animal.

firstly, yes that was the photo I was referring to. and for your second point, I was more referring to the fact the locos are more commonly used for passenger work, and 92s surely are mixed-traffic, as they were designed for both passenger (albeit sleeper) and freight work? But yes, I do see your point.

 

[43096]

Yes, that’s about right. GB on the whole try and come up with pool codes that make sense, eg GBTG for the 60s, GBDF for the 47s.

Some (esp with other operators) are more random on the face of it at least. The DB 92s operational in the UK are WFBC for example.

GBYH for 59003 “Yeoman Highlander”.

There is logic to the DB system too...

 

[The Bear]

The ten 92s modified for the Sleeper very rarely haul freight these days - they're pretty much exclusively used on the Beds and all 10 are typically needed. Also, the two freight workings GB used to use 92s on regularly - Gartson-Dagenham STVA and 6S94 china clays to Irvine have now gone over to DRS (STVA) and 66s via Settle & Carlisle (china clays).

The two freight/tunnel-only ones (032/044) work regularly out of Dollands Moor hauling freight through the tunnel and up HS1; although with both going through Brush for overhaul, it's just been the one of the two GBCT 92s in action for several months now.

A path still exists for 6S94 to go WCML via Shap but with GBRF's 92s all tied up on the beds, on Chunnel work & the inability during the daytime to accommodate heavy diesel hauled class6 freights north of Preston is probably the reason for its pathing via The Drag.
When GBRF first took over 6S94, until the Sleeper Contract started the train went WCML with 92s.

If that were a CS liveried example on the front, it would be a modern-day equivalent of when Virgin 57s used to haul the Chirk logs in terms of a passenger loco hauling freight.

The 57/3 were hired by Colas where as a CS liveried loco is really a GBRF loco on a GBRF train.

Another equivalent to that is TPE 68s being used on engineering trains, and sometimes used on intermodals with Chiltern liveried examples.

The working I think you maybe referring to was 4S44 Daventry-Mossend Russell group Intermodal hauled by a TPE 68 & a Chiltern 68. The date escapes me but the pair were a substitution at Crewe for a failed class88 & were ripped at Kingmoor as one or both 68s were required at for exam.

firstly, yes that was the photo I was referring to. and for your second point, I was more referring to the fact the locos are more commonly used for passenger work, and 92s surely are mixed-traffic, as they were designed for both passenger (albeit sleeper) and freight work? But yes, I do see your point.

68 are also mixed-traffic as DRS use theirs on freights, as Tim has said before same beast, different livery.

 

[Richard Scott]

Know it's off topic but why don't DRS use 88s on 6S94 if path exists on WCML? Didn't think they were massively over utilised at the best of times?

 

[ScottDarg]

Know it's off topic but why don't DRS use 88s on 6S94 if path exists on WCML? Didn't think they were massively over utilised at the best of times?

DRS would need to win the contract first - it's currently with GBRf.

 

[Richard Scott]

DRS would need to win the contract first - it's currently with GBRf.

Ok, I misread that then, had read it as being with DRS. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[gsnedders]

The colour of the paint on the outside doesn't change the fact it's a 6,700hp Co-Co freight machine owned by a Freight Operating Company. When it comes to hauling freight on Network Rail, the CS, GBRf and grey one(s) are all the same animal.

And when it comes to the sleeper, it's only the contract with CS that means they favour the CS-liveried ones of the ones in the sleeper-compatible pool.

 

[Murray J]

The 57/3 were hired by Colas where as a CS liveried loco is really a GBRF loco on a GBRF train.

68 are also mixed-traffic as DRS use theirs on freights, as Tim has said before same beast, different livery.

Ah I see what you mean, ok.

 

[wallan]

I was only joking... it's Evian if I recall correctly, so almost certainly plastic bottles that will (hopefully) end up in the end (UK) consumers' recycling boxes.

They are empty vans going back to France as far as I know. I guess it would need to be some high volume product that could go from Daventry to wherever it originates in France. It's also pretty much a daily flow, so there'd be the re-loading time to consider.

All you would need is a Load / Part Load to cover the cost of the return journey , this is what a Road Haulier would do

 

[The Bear]

Know it's off topic but why don't DRS use 88s on 6S94 if path exists on WCML? Didn't think they were massively over utilised at the best of times?

DRS would need to win the contract first - it's currently with GBRf.

A class88 has actually hauled 6S94, although only a short distance....
15/4/2017; 92032 with 66727 DITL failed halfway out of Grayrigg loop with 88002 stood en-block on a light engine test run. Eventually 88002 was attached to the rear of 6S94 to drag it back into the loop to clear the line.

 

[TimboM]

A path still exists for 6S94 to go WCML via Shap but with GBRF's 92s all tied up on the beds, on Chunnel work & the inability during the daytime to accommodate heavy diesel hauled class6 freights north of Preston is probably the reason for its pathing via The Drag.
When GBRF first took over 6S94, until the Sleeper Contract started the train went WCML with 92s.

GB took over the china clays at the start of 2017, already well into the Sleeper contract and at the time the 92s were returning from their enforced absence for reliability mods. The introduction of the Mk5s has impacted availability, though, as has to be 92s on the Beds now (including the 2x ECS turns at each end).

That said, if the regular borrowing by DB of the GB 92 at the tunnel is discounted, other than the china clays and the odd unit or tamper delivery, there aren't any other GB flows through the tunnel currently. So in theory the 92 there could go on a jolly to Carlisle and back now and again.

As well as the Mk5s needing 92s, I believe the S&C path is cheaper and also NR (and GB's accountants) would get sweaty palms about the 92s hauling 1,900 tonnes up Shap when any slight delay has Avanti and TPE units queueing up behind it in no time. They also ended up with the 66 topping them from Dollands to Wembley due to coming to grief too many times in London at rush hour.

All in all, just got to the point where it was easier/cheaper/less hassle to operate it with a 66 throughout (sadly).

A class88 has actually hauled 6S94, although only a short distance....
15/4/2017; 92032 with 66727 DITL failed halfway out of Grayrigg loop with 88002 stood en-block on a light engine test run. Eventually 88002 was attached to the rear of 6S94 to drag it back into the loop to clear the line.

92032 slipped to a stand that day coming out of the loop. Carlisle Box were quite good at looping 6S94 at the bottom of the steep hill at Grayrigg or Tebay and then being surprised when it was a struggle to get going again. Happened with 92028 too, although the 66 was fired up on that occasion and helped get the train to Shap summit where it was looped and 92028 was then back in business.

After that they'd hold it at Carnforth (if they remembered...) to ensure it had a clear run. It was the fretting and faffing like that which helped send it S&C in the end, although interestingly the 66/7s have failed going that way a few times too.

And when it comes to the sleeper, it's only the contract with CS that means they favour the CS-liveried ones of the ones in the sleeper-compatible pool.

Whichever 92s are healthy are the ones that are favoured! 020, 028 and 043 have been regular performers recently - some nights during lockdown it was exclusively gold and blue 92s on the Class 1s.

There is a contractual requirement to have 80% of the trains hauled by CS-liveried locos, however I expect any penalties linked to that are far less severe than cancelled or delayed services. In fact, I wouldn't be that surprised if that requirement was waived a while back. Interestingly, 92020 was brought back specifically for the Sleeper, but was painted in GBRf colours.

 

[BRX]

Here's a CS liveried 92 working the China Clay empties... back in 2017.

 

[DB]

There is a contractual requirement to have 80% of the trains hauled by CS-liveried locos

If the diesel-hauled sections are counted as separate trains for this purpose, that alone will push the percentages well up as the suitable locos are all in CS livery!

 

[55002]

CS liveried 92006 is in Crewe now out on test run to Preston and back 0Z92 someone said first time ran under its own power in 15 years.. is that correct?

 

[TimboM]

CS liveried 92006 is in Crewe now out on test run to Preston and back 0Z92 someone said first time ran under its own power in 15 years.. is that correct?

No, it’s absolute garbage and I’ve corrected the note on RailCam. Not sure why people feel the need to add notes on there when they’re clearly bereft of the facts.

92006 was stored Feb 2006, reinstated by GBRf in July 2019 and has been active in the Sleeper pool since then. It’s been at Crewe ETD for repairs since December and on test runs to Preston and back today.

If all goes well, it’ll return to Sleeper duties later in the week.

 

[55002]

No, it’s absolute garbage and I’ve corrected the note on RailCam. Not sure why people feel the need to add notes on there when they’re clearly bereft of the facts.

92006 was stored Feb 2006, reinstated by GBRf in July 2019 and has been active in the Sleeper pool since then. It’s been at Crewe ETD for repairs since December and on test runs to Preston and back today.

If all goes well, it’ll return to Sleeper duties later in the week.

Cheers I thought that must be completely wrong..but was in store for 13 years though?

 

[TimboM]

Cheers I thought that must be completely wrong..but was in store for 13 years though?

Yes - GBRf bought back two additional 92s from long-term store to support the Sleeper contract.

92006 in July 2019 after 13 years in the wilderness and 92020 reinstated in December 2018 after almost 18 years in store - has to be one of the most "miraculous" comebacks in modern times, particularly when considering these aren't the easiest and cheapest locos to get working.

92006 has had a few glitches recently that required ironing out at Crewe ETD, however 92020 (touchwood) is one of the top performers on the Beds at the moment and not far off 200 main 'trunk' runs since its reinstatement.