Will there ever be anymore third rail locos?

[BerkshireRails]

I'd posit a battery electric locomotive would be something resembling the JR Freight EH-800 [link is a picture]

I like that idea, which heads down a similar idea of articulated loco to my idea with the class 95s.

Having said both of those points, there are plenty of other clear mistakes in the Sectional Appendix so I wouldn't at all be surprised if somebody had accidentally put 'Y' down for the 88s between Drayton Park and Moorgate when it should be 'N'.

That is what I am thinking has happened.

 

[Harlequinuk]

@BerkshireRails

Is your route document publicly available? I would love to know , about the routes from Clapham Junction to Brighton , both loco and emu stock (and to Eastbourne, and Coastway West to Portsmouth/Southampton)

 

[swt_passenger]

@BerkshireRails

Is your route document publicly available? I would love to know , about the routes from Clapham Junction to Brighton , both loco and emu stock (and to Eastbourne, and Coastway West to Portsmouth/Southampton)

There are public versions of the sectional appendix available on the NR website here, you need to scroll down a bit beyond all the stuff about the staff version, to ‘pdf copies’. There’s a combined volume for the whole DC area, ie Kent/Sussex/Wessex:

National Electronic Sectional Appendix - Network Rail

The National Electronic Sectional Appendix contains detailed information useful to operators about network capability, as well as other data.

www.networkrail.co.uk

 

[BRX]

As we see bimode and trimode locos start to become a thing... what will be the approach to 3rd rail areas in the longer term, as far as freight locos are concerned?

Will they end up being treated like unelectrified lines, using diesel traction perhaps until battery power takes over?

Or will there come a point where it makes sense economically to start using the 3rd rail? Are there technical/practical reasons that a 3rd rail loco doesn't really make sense? It seems like battery technology should now be at a point where it can cover and gapping issues.

 

[Sun Chariot]

As we see bimode and trimode locos start to become a thing... what will be the approach to 3rd rail areas in the longer term, as far as freight locos are concerned?

Will they end up being treated like unelectrified lines, using diesel traction perhaps until battery power takes over?

Or will there come a point where it makes sense economically to start using the 3rd rail? Are there technical/practical reasons that a 3rd rail loco doesn't really make sense? It seems like battery technology should now be at a point where it can cover and gapping issues.

Do posts 6 and 10 (linked) answer your question sufficiently?
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/will-there-ever-be-anymore-third-rail-locos.291674/post-7452440
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/will-there-ever-be-anymore-third-rail-locos.291674/post-7452572

 

[BRX]

Do posts 6 and 10 (linked) answer your question sufficiently?
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/will-there-ever-be-anymore-third-rail-locos.291674/post-7452440
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/will-there-ever-be-anymore-third-rail-locos.291674/post-7452572

Not really.

(By the way my post was initially the start of a new thread - I didn't know this one already existed - so has been merged in and effectively just repeats a question already asked)

Post 10 gives a few examples of freight services that operate in 3rd rail territory but only a scattering of them. There are lots of others, which amount to more mileage. Without actually quantifying the mileage, and then relating this to the marginal cost of adding 3rd rail capability to new locos that will be getting built anyway, I don't see how you can make an argument that it wouldn't make sense financially/economically.

As others have pointed out, looking at the cost of the 92s isn't a useful way to judge how expensive adding 3rd rail capability is. They were expensive for other reasons. However...clearly at the time, there must have been a discussion about whether the marginal cost of adding 3rd rail ability was worth it (rather than just handing over to diesel on the UK side). And the decision was yes, seemingly. Perhaps that was based on what proved to be over-optimistic estimates of the quantity of cross channel freight. But even before that, it was considered worth building the 73s. So, why not now, especially as all the indications are that diesel is not going to be a cheap fuel for all that much longer?