• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Class 93 Tri-mode Loco

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,467
Location
Cambridge, UK
between 1:100 and 1:85 rising from Acton Main Line to Acton Wells Jn, for about 450m. https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/linefiles/route/?ELR=AWL
Assuming a 4000t jumbo train is split into 3 sections they will each be around 1300 tonnes which will be an interesting weight for a 93 to handle. Easy probably under 25kV.
Ignoring other rolling resistance factors, on a 1% gradient, the fraction of a 1300 tonne (plus loco) train weight force that has to be lifted up the gradient is only 14 tonnes, which is around 140 kN of tractive effort. According to the tractive effort curves in post #243, that's only about half the low-speed TE of a cl. 93, so it ought to be no real problem (and that's true on battery + diesel or OHLE). Using OHLE power just means you can climb it faster e.g. roughly 60 mph instead of 15-20 mph.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,674
Ignoring other rolling resistance factors, on a 1% gradient, the fraction of a 1300 tonne (plus loco) train weight force that has to be lifted up the gradient is only 14 tonnes, which is around 140 kN of tractive effort. According to the tractive effort curves in post #243, that's only about half the low-speed TE of a cl. 93, so it ought to be no real problem (and that's true on battery + diesel or OHLE). Using OHLE power just means you can climb it faster e.g. roughly 60 mph instead of 15-20 mph.
Jumbos are split in 2 rather than 3
Hanwell - Dagenham portions are normally 18 wagons hence just the total (loco + loaded wagons) gravity portion of the resistance is 218kN (75.1% of available low speed TE from 0-3mph on diesel, 0-30.5mph on OHLE), leaving just 72kN for all the rest.
The balancing speed (excluding non gravity resistances) for diesel TE vs gravity resistance is ~4.5mph i.e. no good unless the battery is available too.

The rolling /starting resistance has been left out of everyone's back of the envelope calcs so far, which makes everything worse.
It will need the ability to restart on the bank (with higher starting resistance), hence OHLE is the way to go here.
 

bahnause

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
696
Location
bülach (switzerland)
Ignoring other rolling resistance factors, on a 1% gradient, the fraction of a 1300 tonne (plus loco) train weight force that has to be lifted up the gradient is only 14 tonnes, which is around 140 kN of tractive effort.
On the continent, 1500-1600 tons are generally specified as the maximum load for four-axle AC locomotives with a 1% (relevant not maximal) gradient. The value depends on the TOC operating the type. This means that a train can usually be started even in poor conditions.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,674
#Is that right? The graph in post #243 suggests that the maximum tractive effort on diesel+battery is available up to around 10mph
yes - but I didn't state anything about "diesel and battery" just plain diesel.
Max TE on Diesel and Battery should be available up to ~9.25mph.

The have also been problems reported further up the thread on the default programming of the locomotive trying to use diesel power to charge the battery at inopportune moments.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
12,212
I guessed the ROG 93s would be based at DRS Crewe due to similarity with 68/88s. Straight down the WCML.

There's also that Leicester depot being built but that's for GBRf 99s.
The new building at Leicester is a Stadler facility. The depot as a whole will continue to be owned/operated by UKRL and won’t be exclusive to GBRf.
 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,467
Location
Cambridge, UK
Jumbos are split in 2 rather than 3
Hanwell - Dagenham portions are normally 18 wagons hence just the total (loco + loaded wagons) gravity portion of the resistance is 218kN (75.1% of available low speed TE from 0-3mph on diesel, 0-30.5mph on OHLE), leaving just 72kN for all the rest.
The balancing speed (excluding non gravity resistances) for diesel TE vs gravity resistance is ~4.5mph i.e. no good unless the battery is available too.

The rolling /starting resistance has been left out of everyone's back of the envelope calcs so far, which makes everything worse.
It will need the ability to restart on the bank (with higher starting resistance), hence OHLE is the way to go here.
Thanks for the info.

(Anyone) Off topic, out of interest, currently does the (cl. 59 ?) loco that hauled the Jumbo train from the West Country take the front portion forward (and another 'local' one take the rear portion), or is it double-headed 59s and/or 66s from the West Country to Hanwell which are then split up to handle each portion?
 
Last edited:

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
7,767
Location
Croydon
Not sure it's been mentioned, but in relation to passenger running the ORR have authorised 93s to run up to 110mph: https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/defaul...e-speed-increase-authorisation-2025-04-15.pdf
Not sure of the specifics, but authorisation wouldn't be sought if there wasn't at least some business potential to it.
Interesting, tanks.

The maximum speed of the Mk5A is 125mph so a 110mph loco would cover a lot of uses ?.
Not just your average freight train but freight probably still a significant use.
 

Bobcp

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2016
Messages
33
Location
Hinckley, Leicester
No

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==



Update at 11:40 on 22/05/24 post has been merged
93005 currently on route to Bilbao for onward transport to Uk.
Vehicle carrier M/V Auto Eco docked at Portbury early this morning (27th).
Vessel departed Vigo on the north west Atlantic coast of Spain on Saturday evening (24th).
Could this be the ship conveying 93005 given the reported sighting of the loco in the Bilbao area a few days earlier?
 

bahnause

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
696
Location
bülach (switzerland)
The have also been problems reported further up the thread on the default programming of the locomotive trying to use diesel power to charge the battery at inopportune moments.
As locomotives do not come with a crystal ball that can predict the future, automation should always be treated with caution. Fortunately, there is a qualified employee on every locomotive who can intervene if necessary.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,674
As locomotives do not come with a crystal ball that can predict the future, automation should always be treated with caution. Fortunately, there is a qualified employee on every locomotive who can intervene if necessary.
Agreed, but whether the driver could win an argument with the Stadler software as it was at that point in time is another matter!
The software probably needs less automation and/or more sophistication e.g. if the driver is applying full power on diesel then the locomotive shouldn't be trying to charge the battery from "diesel" at the same time so only half the total diesel power is available for traction. :frown:
Hopefully the software has been updated but sometimes things can only be learnt the hard way...
 

bahnause

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
696
Location
bülach (switzerland)
Agreed, but whether the driver could win an argument with the Stadler software as it was at that point in time is another matter!
The software probably needs less automation and/or more sophistication e.g. if the driver is applying full power on diesel then the locomotive shouldn't be trying to charge the battery from "diesel" at the same time so only half the total diesel power is available for traction. :frown:
Hopefully the software has been updated but sometimes things can only be learnt the hard way...
I don't have any specific information on how the software behaves. So far I can only see assumptions. Generally speaking, the TOC gets what it orders. The tractionI know of all have a manual mode to influence the battery charge accordingly, even if this is not usually necessary. And this is not the only automatic mode on a locomotive that I can override manually.
 

themiller

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,237
Location
Cumbria, UK

BlueLeanie

Member
Joined
21 Jul 2023
Messages
522
Location
Haddenham
Agreed, but whether the driver could win an argument with the Stadler software as it was at that point in time is another matter!
The software probably needs less automation and/or more sophistication e.g. if the driver is applying full power on diesel then the locomotive shouldn't be trying to charge the battery from "diesel" at the same time so only half the total diesel power is available for traction. :frown:
Hopefully the software has been updated but sometimes things can only be learnt the hard way...
Is there really just a single recharge setting for the battery? Seems very inflexible to have 50% or nothing.
 

Rail Quest

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2023
Messages
528
Location
Warrington
I've just noticed the below moves on RTT scheduled for tomorrow: a light loco return trip from Workshop to Retford running with 0Q** headcodes. Could this be a 93 run?

[Links direct to Realtime Trains pages for light loco moves from Worksop to Retford and return]
 

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
5,430
I've just noticed the below moves on RTT scheduled for tomorrow: a light loco return trip from Workshop to Retford running with 0Q** headcodes. Could this be a 93 run?

[Links direct to Realtime Trains pages for light loco moves from Worksop to Retford and return]
Wonder wether it’s a shake down run for one of two of the new arrivals
 

ic31420

Member
Joined
23 Aug 2017
Messages
337
yes - but I didn't state anything about "diesel and battery" just plain diesel.
Max TE on Diesel and Battery should be available up to ~9.25mph.

The have also been problems reported further up the thread on the default programming of the locomotive trying to use diesel power to charge the battery at inopportune moments.

it sounds pretty simple doesn't it, but the reality is that it isnt. I think essentially F1 has had some of the same issues with drivers complaining of clipping (where engine power is diverted to charge the battery) at inopportune moments. And that's on a track with a known layout where they can pretty much map into the software what's needed.

With a locomotive you have a bit of a dilemma, how you deploy the battery, do you burn it up all at once pulling away using 100% battery before bringing the diesel in, but that of course limited total power.

What about charging? Do you charge to 100% using diesel at the first opportunity? doesnt sound very green, or do you wait until you can charge regeneratively? Nice and green, but not very useful if you have just used the battery energy, have a period coasting then could do with max power to get up a hill/ to mainline speed.


Using Wiki figures the dirty diesel engine outputs 1200hp and the battery a max of 540hp

Say for example it pulls away and 1600hp is demanded from the Various power sources. Does the battery give out say it's full output and the engine tops up? Is the demand shared more equally (less green)?

Then when train is underway at at a modest line speed the battery is say 50% depleted.

What then happens when the power demand reduces say to 1000hp?

Does the engine still run at 1200hp and pump 200hp back into the battery? That's great for the next time you need the umph, say when theine speed increased 40mph -75mph, but not so good for being green and recovering waste energy when you need to brake.

Does the computer manage all this or can the driver have a say? say for example having pulled away and now running at line speed reduces traction demand to 800hp he knows it's unlikely he'll need to brake and need the battery capacity for energy recovery, but does know there is a big hill a few miles down the road for which a fully charged battery would be useful for. Can he then override the system, run the engine up to 1200hp and charge the battery?

*yes of course there will be losses but you get my gist.

The possibilities and scenarios are endless. The problem with putting the human in the chair incharge is that they may not understand how to get the best out of the system, may not judge it well. Or may have different ideas and objectives, for example they may enjoy the power and performance of a fully charged battery and care little for the green credentials and fuel costs.

There is no perfect answer I don't think
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,010
Location
South Staffordshire
it sounds pretty simple doesn't it, but the reality is that it isnt. I think essentially F1 has had some of the same issues with drivers complaining of clipping (where engine power is diverted to charge the battery) at inopportune moments. And that's on a track with a known layout where they can pretty much map into the software what's needed.

With a locomotive you have a bit of a dilemma, how you deploy the battery, do you burn it up all at once pulling away using 100% battery before bringing the diesel in, but that of course limited total power.

What about charging? Do you charge to 100% using diesel at the first opportunity? doesnt sound very green, or do you wait until you can charge regeneratively? Nice and green, but not very useful if you have just used the battery energy, have a period coasting then could do with max power to get up a hill/ to mainline speed.


Using Wiki figures the dirty diesel engine outputs 1200hp and the battery a max of 540hp

Say for example it pulls away and 1600hp is demanded from the Various power sources. Does the battery give out say it's full output and the engine tops up? Is the demand shared more equally (less green)?

Then when train is underway at at a modest line speed the battery is say 50% depleted.

What then happens when the power demand reduces say to 1000hp?

Does the engine still run at 1200hp and pump 200hp back into the battery? That's great for the next time you need the umph, say when theine speed increased 40mph -75mph, but not so good for being green and recovering waste energy when you need to brake.

Does the computer manage all this or can the driver have a say? say for example having pulled away and now running at line speed reduces traction demand to 800hp he knows it's unlikely he'll need to brake and need the battery capacity for energy recovery, but does know there is a big hill a few miles down the road for which a fully charged battery would be useful for. Can he then override the system, run the engine up to 1200hp and charge the battery?

*yes of course there will be losses but you get my gist.

The possibilities and scenarios are endless. The problem with putting the human in the chair incharge is that they may not understand how to get the best out of the system, may not judge it well. Or may have different ideas and objectives, for example they may enjoy the power and performance of a fully charged battery and care little for the green credentials and fuel costs.

There is no perfect answer I don't think
I have no idea about rechargeable traction batteries so cannot really comment, but I really doubt Stadler with their reputation to uphold, would install a battery traction package into a commercial locomotive design, unless it was proven, and I am further guessing the design was tried and tested at the factory and at the Velim test track.

I will also suggest that the system will be robust enough that the train drivers will have no doubt at all how the system works. I also suggest that getting the train away from a stand would involve the driver using the traction controlled diesel power, which would probably feed some battery power as it felt needed. I will say though, that normally, at each successive turn of the wheels the motors require a little less energy, so perhaps the traction system chooses to ramp down the demand from the battery after maybe only 3-4 mph, and let the diesel do the heavy lifting.
 

bahnause

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
696
Location
bülach (switzerland)
Does the computer manage all this or can the driver have a say? say for example having pulled away and now running at line speed reduces traction demand to 800hp he knows it's unlikely he'll need to brake and need the battery capacity for energy recovery, but does know there is a big hill a few miles down the road for which a fully charged battery would be useful for. Can he then override the system, run the engine up to 1200hp and charge the battery?
It is always important to utilise resources in a goal-oriented manner. And one of the most important, flexible and experienced resources is the driver. Many of our projects in connection with optimising rail operations in recent years have included a proportion of calculations performed by more or less intelligent algorithms. Hardly any of them involve automation at the users end. The aim is to provide the driver/signaller with the important information at the right time and in the appropriate way. I well remember that some employees with little experience of day-to-day operations were amazed at how precisely and efficiently a driver can drive a train on the target line of a timetable if you just let him. You don't always have to give him an exact target speed. A time when it should reach point X is sufficient. He can then utilise his knowledge of the terrain to reach this destination as efficiently as possible. The same will presumably also apply to the operation of such a locomotive. The train driver knows the lione and his planned driving strategy, so he can also utilise the system accordingly.
 

Suraggu

Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
1,010
Location
The Far North
I've just noticed the below moves on RTT scheduled for tomorrow: a light loco return trip from Workshop to Retford running with 0Q** headcodes. Could this be a 93 run?

[Links direct to Realtime Trains pages for light loco moves from Worksop to Retford and return]
93001 & 93002 allocated according to the black box.
 
Last edited:

Rail Quest

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2023
Messages
528
Location
Warrington
It looks to have departed, with Railcam allocations also reporting 001/002. This must be the first move for the locos in a couple of months, right? Perhaps this is in advance of the mainline loaded Shap tests that were scheduled for a few weeks back.
 

Top