• 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

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
15,484
Location
Bristol
I'm a bit puzzled as to why they are pathed as diesel... surely the point of these locos is that they can draw lots of power from the wires to keep going up the bank at a decent speed?
If there was no power (and one stalled) then there would be no electric trains for them to hold up anyway...
I'd guess a mix of 2 reasons - Most likely is that there simply isn't a suitable electric timing load. The other is that timing it as diesel gives them a bit of slack against timing it as an 86/90 or 92.

Remember the RTT 'Pathed As' field is the NR 'timing load' for planning purposes. Many (most) timing loads do not have timings in the database for all routes and stopping combinations. It is not always a specific description of the individual train's formation. There are many reasons why a train (particularly a train hauled by a loco not (yet) in regular service) would need to use a timing load quite different from the actual traction being used.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,788
Location
Nottingham
I'm a bit puzzled as to why they are pathed as diesel... surely the point of these locos is that they can draw lots of power from the wires to keep going up the bank at a decent speed?
If there was no power (and one stalled) then there would be no electric trains for them to hold up anyway...
I assume it's because they are ffirst demonstrating achievable Tractive Effort, rather than power.

You would do power tests by measuring section running times with load up a long gradient, but I wouldn't expect NR to allow them to do those until they have demonstrated that the locomotive has the tractive effort to restart after coming to a halt on the steepest part of the line.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,704
I assume it's because they are first demonstrating achievable Tractive Effort, rather than power.

You would do power tests by measuring section running times with load up a long gradient, but I wouldn't expect NR to allow them to do those until they have demonstrated that the locomotive has the tractive effort to restart after coming to a halt on the steepest part of the line.
Correct.
The power doesn't matter if you can't use it.
 

themiller

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,251
Location
Cumbria, UK
I'm a bit puzzled as to why they are pathed as diesel... surely the point of these locos is that they can draw lots of power from the wires to keep going up the bank at a decent speed?
If there was no power (and one stalled) then there would be no electric trains for them to hold up anyway...
I can only assume that they’re testing ‘worst case scenario’! Come to a full stand on the steepest gradient then restart on diesel with or without boost from the battery. They may even contaminate the rail head to see what happens.
 

JKF

Member
Joined
29 May 2019
Messages
1,033
Is it odd though that all the 93s have been roaded from Portbury to Worksop, whereas the 99s were hauled on own wheels from Avonmouth ?

Incidentally were all the TPE Mk5As hauled on own wheels from Portbury ?
Presume the rolling stock owner is obviously responsible for arranging the movement of their assets from manufacturer to operating base.
I’m pretty sure all the 5As went out by rail, but there were some EMUs delivered later that went out by road. I think some of them were incomplete and were being finished off at the new factory in Wales.

Subsequent class 99 deliveries are supposed to be coming in to Portbury, the first two only went in through Avonmouth as they were delivered from Velim not Spain. Portbury has regular ferries coming in from Bilbao. It’s been said that the 99s coming into Portbury will also go out by rail - GBRF have drivers with route knowledge due to the steel traffic.
 

Rail Quest

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2023
Messages
543
Location
Warrington
93007 (leading) and 002 have been allocated on RailCam to 6Q09, reportedly double-heading. Does anyone know if both of them are under power? Just strikes me as a bit odd to have two of them on the run: extra weight if unpowered, and doubling performance if powered.
 

Rhysdabeast

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2020
Messages
3,059
Location
Crewe
93007 (leading) and 002 have been allocated on RailCam to 6Q09, reportedly double-heading. Does anyone know if both of them are under power? Just strikes me as a bit odd to have two of them on the run: extra weight if unpowered, and doubling performance if powered.
Saw them both on the independent lines, 93007 leading with 93002 tucked in behind, consist is 8 loaded NLU 29*** JNA's all loaded with ballast. They both had the pantographs down so at least one running on diesel power, couldn't really tell if both were powering though.
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,788
Location
Nottingham
93007 (leading) and 002 have been allocated on RailCam to 6Q09, reportedly double-heading. Does anyone know if both of them are under power? Just strikes me as a bit odd to have two of them on the run: extra weight if unpowered, and doubling performance if powered.
If I was managing a traction test for a new locomotive, I'd make sure that part of the load being hauled had a second locomotive dead in tow. So that when you reach the maximum test load and the leading loco fails to proceed, then you've got a spare in the consist that you can fire up and use as a banker to avoid blocking the WCML for the next six hours.
 

Rail Quest

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2023
Messages
543
Location
Warrington
Saw them both on the independent lines, 93007 leading with 93002 tucked in behind, consist is 8 loaded NLU 29*** JNA's all loaded with ballast. They both had the pantographs down so at least one running on diesel power, couldn't really tell if both were powering though.
Awesome thanks

If I was managing a traction test for a new locomotive, I'd make sure that part of the load being hauled had a second locomotive dead in tow. So that when you reach the maximum test load and the leading loco fails to proceed, then you've got a spare in the consist that you can fire up and use as a banker to avoid blocking the WCML for the next six hours.
Ahh yes that does make sense
 

Freightmaster

Verified Rep
Joined
7 Jul 2009
Messages
3,870
They both had the pantographs down so at least one running on diesel power, couldn't really tell if both were powering though.

Just watched 6Q09 passing Freightmaster HQ (Bolton-le-Sands) and 93007 was definitely 'pan up' with 002 dead in tow.




MARK
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,788
Location
Nottingham
These are the wagons https://www.greenbrier-europe.com/2022/10/07/jna-uk-429-m³-4-axle-open-box-wagon/ from the website it states the Axle load is 22.5 t / axle
Thank you. So if those wagons are fully loaded, that's 90t each. So a total load of 8 x 90t + 86t = 806t.


So it appears loaded tests are beginning tomorrow.

Northbound, I see 6Q09 passed Oxenholme at 0039h (+15s) and Shap Summit at 0108h, taking 29m to do so. Can't tell if it paused at Tebay.

Southbound, running as 6Q42 it got from Penrith North Lakes to Shap Summit in precisely 19 minutes, without looping at Eden Valley. How do those figures compare to 66s hauling similar trailing loads?



== == == ==
EDIT:
The runs on Thursday are pathed as 1600t trailing load:


 
Last edited:

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
4,138
Looks like they are going from Wembley to Birmingham & back tomorrow (weds) so will they be heading from wembley up to basford hall at dinner point during the day on Thursday?
 

Suraggu

Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
1,031
Location
The Far North
Looks like they are going from Wembley to Birmingham & back tomorrow (weds) so will they be heading from wembley up to basford hall at dinner point during the day on Thursday?
It’s been stated on a FB group 93002/007/010 are for loaded testing on the WCML North.

93001 is running around light engine this week with it heading to Kings Cross, Ipswich & Wembley tonight and then associated moves in the West Midlands.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Thank you. So if those wagons are fully loaded, that's 90t each. So a total load of 8 x 90t + 86t = 806t.



Northbound, I see 6Q09 passed Oxenholme at 0039h (+15s) and Shap Summit at 0108h, taking 29m to do so. Can't tell if it paused at Tebay.

Southbound, running as 6Q42 it got from Penrith North Lakes to Shap Summit in precisely 19 minutes, without looping at Eden Valley. How do those figures compare to 66s hauling similar trailing loads?



== == == ==
EDIT:
The runs on Thursday are pathed as 1600t trailing load:


Words from ROG’s CEO posted on LinkedIn regarding 6Q09’s performance last night:

From a standing start at Tebay, 93007 easily attained 60mph on the climb in the Down direction. This despite a greasy railhead and rainy conditions. No issues with the loco and all the testing completed in good order. Early indications are that the loco performed well in other modes also. Trailing load will now increase incrementally over the next two weeks, and varying power modes will be tested as we continue to learn exactly what these game-changing locomotives can do - this time from a freight perspective.
 
Last edited:

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,788
Location
Nottingham
Words from ROG’s CEO posted on LinkedIn regarding 6Q09’s performance last night:
That's great to hear.

The gradient from Tebay is 1.31% for 7km up to the summit. If the train weighed 806+86=892t, then 60mph (26.8m/s) demonstrates 892,000 x 9.8 x 1.31% x 26.8 = 3.045 MW delivered at the wheel.
 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,531
Location
Cambridge, UK
Words from ROG’s CEO posted on LinkedIn regarding 6Q09’s performance last night:

From a standing start at Tebay, 93007 easily attained 60mph on the climb in the Down direction. This despite a greasy railhead and rainy conditions. No issues with the loco and all the testing completed in good order. Early indications are that the loco performed well in other modes also. Trailing load will now increase incrementally over the next two weeks, and varying power modes will be tested as we continue to learn exactly what these game-changing locomotives can do - this time from a freight perspective.
Just to lift the total train weight up the 5 miles of 1 in 75 from Tebay to Shap Summit needs a tractive effort of about 120kN to overcome gravity (plus extra for train rolling resistance), versus the approx. 145kN theoretical TE (on dry rails presumably) at 60mph from the graph in post #1291. So on wet/greasy rails I think it's doing OK/as expected.

It'll be interesting to see how the heavier runs pan out.
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
4,138
93001 is running around light engine this week with it heading to Kings Cross, Ipswich & Wembley tonight and then associated moves in the West Midlands.
Looks like 001 is going from Wembley to Bristol & back on thursday.
 

Dood75

Member
Joined
8 May 2019
Messages
215
Tonights 6Q09 running with 93007 leading 93010 with 13 loaded ballast (as opposed to 8 last night)
 

cce

Member
Joined
10 May 2018
Messages
54

Suraggu

Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
1,031
Location
The Far North
This one?


Filton bank is quite steep and it's not electrified so should be interesting
No 93001 will be working the below light engine move as part of the class 93 testing:

 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,788
Location
Nottingham
So about 1340t total train weight and drizzle forecast, so maybe damp rails again.
Last night took 8 minutes from a standing start at Tebay to Shap Summit, compared to 1/4 minute less yesterday with less load.

Assuming full wagons, on a 1.31% gradient, that's a tractive effort of 1342x9.8x0.0131=172kN + friction.
If speed achieved was proportionately less at 58mph (26m/s), power = 172x26 = 4,400kW + wind resistance and friction.

EDIT:
On the 6Q42 return, Penrith to the summit took 18m45s, compared to 18m30s yesterday.
 
Last edited:

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
15,484
Location
Bristol
This one?


Filton bank is quite steep and it's not electrified so should be interesting
600t isn't that much though, 66s do fully loaded trains up Filton Bank regularly. Shame it's passing after midnight, I might have been tempted to ride out to Ashley Down if it was a more reasonable time.
 

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
5,561
600t isn't that much though, 66s do fully loaded trains up Filton Bank regularly. Shame it's passing after midnight, I might have been tempted to ride out to Ashley Down if it was a more reasonable time.
This isn’t the 93. The 93 will be light engine
 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,531
Location
Cambridge, UK
Last night took 8 minutes from a standing start at Tebay to Shap Summit, compared to 1/4 minute less yesterday with less load.

Assuming full wagons, on a 1.31% gradient, that's a tractive effort of 1342x9.8x0.0131=172kN + friction.
If speed achieved was proportionately less at 58mph (26m/s), power = 172x26 = 4,400kW + wind resistance and friction.

EDIT:
On the 6Q42 return, Penrith to the summit took 18m45s, compared to 18m30s yesterday.
So last night's runs were maybe just hitting the power-limited part of the tractive effort curve at the highest speed the train achieved on the climbs (the wagons limit the max speed to 60mph, so tonight's heavier runs should get the loco properly power-limited for longer periods on the climbs).

There's now a northbound 1800t timing load run on RTT for tomorrow - https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:R02252/2025-06-26/detailed
 
Last edited:

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,043
Location
South Staffordshire
The use of infrastructure vehicles as loaded test trains for the class 93 is very interesting and perhaps points to something I hadn't considered. A numbert of people have been speculating over the last couple of years as to what sort of trains ROG could deploy the 93s onto. Perhaps Network Rail infrastructure services are such a traffic and perhaps ROG could consider tendering for such steady work in the future, alongside the existing FOCs. Or possibly FOCs might consider leasing examples for such regular flows as Doncaster - Millerhill or Carlisle-Crewe.

Obviously electricity from the OLE ie regarded as expensive at the moment, but if Iran were to block the straights of Hormuz and seriously elevate the price of crude oil, then global oil / diesel prices could go through the roof, and AC traction become more acceptable.

Who knows
 

Top