• 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

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Roast Veg

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
2,270
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.
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.
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,787
Location
Nottingham
In last night's test, I see that 6Q09 passed Tebay at 0035, apparently without stopping, and got to the summit just ten minutes later at 0045. It was pathed from Crewe to Carnforth as a diesel, then as an electric.


The timing load last night had been changed to 1800t, but the load for tonight is still currently set to 2000t.

 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,530
Location
Cambridge, UK
It swapped modes at Preston where in made an unscheduled (according to the path) stop.
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.
 

Rail Quest

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2023
Messages
543
Location
Warrington
It swapped modes at Preston where in made an unscheduled (according to the path) stop.
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.
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.
 

Richard123

Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
67
Location
Rugby
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.
6Q09 or 6Q42?

6Q09 gained time all the way Crewe to near Shap where it changed over as planned?

6Q42 south to Crewe climbed Shap in diesel and stayed in diesel and kept time throughout?

Previous day lost time at Eden (planned changeover).

Must be looking at different trains to you...
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,787
Location
Nottingham
5 loaded JNA wagons and a 93 tucked inside. Both trips on Diesel/Battery.
Thanks. So a trailing load of 5x90+86 = 536t and a total train weight of 622t, assuming full wagons.

Tebay to the summit is 5m40ch (8.84km), giving an average speed of 8,840/930 = 9.5m/s (34 21mph)
Tractive effort is 622x9.8x(1.31+0.1)% = 86kN if allowing 0.1% of train weight for rolling friction.
Power demonstrated was 86x9.5 = 816kW, so close to the 900kW spec for 93 on diesel.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

EDIT:
Wind resistance at 21mph will have been small but not neglible. I don't have data for open wagons, but the world record for a 2x1320kW HST was 148mph. At a fifth seventh of that speed (21mph), an HST-shaped trailing load would have wind resistance of 2640/125 329 = 8kW, as wind resistance power varies as the cube of the speed. I'm guessing now, but a rake of 5 JNAs and a 93 with a less streamlined shape at 21mph might need two or three times that, so around 16-24kW. That makes the power delivered on diesel around 830-840kW.
 
Last edited:

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
5,557
The comment below are taken from the ‘Class 93 locomotive Group’ on Facebook

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
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,787
Location
Nottingham
Last night 6Q09 got from Tebay to Shap summit in 9 1/2 minutes, equivalent to 8840/570=15.5m/s (35mph)
The timings were based on a trailing load of 2000t. Does anyone know what the actual load was? Thanks.

 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,530
Location
Cambridge, UK
The load was 16 low height Network Rail loaded ballast/spoil bogie boxes
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.
 

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
5,557
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.
Today’s tests are between Worksop and Newark Northgate.
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,787
Location
Nottingham
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.
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: let's say a round 100kW. (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?
 
Last edited:

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
5,557
Seen at Retford. Now history it's arrived back.
Mearly stating the correct route the locos are working.
They should be leaving Worksop again at 13:07 as 0Q06 back to Newark, then 0Q07 back to Worksop.
 

Suraggu

Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
1,031
Location
The Far North
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?
The words ‘game changing’ has been thrown around regarding the class 93’s and class 99’s respectively.

ROG have just posted a video of the 1800t trial from a standing start at Tebay over Shap: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rail...=social_share_video_v2&utm_campaign=copy_link

Regardless if ROG have customers for them or not, the performance from these loaded trials has been quite something and is a selling point for these locos.

One of the top engineering bods at DB Cargo was on one of this weeks trials and posted publically on LinkedIn how impressive this Bo-Bo tri mode loco is, especially on AC with the boost mode.

Tim Shoveller has also posted publicly his interest regarding the class 93’s and its abilities.

Now these trials are seemingly complete and awaiting full type approval, who knows what’s next.
 
Last edited:

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,043
Location
South Staffordshire
Really pleased the Crewe Carlisle trials have gone well and the 93s are proving their capabilities. Just remember thought that it is now July and the rail head conditions are optimum for this. Will br interesting to compare in November.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,758
Whatever happened to dynomometer coaches?

It would stop all this having to wander round the system looking for naughty bits of railway to use for testing.
 

Nottingham59

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2019
Messages
2,787
Location
Nottingham
ROG have just posted this in can video of the 1800t trial from a standing start at Tebay over Shap
That's what we needed to see.

A trailing load of 1800t and a total train weight of 1886t.
Maximum speed: 39mph (17.43m/s), which I assume was achieved on the main gradient of 1.31%.

Tractive effort against gravity: 1886*9.8*1.31% = 242kN, plus
friction assuming 0.1% of train weight: 1886*9.8*0.1% = 18.5kN, plus
wind resistance = c.100kW/17 ~ 6kN

So total demonstrated tractive effort of around 266kN.

Power demonstrated was (242+18)*17.4 + 100 = 4624kW.
Given all the assumptions made, that's remarkably close to the specificed maximum power on AC in boost mode of 4600kW.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
6,050
Whatever happened to dynomometer coaches?
or mobile load banks, for that matter. They are what allow you to replicate a variable load, the dynamometer just measures the drawbar HP.
It would stop all this having to wander round the system looking for naughty bits of railway to use for testing.
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.
 

Top