DB Cargo UK owned class 92 locomotive question.

[yh00157]

hello. I am a railroad fanatic living in Korea.

While studying mechanics in high school and junior college, I also watch railroad cars.

I asked a question about a class 92 locomotive in the past.

I know that TVM-430 is used for channel tunnel, high speed 1 section.

For reference, the Gyeongbu high-speed line (Gwangmyeong ~ Daejeon ~ Dongdaegu ~ Singyeongju ~ Ulsan ~ Busan) and the Honam high speed line (Osong ~ Gwangju Songjeong) TVM-430 signal equipment are used in Korea.

It was confirmed that the British Railway main line uses AWS and TPWS equipment.

I've asked a question here once before, but I want to know exactly what I'm writing.

The reason why DB Cargo UK-owned locomotives do not operate on the main line of the British Railways is AWS, TPWS signal equipment defective?

Or, I would like to know if it is not running due to a problem with electrical devices such as transformers.

I saw on YouTube that only some locomotives of the high-speed 1 freight train operate, so I would like to know more in detail.

DB Cargo UK I replied to the official email, but I didn't get a reply, so I want to know exactly.

For your reference, I am using a Korean portal site account, so I do not receive an answer.

I am writing to know more precisely.


The text was written in Korean and then changed to English using Google Translate. There may be some grammar mistakes, so please forgive me.

 

[Roast Veg]

The reason why DB Cargo UK-owned locomotives do not operate on the main line of the British Railways is AWS, TPWS signal equipment defective?

Or, I would like to know if it is not running due to a problem with electrical devices such as transformers.

I saw on YouTube that only some locomotives of the high-speed 1 freight train operate, so I would like to know more in detail.

To save money, DB Cargo UK removed the "3rd rail shoes" and deactivated some of the AWS/TPWS equipment. I don't think there was any failure, just the cost of maintenance. DB didn't have any contracts to operate the Class 92 outside of the Channel Tunnel railway, so they did not need the equipment to be operational.

The text was written in Korean and then changed to English using Google Translate. There may be some grammar mistakes, so please forgive me.

I have tried to write this message for easy translation. When I visited Korea, I enjoyed the Seoul Metro and KTX-I very much.

 

[zwk500]

The reason why DB Cargo UK-owned locomotives do not operate on the main line of the British Railways is AWS, TPWS signal equipment defective?

Or, I would like to know if it is not running due to a problem with electrical devices such as transformers.

There are 2 primary reasons for the limited use of Class 92s in the UK. The main one is that there are very few trains for them to work. It is cheaper for DB to store the locomotives than maintain them with no work. The Second is that their power draw is very high, and they can cause electrical interference with signalling and power supply systems. This requires routes where Class 92s work to be fitted with electrical shielding, higher standard of equipment or greater maintenance checks.
I've not heard about AWS/TPWS failures being a reason for withdrawal.

To save money, DB Cargo UK removed the "3rd rail shoes" and deactivated some of the AWS/TPWS equipment. I don't think there was any failure, just the cost of maintenance. DB didn't have any contracts to operate the Class 92 outside of the Channel Tunnel railway, so they did not need the equipment to be operational.

Have they done this to all 92s or just some? Class 92 paths still exist over the 3rd rail network (or did pre-COVID).

 

[Roast Veg]

Have they done this to all 92s or just some? Class 92 paths still exist over the 3rd rail network (or did pre-COVID).

Just the red ones I think, but I've got no insider knowledge. It's possible some of the stored locos are in various configurations.

 

[D365]

I’m not sure how many of DB Cargo’s 92s are due to be fitted with ETCS, but the installation of onboard ETCS includes Thales or Unipart Mk4 TPWS. In effect, a free upgrade - funded by the East Coast Digital Programme.

 

[hwl]

I’m not sure how many of DB Cargo’s 92s are due to be fitted with ETCS, but the installation of onboard ETCS includes Thales or Unipart Mk4 TPWS. In effect, a free upgrade - funded by the East Coast Digital Programme.

Funded by national freight fitment programme which is mostly funded by East Coast...

 

[D365]

Funded by national freight fitment programme which is mostly funded by East Coast...

Thanks for the correction - I'm still learning my way around it.

 

[hwl]

Thanks for the correction - I'm still learning my way around it.

The first ETCS rollout (rather than trial or limited area) scheme was always going to have to be a big huge one to cover most of the national freight fitment cost as well as the first of a kind development cost for a decent number of passenger fleets (Hitachi AT300 family; Bombardier: Electrostar, Turbostar and Aventra*; Stadler Flirt, Siemens Desiro City*, Alstom 180) which really helps future schemes as the fleet first of kind cost are potentially much reduced with just Siemens Desiro, CAF Civity**, Bombardier Voyager /Meridian) and Alstom 175 & 390s of the post privatisation fleets not covered by EC.

*Some updates from earlier implementations and roll out to stock not currently enabled on
**Covered by TfW for Cambrian 158 replacement

 

[D365]

Thanks. That's a good bit of background.

ETCS & TPWS fitments are one thing - I imagine that other work would need to be done in order to reinstate the DBC 92s to Network Rail tracks.

 

[cj_1985]

I’m not sure how many of DB Cargo’s 92s are due to be fitted with ETCS, but the installation of onboard ETCS includes Thales or Unipart Mk4 TPWS. In effect, a free upgrade - funded by the East Coast Digital Programme.

I heard that 92032 would be the first 92 fitted with the ECTS kit, and will be used to cover the fitment of the kit to both GBRf and DB 92s

 

[31160]

Wel if 92032 is first too be fitted ill have to keep a look out for ECML sleeper diverts in the future

 

[Wyrleybart]

Sticking with the original question, I understand that DBC class 92s work the HS1 route from Dollands Moor to ???? Looking at my rather ancient atlas there seems to be loops of the HS1 in the Dagenham Dock area. Are the 92s able to get off HS1 onto a conventional yard around there ?

I understand DBC 92s have occasionally hauled the Stadler bimodes using 66001 or 66002 as an adaptor. Where was that to ?

 

[zwk500]

Sticking with the original question, I understand that DBC class 92s work the HS1 route from Dollands Moor to ???? Looking at my rather ancient atlas there seems to be loops of the HS1 in the Dagenham Dock area. Are the 92s able to get off HS1 onto a conventional yard around there ?

I understand DBC 92s have occasionally hauled the Stadler bimodes using 66001 or 66002 as an adaptor. Where was that to ?

92s work trains on HS1 between Dollamds Moor and Ripple Lane Yard in the Dagenham Dock area. They are also cleared to operate on the WCML in parts, as there's a maintenance base at Crewe. 92 hauled freight on the WCML is rare but not unknown. I don't know if 92s are cleared all the way up to Mossend or if the limit is Crewe.

 

[43096]

92s work trains on HS1 between Dollamds Moor and Ripple Lane Yard in the Dagenham Dock area. They are also cleared to operate on the WCML in parts, as there's a maintenance base at Crewe. 92 hauled freight on the WCML is rare but not unknown. I don't know if 92s are cleared all the way up to Mossend or if the limit is Crewe.

DB Cargo 92s no longer work on the "conventional" network - they are always dragged between Dollands Moor, Wembley and Crewe IEMD. GBRf Class 92s can work through the tunnel, on HS1, between Wembley and Dollands Moor and of course the full length of both WCML and ECML.

 

[D365]

92s work trains on HS1 between Dollamds Moor and Ripple Lane Yard in the Dagenham Dock area. They are also cleared to operate on the WCML in parts, as there's a maintenance base at Crewe. 92 hauled freight on the WCML is rare but not unknown. I don't know if 92s are cleared all the way up to Mossend or if the limit is Crewe.

I thought the question was about why DBC 92s do not operate on the national network.

 

[DanNCL]

92s work trains on HS1 between Dollamds Moor and Ripple Lane Yard in the Dagenham Dock area. They are also cleared to operate on the WCML in parts, as there's a maintenance base at Crewe. 92 hauled freight on the WCML is rare but not unknown. I don't know if 92s are cleared all the way up to Mossend or if the limit is Crewe.

DB's 92s are only cleared to work under their own power on HS1 and the Channel Tunnel. If for whatever reason they need to return to Crewe they're now dragged by a 66.

GBRF's 92s are cleared to work under their own power on the ECML, WCML, North London Line and on parts of the third rail network, as well as on HS1 and the Channel Tunnel.

 

[zwk500]

DB's 92s are only cleared to work under their own power on HS1 and the Channel Tunnel. If for whatever reason they need to return to Crewe they're now dragged by a 66.

GBRF's 92s are cleared to work under their own power on the ECML, WCML, North London Line and on parts of the third rail network, as well as on HS1 and the Channel Tunnel.

What's the reason for the FOC distinction? I don't remember those restrictions being written into NESA Table D, although the clearance could be published somewhere else I never looked.

 

[DanNCL]

What's the reason for the FOC distinction? I don't remember those restrictions being written into NESA Table D, although the clearance could be published somewhere else I never looked.

It may be an operating decision by DB as opposed to Network Rail actually revoking route clearance. As mentioned upthread some (if not all) of DB's operational 92s have had the third rail shoes removed and AWS/TPWS isolated.

 

[popeter45]

If DB only run them on GC cleared routes would it make sense to instead use a more standard mainland locomotive like a vectron or traxx?

 

[DanNCL]

If DB only run them on GC cleared routes would it make sense to instead use a more standard mainland locomotive like a vectron or traxx?

No standard mainland locos are equipped with TVM signalling for HS1. A Vectron was tested in the Channel Tunnel a while back but nothing seems to have happened as a result of that.

 

[yh00157]

To save money, DB Cargo UK removed the "3rd rail shoes" and deactivated some of the AWS/TPWS equipment. I don't think there was any failure, just the cost of maintenance. DB didn't have any contracts to operate the Class 92 outside of the Channel Tunnel railway, so they did not need the equipment to be operational.

I have tried to write this message for easy translation. When I visited Korea, I enjoyed the Seoul Metro and KTX-I very much.

There are 2 primary reasons for the limited use of Class 92s in the UK. The main one is that there are very few trains for them to work. It is cheaper for DB to store the locomotives than maintain them with no work. The Second is that their power draw is very high, and they can cause electrical interference with signalling and power supply systems. This requires routes where Class 92s work to be fitted with electrical shielding, higher standard of equipment or greater maintenance checks.
I've not heard about AWS/TPWS failures being a reason for withdrawal.

Have they done this to all 92s or just some? Class 92 paths still exist over the 3rd rail network (or did pre-COVID).

So, have AWS and TPWS signaling equipment been removed?

I'm trying to translate from English to Korean again with Google Translate, but I don't understand the content, so I'm asking.

 

[zwk500]

So, have AWS and TPWS signaling equipment been removed?

I'm trying to translate from English to Korean again with Google Translate, but I don't understand the content, so I'm asking.

It appears that the answer is Yes, AWS/TPWS has been removed from some, but possibly not all, of the DB Cargo locomotives.

 

[Roast Veg]

It appears that the answer is Yes, AWS/TPWS has been removed from some, but possibly not all, of the DB Cargo locomotives.

It has either been physically removed (unlikely) or electrically isolated (more likely).

 

[D365]

It has either been physically removed (unlikely) or electrically isolated (more likely).

Agree unlikely to have been physically removed from all - it would take a lot of work for little benefit. Especially since TPWS Mk4 will now be fitted to the ETCS 92s.

 

[popeter45]

No standard mainland locos are equipped with TVM signalling for HS1. A Vectron was tested in the Channel Tunnel a while back but nothing seems to have happened as a result of that.

acording to the 2021 HS1 network statement ETCS is allowed to be used with STM, cant find much info but is STM common or not?

 

[D365]

acording to the 2021 HS1 network statement ETCS is allowed to be used with STM, cant find much info but is STM common or not?

What's STM please.

 

[popeter45]

What's STM please.

Special Transmissions Module
listed in the document as "STM required to interface with TVM 430"

 

[43096]

Special Transmissions Module
listed in the document as "STM required to interface with TVM 430"

STM is the interface from national train protection systems to ETCS. As I understand it, ETCS becomes the primary signalling system on the train and other systems use an STM to interface with ETCS - so there will be an AWS/TPWS STM (to TPWS Mark 4) and also a TVM430 STM for Class 92/Eurostar, just as there is an LZB and PZB STM in Germany, for example.

 

[AlexNL]

AWS/TPWS on the Crossrail Class 345 units is provided via an STM on the 9 car units.

 

[XAM2175]

Special Transmissions Module
listed in the document as "STM required to interface with TVM 430"

Specific Transmission Module, actually.

STM is the interface from national train protection systems to ETCS. As I understand it, ETCS becomes the primary signalling system on the train and other systems use an STM to interface with ETCS - so there will be an AWS/TPWS STM (to TPWS Mark 4) and also a TVM430 STM for Class 92/Eurostar, just as there is an LZB and PZB STM in Germany, for example.

Correct. An STM is most easily thought of as an adaptor that enables the train's ETCS equipment to work with non-ETCS signalling and safety systems. Most, if not all, on-train ETCS computers allow the use of multiple STMs as required.