Interesting, thank you. I have in my notes that the class 92 was fitted with 6FRA7059B traction motors, and the 68 is fitted with 4FRA6063 motors. I can't find the source, so I'm willing to be corrected.All are ABB AMXL 400 (as 68 and 88). The model number denotes ASEA / Swedish / Vasteras heritage. The numbering system is based ASEA industrial drive numbering (AML series) with 1xx is >~250kW with increments of 250kW stepping up a hundred so 4xx demotes >= ~1MW
4FRA / 6FRA are models based on the Brown-Boveri Swiss (Zurich) / German (Mannheim) numbering e.g. 4 = 4pole, 6 = 6pole, FRA = Frame mounted rigid axle linkage, FIA = Frame mounted with Independent Axles linkage, FHA = FRA with additional height clearance, FXA = FRA with eXtra additional height clearance (e.g. for India). There is still significant linkage between Bombardier (now Alstom) locomotives and the Brown-Boveri Swiss /German heritage for example the Alstom/Bombardier Traxx MS3 and recent AC3 locomotives have 6FIA series motors.
It swapped modes at Preston where in made an unscheduled (according to the path) stop.It was pathed from Crewe to Carnforth as a diesel, then as an electric.
Crewe Coal Yard to Winsford took 14.25 minutes for 6.7 miles - 28.21mph pass to pass average (I assume accelerating as hard as it could on diesel+battery, on level or very gentle downgrades), then the 43 miles from Winsford to Preston South Junction took 46 minutes - 56mph pass to pass average on a gently undulating route.It swapped modes at Preston where in made an unscheduled (according to the path) stop.
It swapped modes at Preston where in made an unscheduled (according to the path) stop.
Perhaps it therefore swapped early due to battery depletion. Diesel-only accelerating with 1800t in tow off the Preston speed limits must be painfully slow and would perhaps cause a delay.Crewe Coal Yard to Winsford took 14.25 minutes for 6.7 miles - 28.21mph pass to pass average (I assume accelerating as hard as it could on diesel+battery, on level or very gentle downgrades), then the 43 miles from Winsford to Preston South Junction took 46 minutes - 56mph pass to pass average on a gently undulating route.
So probably not bad for a roughly cl.37 equivalent.
6Q09 or 6Q42?Perhaps it therefore swapped early due to battery depletion. Diesel-only accelerating with 1800t in tow off the Preston speed limits must be painfully slow and would perhaps cause a delay.
Did you or anyone see how many wagons tonight?93 001/007 just left Basford Hall on battery power.
5 loaded JNA wagons and a 93 tucked inside. Both trips on Diesel/Battery.Did you or anyone see how many wagons tonight?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Tebay to Shap Summit in 15 1/2 minutes.
Thanks. So a trailing load of 5x90+86 = 536t and a total train weight of 622t, assuming full wagons.5 loaded JNA wagons and a 93 tucked inside. Both trips on Diesel/Battery.
Last night's 6Q09 took 15.5 minutes from Tebay to Shap Summit (as you said upthread) for 5.5 miles, which is 21.3 mph average. The 9.5m/s is correct, the 'mph' error is in the m/s to mph conversionTebay to the summit is 5m40ch (8.84km), giving an average speed of 8,840/930 = 9.5m/s (34mph)
Thanks. That'll teach me to use Google to do the maths!The 9.5m/s is correct, the 'mph' error is in the m/s to mph conversion
Not sure if many of you use LinkedIn, or if you can view without signing up but we’re been posting a few videos that might be of interest for you, some technical talk, some messages and plans from our CEO and Head of The project etc
Last night was another successful test, as you may have seen from some pictures, we ran diesel hybrid rather than with the Panto up, slightly less weight on but performed really well and were getting some great regenerative power figures on the brakes and coasting on the declines
More moves coming soon, will update you with some plans and where you’re likely to see them soon but have a look and follow Rail Operations Group on LinkedIn if you don’t already!
0Q26 - Thursday 11.40 Crewe - Worksop is 001/007/010 running together on the return leg from testing
So borrowing @Nottingham59's calculation method for that Wed 2nd/Thurs 3rd overnight run:The load was 16 low height Network Rail loaded ballast/spoil bogie boxes
93009 still outside the depot to view today.93009 now at junction 24 of the M1 for the night.
Today’s tests are between Worksop and Newark Northgate.93009 still outside the depot to view today.
There was another test run today with 94002 and 93003 to Retford. Just arrived back at Worksop.
Seen at Retford. Now history it's arrived back.Today’s tests are between Worksop and Newark Northgate.
Looks good.So borrowing @Nottingham59's calculation method for that Wed 2nd/Thurs 3rd overnight run:
A trailing load of 16*90+86 = 1526t and a total train weight of 1612t, assuming full wagons.
Tebay to the summit is 5m40ch (8.84km) and took 9.5 minutes (570s), giving an average speed of 8840/570 = 15.5m/s (34.7 mph), pass-to-pass.
Tractive effort is 1612*9.8*((1.31+0.1)/100) = 223kN if allowing 0.1% of train weight for rolling friction.
Power demonstrated was 223*15.5 = 3456kW, so in the high electric power range for a 93.
So a good test week, in terms of cl. 93 performance, I think.
Mearly stating the correct route the locos are working.Seen at Retford. Now history it's arrived back.
The words ‘game changing’ has been thrown around regarding the class 93’s and class 99’s respectively.Looks good.
Adding in wind resistance at 35mph, an HST-shaped trailing load would have consumed around 2640kW/4^3= 41kW. A rake of 16 JNA wagons with a distinctly unstreamlined top surface is likely to have been perhaps three times that. (I'm guessing here: does anyone have data for wind resistance of freight loads?) So a total demonstated power of perhaps 3,600 kW.
I'm sure ROG will be pleased. Will this mean that the Class 93 will be passed to haul 1500t trailing loads over Shap? Or does NR demand a safety margin?
That's what we needed to see.ROG have just posted this in can video of the 1800t trial from a standing start at Tebay over Shap
or mobile load banks, for that matter. They are what allow you to replicate a variable load, the dynamometer just measures the drawbar HP.Whatever happened to dynomometer coaches?
except that this is a good demo of what the loco can do on a gradient with curved track, so you get a feel for how sure-footed it is in addition to how much brute force is available.It would stop all this having to wander round the system looking for naughty bits of railway to use for testing.