Could a brand new diesel-electric locomotive be procured for GB in 2025?

[Yorkshire09876]

That makes more sense, thank you.

"Order > design > construction > testing > delivery" is a longer lead-time, than that for the scope of work done to the 69s.

New builds are likely to need overseas suppliers, who will be already be committing construction orders for other railways across other nations.

Even if the 69s are stop-gap, they have met GBRf's "need" far more quickly, than for a complete new build

mods note - split from this thread

GBRF confirms conversion of Class 56s to Class 69s

GBRF have today confirmed that they are going to convert sixteen class 56 loco prices into class 69s (chortle) by fitting them with EMD 12-710 engines! GB Railfreight (GBRf) has confirmed an order for 16 Class 69s that will be converted from Class 56s it bought last year. The locomotives will...

www.railforums.co.uk

That's not going to be the main reason, which will be that new 66s are no longer allowed because they don't meet current emissions standards, and there isn't enough space in the bodyshell to meet those.

There is currently no off-the-shelf diesel loco design available which does meet the requirements, and it seems to be regarded as very challenging to do so with a power output comparable to the EMD 12-710, within the confines of the UK loading gauge - and trying to get a manufacturer to design a loco which is compliant with the latest standards, for a very small order, would probably mean a very high cost per loco - especially as diesel-only locos are falling out of favour now. The hybrid Classes 99 and 93 have smaller engines, physically as well as in power output, which make it more practical.

Re-powers of older locos are expected to meet the same emissions standards as new ones if possible, but if it's not possible then exemptions can be granted to allow meeting one of the earlier targets, so long as the new engine is less polluting than the old one. And that is what has been done with the Class 69 - they are as close to a Tier-3a compliant Class 66 as possible, using the Class 56 bodyshell, bogies, traction motors and brake gear, with the EMD 12-710 engine, of the same variant as the latter builds of Class 66. This reuse of the Class 56 makes them a re-power rather than a new loco, and the exemption will have been granted on the basis that it's not possible to re-power them to be compliant with the latest standards due to the confined space within the bodyshell.

 

[BRX]

There is currently no off-the-shelf diesel loco design available which does meet the requirements, and it seems to be regarded as very challenging to do so with a power output comparable to the EMD 12-710, within the confines of the UK loading gauge - and trying to get a manufacturer to design a loco which is compliant with the latest standards, for a very small order, would probably mean a very high cost per loco - especially as diesel-only locos are falling out of favour now. The hybrid Classes 99 and 93 have smaller engines, physically as well as in power output, which make it more practical.

It seems that a class 66 can produce 2400kW of power and a class 99 can produce 1790kW on diesel. To me that suggests that if you put two of those class 99 diesel engines into one loco you'd have something much more powerful than a 66, and we know they can fit in the UK loading gauge because they fit in the 99. I'm assuming that because the 99 is primarily an electric loco, its diesel engine takes up less than 50% of the space within. Putting all this together, it would appear that an all-diesel loco, with at least the power of a 66, that will meet the latest standards, ought to be possible without major difficulties but there are probably all sorts of things I have no idea about - is that right?

 

[Rail Quest]

It seems that a class 66 can produce 2400kW of power and a class 99 can produce 1790kW on diesel. To me that suggests that if you put two of those class 99 diesel engines into one loco you'd have something much more powerful than a 66, and we know they can fit in the UK loading gauge because they fit in the 99. I'm assuming that because the 99 is primarily an electric loco, its diesel engine takes up less than 50% of the space within. Putting all this together, it would appear that an all-diesel loco, with at least the power of a 66, that will meet the latest standards, ought to be possible without major difficulties but there are probably all sorts of things I have no idea about - is that right?

Surely at that rate, such a loco could just be fitted with a single CAT C175-16 (the engine fitted to the 68s) which produces 2800kW? I'm assuming that engine still meets emissions regulations

 

[BRX]

Surely at that rate, such a loco could just be fitted with a single CAT C175-16 (the engine fitted to the 68s) which produces 2800kW? I'm assuming that engine still meets emissions regulations

68s are over ten years old - I don't think they meet current regulations.

 

[ac6000cw]

Surely at that rate, such a loco could just be fitted with a single CAT C175-16 (the engine fitted to the 68s) which produces 2800kW? I'm assuming that engine still meets emissions regulations

The version of the C175-16 that's in the 68's doesn't meet emissions rules for new builds, and I think (based on what's been said on this forum in the past) fitting the necessary SCR exhaust treatment equipment wouldn't be possible within the cl.68 bodyshell and/or weight limits.

 

[Rail Quest]

The version of the C175-16 that's in the 68's doesn't meet emissions rules for new builds, and I think (based on what's been said on this forum in the past) fitting the necessary SCR exhaust treatment equipment wouldn't be possible within the cl.68 bodyshell and/or weight limits.

Ahh OK fair enough. My hopes of a new diesel locomotive to grace the UK's railways with a thrashy engine note are dwindling by the day

 

[ac6000cw]

My hopes of a new diesel locomotive to grace the UK's railways with a thrashy engine note are dwindling by the day

The future is almost certainly more 'hybrid' locos like the 99 and 93. Other than rebuilds/re-powers like the 69s, I doubt we'll see any more new-build diesel-only freight locos in the UK.

 

[HSTEd]

Is there a pressing requirement for a new diesel electric locomotive?

The existing fleet appears perfectly adequate for the status quo, and the reductions in coal (and soon biomass) traffic has left a lot of surplus motive power.

I'd be really interested on what a CoCo battery locomotive with giant pile of batteries could do. Probably would only need a comparatively small transformer for 25kV charging.

 

[Rail Quest]

Is there a pressing requirement for a new diesel electric locomotive?

IMO, it may depend on two things:
1) How long will the class 66s last to the point that the FOCs would be looking to replace them
2) Can ALL of the moves that sheds currently run be replaced by battery/electric or dual mode diesels like the 99 by the time the sheds need replacing

If we don't have significant enough electrification or sufficient battery/electric or dual mode diesel alternatives in the next 20 years, perhaps the freight industry could start to see a problem with life expired locos struggling with no real way of replacing them. I imagine there will be good battery/electric alternatives in time but this is definitely a risk.

Perhaps a new diesel locomotive type with a larger engine compliant with the current emission standards could mitigate this risk. My thoughts immediately go to the likes of the 3000+ ton aggregate moves out of Whatley etc. and the 3000 ton Immingham to Kingsbury flows. These are just a few examples that might be a challenge for bi-modes.

 

[supervc-10]

Would an articulated bi-mode locomotive be worthwhile? 6 axles, one side being diesel, one side being electric/battery?

Still not 100% sure there's a need in the short-to-medium term though.

 

[Rail Quest]

Would an articulated bi-mode locomotive be worthwhile? 6 axles, one side being diesel, one side being electric/battery?

This is an interesting idea. Could something similar be achieved by running 68/88 locos in pairs, as an example?

 

[43096]

Would an articulated bi-mode locomotive be worthwhile? 6 axles, one side being diesel, one side being electric/battery?

So pretty much a Class 99, then? 6-axle electric loco with a diesel engine...

 

[Yorkshire09876]

It seems that a class 66 can produce 2400kW of power and a class 99 can produce 1790kW on diesel. To me that suggests that if you put two of those class 99 diesel engines into one loco you'd have something much more powerful than a 66, and we know they can fit in the UK loading gauge because they fit in the 99. I'm assuming that because the 99 is primarily an electric loco, its diesel engine takes up less than 50% of the space within. Putting all this together, it would appear that an all-diesel loco, with at least the power of a 66, that will meet the latest standards, ought to be possible without major difficulties but there are probably all sorts of things I have no idea about - is that right?

I believe all those Stadler locos (68, 88, 93, 99) have a DC-link transmission, fed from whichever power source is in use. That will account for most of the electric bits and would be needed whatever the power source. I doubt if the main bit needed for electric-only, the transformer, is of an equivalent size to a diesel engine.

 

[Meerkat]

If we don't have significant enough electrification or sufficient battery/electric or dual mode diesel alternatives in the next 20 years, perhaps the freight industry could start to see a problem with life expired locos struggling with no real way of replacing them. I imagine there will be good battery/electric alternatives in time but this is definitely a risk.

This is why the freight industry should be heavily lobbying the government and campaign groups to start building out enough electrification that the hybrid freight locos can cover everything!

 

[BRX]

I believe all those Stadler locos (68, 88, 93, 99) have a DC-link transmission, fed from whichever power source is in use. That will account for most of the electric bits and would be needed whatever the power source. I doubt if the main bit needed for electric-only, the transformer, is of an equivalent size to a diesel engine.

Here is a drawing of the innards of a class 88, from an article here:



And here is a drawing of the innards of a 93, from an article here:





I was surprised how small the "power pack" itself is, in both cases.

I've not managed to find something similar showing what happens inside a class 68 or 99.

 

[Rail Quest]

I was surprised how small the "power pack" itself is, in both cases.

The engine in the class 99 is definitely a lot larger based on this walkthrough video taken from 002 at Innotrans:

Whilst the access corridors (not sure of the technical term) for the 88/93 diagrams above remain in the centre of the vehicles for the full length, the access corridor for the 99 has to pitch to one side to get around the engine.

 

[Trainbike46]

IMO, it may depend on two things:
1) How long will the class 66s last to the point that the FOCs would be looking to replace them
2) Can ALL of the moves that sheds currently run be replaced by battery/electric or dual mode diesels like the 99 by the time the sheds need replacing

Is the replacement need for 66s even remotely in the near future? They are very far from the oldest locomotives around.

And even when the 66s start going, a significant part of their work could be replaced by 99s (and a smaller portion by 93s or fully electric locomotives). Then consider things like the massive reduction in bulk freight flows since 2010 (coal is gone), and coming soon (reduction in biomass flows to drax), and it seems unlikely there is a need for more diesel locomotives anytime soon.

 

[supervc-10]

So pretty much a Class 99, then? 6-axle electric loco with a diesel engine...

Pretty much, but my understanding was that the 99 was still somewhat limited on diesel power. I might be very wrong though! I was thinking about getting a 66 level of tractive effort off the wires. I think people have been saying over on the 99 thread that they're unsure if it'll manage that, but maybe I'm mixing up the 99 and 93!

My thinking was that as people have been saying that that it's tricky to get a powerful enough diesel engine and the emissions stuff and the electrical side of things into the UK loading gauge, and that maybe going longer would be the solution to that. Obviously can only go so long before route restrictions start to crop up hence my thinking of articulation.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Major heavy-haulers abroad use multiple smaller locos, often distributed through the train.
In South Africa, the electrified Sishen iron ore line uses additional diesel locos mid-train on the banks.

 

[furnessvale]

Is there a pressing requirement for a new diesel electric locomotive?

The existing fleet appears perfectly adequate for the status quo, and the reductions in coal (and soon biomass) traffic has left a lot of surplus motive power.

I'd be really interested on what a CoCo battery locomotive with giant pile of batteries could do. Probably would only need a comparatively small transformer for 25kV charging.

Worth looking at. In the worst case scenario, a double articulated unit, with one half full of batteries, would only loose one wagon off the payload.

 

[Snow1964]

The latest Stadler loco is EURO9000.
It has two 950kw (1274hp) diesels,
but on electric is 9000kw (hence its name) which is 12,070hp
20ton axle load
120km/h (74.6mph)

I suspect the smaller UK loading gauge would not allow everything to fit in, but possibly could revive the old idea of pairs on single ended Bo-Bo locos coupled like class 20s used to run (or permanently coupled as one loco), maybe could have one with transformer, one with battery pack. Having 16 wheels probably allow RA5 route availabilty.

https://www.europeanlocpool.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/ELP_Datenblatt_EURO9000_en_20240917_web.pdf

Spec sheet of EURO9000 attached

 

[Yorkshire09876]

The latest Stadler loco is EURO9000.
It has two 950kw (1274hp) diesels,
but on electric is 9000kw (hence its name) which is 12,070hp
20ton axle load
120km/h (74.6mph)

I suspect the smaller UK loading gauge would not allow everything to fit in, but possibly could revive the old idea of pairs on single ended Bo-Bo locos coupled like class 20s used to run (or permanently coupled as one loco), maybe could have one with transformer, one with battery pack. Having 16 wheels probably allow RA5 route availabilty.

https://www.europeanlocpool.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/ELP_Datenblatt_EURO9000_en_20240917_web.pdf

Spec sheet of EURO9000 attached

If it's getting to that stage, why bother with single-ended locos or articulation? Easier just to use two locos - like DRS do sometimes (88 and 68 pair), which gives an electric plus a powerful diesel, and they can also be used separately as well so more flexible.

 

[HSTEd]

If it's getting to that stage, why bother with single-ended locos or articulation? Easier just to use two locos - like DRS do sometimes (88 and 68 pair), which gives an electric plus a powerful diesel, and they can also be used separately as well so more flexible.

Two locomotives would likely be substantially more expensive than a single ended locomotive and some sort of non powered control vehicle at the other end of the formation.

Given that freight operations are almost all block trains these days, a single ended locomotive is probably not that big of an issue.

Based on previous freight operator practice, two locomotives will just result in an electric left in a siding to rot whilst the diesel runs under the wires.

 

[eldomtom2]

Major heavy-haulers abroad use multiple smaller locos, often distributed through the train.
In South Africa, the electrified Sishen iron ore line uses additional diesel locos mid-train on the banks.

I believe the use of diesel locomotives is due to voltage drop over long distances, not gradients, and that not all trains use diesel locomotives.

 

[hwl]

The latest Stadler loco is EURO9000.
It has two 950kw (1274hp) diesels,
but on electric is 9000kw (hence its name) which is 12,070hp
20ton axle load
120km/h (74.6mph)

I suspect the smaller UK loading gauge would not allow everything to fit in, but possibly could revive the old idea of pairs on single ended Bo-Bo locos coupled like class 20s used to run (or permanently coupled as one loco), maybe could have one with transformer, one with battery pack. Having 16 wheels probably allow RA5 route availabilty.

https://www.europeanlocpool.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/ELP_Datenblatt_EURO9000_en_20240917_web.pdf

Spec sheet of EURO9000 attached

The only place in the UK where you could use 9MW with 6 axles in on HS1
a) you are nominally limited to 7.5MW on NR by default
b) the only places where you have very steep up hill gradients in HS1

In general on electric you would need more axles (i.e. 8 like 2x 90s) to be able to do anything with that extra power of the Stadler 9000 compared to a 99 a low-medium speeds. There is zero benefit to the extra power under ~35mph (useable power limited by axle loads and adhesion) and the benefit only then gradually increases with increasing speed.

The 9000 does have more diesel grunt than a 99 as is much closer to matching a 66 than the 99 is.

 

[Trainbike46]

Pretty much, but my understanding was that the 99 was still somewhat limited on diesel power. I might be very wrong though! I was thinking about getting a 66 level of tractive effort off the wires. I think people have been saying over on the 99 thread that they're unsure if it'll manage that, but maybe I'm mixing up the 99 and 93!

My thinking was that as people have been saying that that it's tricky to get a powerful enough diesel engine and the emissions stuff and the electrical side of things into the UK loading gauge, and that maybe going longer would be the solution to that. Obviously can only go so long before route restrictions start to crop up hence my thinking of articulation.

The question is, does it matter that a locomotive isn't quite as powerful as a 66 on diesel?

The 99 easily exceeds the 66 on electrified track, and all the locations along the routes where the maximum power is needed, such as steep hills and high(er) speed sections, are electrified. It's fine that it's slightly less powerful on diesel than a 66 is.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

Two locomotives would likely be substantially more expensive than a single ended locomotive and some sort of non powered control vehicle at the other end of the formation.

Given that freight operations are almost all block trains these days, a single ended locomotive is probably not that big of an issue.

Based on previous freight operator practice, two locomotives will just result in an electric left in a siding to rot whilst the diesel runs under the wires.

We're talking about freight here, so not sure what the relevance of a non-powered driving vehicle is. There are a number of trains which do run double headed - DRS will often put pairs of 88s on the longest Tesco trains in slippery season, and if they have planned diversions with a lot of non-electrified running they will normally have an 88 and a 68. Flask trains also always have two locos, sometimes top and tail but often double-headed.

Also, the loco(s) need to run around the train at many freight collection points, so a single-ended one would be fairly useless. The railway infrastructure in this country basically relies on passenger trains being able to be driven from either end, and freight locos being able to run around their trains. Turntables or triangles for turning locos are now few and far between.

 

[HSTEd]

We're talking about freight here, so not sure what the relevance of a non-powered driving vehicle is.

A block train, which constitutes a large fraction of freight movements, would be able to reverse without running the locomotive around.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

A block train, which constitutes a large fraction of freight movements, would be able to reverse without running the locomotive around.

Given the tight profit margins on freight, they aren't going to want to through-wire all the trains or have space taken up by a DVT-type vehicle (which would also need a generator to power its cab desk, lights, etc). It's a non-starter!

 

[HSTEd]

Given the tight profit margins on freight, they aren't going to want to through-wire all the trains or have space taken up by a DVT-type vehicle (which would also need a generator to power its cab desk, lights, etc).

Through wiring of the trains would likely save the overall rail industry on net, because adoption of Electronically controlled pneumatic braking or similar technology would save a lot of money in infrastructure. (Eliminating trackside hot axle box detectors if nothing else!)

The freight industry's practices result in significant externalities in the rest of the industry that aren't really captured in the current (very generous) infrastructure charging regime.

It's a non-starter!

I'm afraid the same argument that leads to this conclusion probably makes significant expansion of electric freight operation impossible.

DRS has ordered 20 10 low power electrodiesels, [EDIT: 10 for ROG not for DRS] and GBRf has leased 30 more, no pure electrics have been ordered since privatisation by a Network Rail-based operator. Against a fleet of literal hundreds of diesel electrics. DRS also has a portfolio that is quite different from "normal" freight operators.
Unless railfreight is made to pay road prices for diesel, it is likely to never chose electric operation - burning diesel will be cheaper.

Ofcourse the question is what happens when road traffic is electrified and the railfreight industry is still using two stroke diesels from before the fall of the Soviet Union (EMD 710)