Class 93 Tri-mode Loco

[Peter Sarf]

What’s an Aventura?

The Aventra (without the letter u) is the name for EMUs of classes 345, 701, 710, 720 & 730.

The discussion started with someone wondering why 730s were being moved sometimes by loco alone and sometimes with translator wagons - by 93s.

 

[Covshire1]

Pair of 93s on Wednesday...

0Q91 1405 Worksop Down Yard to Daventry Int Rft Recep Fl

Realtime Trains | 0Q91 1405 Worksop Down Yard to Daventry Int Rft Recep Fl | 22/10/2025

Real-time train running information for 0Q91 1405 departure from Worksop Down Yard to Daventry Int Rft Recep Fl on 22/10/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Class15]

Pair of 93s on Wednesday...

0Q91 1405 Worksop Down Yard to Daventry Int Rft Recep Fl

Realtime Trains | 0Q91 1405 Worksop Down Yard to Daventry Int Rft Recep Fl | 22/10/2025

Real-time train running information for 0Q91 1405 departure from Worksop Down Yard to Daventry Int Rft Recep Fl on 22/10/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

And onto 4L96 to Felixstowe or 4S47 to Mossend I wonder?

 

[172007]

Deleted, dosnt realise the move on post 1983 didnt happen until i had typed and double checked

 

[800001]

93001 worked 5Q65 Gascoigne Wood to Soho yesterday moving 730012.

 

[AndrewE]

93001 worked 5Q65 Gascoigne Wood to Soho yesterday moving 730012.

Hooray! https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K45669/2025-10-28/detailed shows just 1 loco, trailing load 400T...
I do hope that there were no barrier/adapter vehicles or others to make up the brake force, as I understand this mode of working was part of the business plan.
Given that it was routed head-on all the way I suppose that it could have had a "fitted head" and no need for a tail loco... but in that case, what about a brake at the rear?

 

[Gordonman]

93001 worked 5Q65 Gascoigne Wood to Soho yesterday moving 730012.

I believe that 37608 was tucked inside the class 93 as either a barrier or for compatibility purposes.

Which in my view,taking the class 93 to Gascoigne Wood in the first place was a pointless exercise as the class 37 could have worked solo.

 

[Nottingham59]

Hooray! https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K45669/2025-10-28/detailed shows just 1 loco, trailing load 400T...
I do hope that there were no barrier/adapter vehicles or others to make up the brake force, as I understand this mode of working was part of the business plan.
Given that it was routed head-on all the way I suppose that it could have had a "fitted head" and no need for a tail loco... but in that case, what about a brake at the rear?

I notice that "service loses and gains coaches" at Elford. What might that have been, I wonder?

 

[AndrewE]

I notice that "service loses and gains coaches" at Elford. What might that have been, I wonder?

I noticed that too and guessed that it was just a RTT glitch, maybe misinterpreting some other WTT/STN entryl 8 minutes isn't much for anything involving a shunter...

 

[Rail Quest]

Which in my view,taking the class 93 to Gascoigne Wood in the first place was a pointless exercise as the class 37 could have worked solo.

They could be trying to expose their drivers to the new locos more, particularly so if ROG are looking at reducing/eradicating 37 use in the wake of their new fleet.

GIven 37611 is being handed back to Europhoenix off the back of the 93 introduction, as was reported in a separate thread on the RPG/Europhoenix fleets, this theory could hold some firm ground. Comments from that thread quoted below:

Apparently 37611 is in the process of handback to europhoenix, any idea if this is actually true?

Yes it is, already debranded and awaiting hand back to europheonix

Does this mean some of the 37s are surplus to requirement at ROG post-93 launch?

Correct

 

[zwk500]

I notice that "service loses and gains coaches" at Elford. What might that have been, I wonder?

I noticed that too and guessed that it was just a RTT glitch

RTT is just repeating the activity code entered in the planning system and then uploaded to TRUST. RTT has interposed 'coaches' for 'vehicles' though. Activity codes are shown at stops to tell the various systems what the train is doing at that location (e.g. T for 'Train stops to set down and take up passengers' or L for 'train stops to change locomotives'). This makes sure that e.g. passenger info systems suppress set down stops, ARS holds the train to be overtaken, or TOPS expects a change in train formation.

Activity code '-T' meaning 'Train stops to attach and detach vehicles' is the default code for a stop in most non-passenger train categories. A planner (TOC or NR) when creating or amending the schedule has overlooked the code, or forgotten to put the '*' in first place on the activity code list to suppress the code when sending it downstream. It's very easy to do.
At Tamworth the 'S' code automatically suppresses the -T code for sending downstream. All of this can be read in section 1.3.5 of the TPRs (although some regions have a simplified version, NW&C at least has the full version).

(It's the same reason passenger trains sometimes show stops at junctions, the default code for a passenger train is 'T', and must be manually overridden).

 

[800001]

93004+93005 and barrier vehicles worked from Derby to Ely Papworth yesterday, 28/10/25

 

[ac6000cw]

93004+93005 and barrier vehicles worked from Derby to Ely Papworth yesterday, 28/10/25

This looks like the working (8Q70) from Ely Papworth to Wolverton tomorrow (Thursday): https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:R19713/2025-10-30/detailed

(Note that yesterday the 93's reversed near the crossover south of Ely North Jn., not as booked in the vicinity of Ely station, much to the disappointment of the enthusiasts - me included - waiting there... c'est la vie!)

 

[ChrisT]

93004+93005 and barrier vehicles worked from Derby to Ely Papworth yesterday, 28/10/25

Yup. Here is 5Q46 passing Marholm Junction at 12.15 on 28th October.



Chris Turnbull

 

[Trainman40083]

This looks like the working (8Q70) from Ely Papworth to Wolverton tomorrow (Thursday): https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:R19713/2025-10-30/detailed

(Note that yesterday the 93's reversed near the crossover south of Ely North Jn., not as booked in the vicinity of Ely station, much to the disappointment of the enthusiasts - me included - waiting there... c'est la vie!)

I wonder if trains that are top and tailed can do that, but not those where the loco runs round?

 

[ChrisT]

I wonder if trains that are top and tailed can do that, but not those where the loco runs round?

I can't see any run-round facilities at Ely Freight Terminal (as it is called on Trackmaps) so yes, you are probably right.



A reversal into the Reception Road at Ely North Junction as the above photo is all that can be done.

Chris Turnbull

 

[AndrewE]

I can't see any run-round facilities at Ely Freight Terminal (as it is called on Trackmaps) so yes, you are probably right.

View attachment 191464

A reversal into the Reception Road at Ely North Junction as the above photo is all that can be done.

Chris Turnbull

so do they run round outside the yard and propel aggregate trains in, or is there some sort of a shunt move with an assisting loco?

 

[ac6000cw]

I can't see any run-round facilities at Ely Freight Terminal

I believe there is a run-round loop within the stone terminal area (it's the track that goes around the left of the open shed structure in the above photo) - Google maps shows it too

Based on personal observation, generally if a train needs running around at Ely, it's done using either the 'reception' loops just south-west of the station or one of the loops on the east side of it (depending on train length and other traffic etc.). Doing it between the station and the North Jn would effectively block both (busy) mainline tracks to other trains for a while.

 

[ChrisT]

I believe there is a run-round loop within the stone terminal area (it's the track that goes around the left of the open shed structure in the above photo) - Google maps shows it too

Based on personal observation, generally if a train needs running around at Ely, it's done using either the 'reception' loops just south-west of the station or one of the loops on the east side of it (depending on train length and other traffic etc.). Doing it between the station and the North Jn would effectively block both (busy) mainline tracks to other trains for a while.

Yes there is a run-round loop but trains usually reverse in the station as you say. I wonder if locos are not allowed to go through the shed?



Here's 37608 on 5L46 Derby RTC (Network Rail) to Ely Mlf Papworth Sidings on 5th December 2022 about to run round its train in the Up Through Siding.

Chris Turnbull

 

[1D54]

93004+93005 and barrier vehicles worked from Derby to Ely Papworth yesterday, 28/10/25

Pretty sure i just saw this pair back at Derby. It was dark so hopefully they are still there when i return later.

 

[alm37]

93001 and 93005 just returned to Worksop. No sign of 93004 so assume still at Derby RTC.

93006 heading to Derby RTC on 0Q60.

 

[Bryson]

93006 stabled at Derby RTC 4/11.

 

[Nym]

93006 stabled at Derby RTC 4/11.

Interesting to see them back at the RTC given LORAM aren't involved with them any more.

Wonder if there's some discussions with Colas?

 

[800001]

Interesting to see them back at the RTC given LORAM aren't involved with them any more.

Wonder if there's some discussions with Colas?

RTC is where there were collecting/returning barrier vehicles when they have down class 175 drags.

 

[Bryson]

Interesting to see them back at the RTC given LORAM aren't involved with them any more.

Wonder if there's some discussions with Colas?

004 and 005 (I didn't see the number clearly on this one) were in the same place on Friday. Easily visible from the passing EMR 222. A lot of Colas locomotives stored around them and also 2x 153 test units.

 

[Class15]

93006 worked down to Daventry as 0Q91 today and is now allocated for 4S48 Daventry to Mossend ‘Malcolm’ service tonight, instead of the usual pair of 90s.

 

[Rail Quest]

93006 worked down to Daventry as 0Q91 today and is now allocated for 4S48 Daventry to Mossend ‘Malcolm’ service tonight, instead of the usual pair of 90s.

Oh nice! Could this be a trial for Freightliner to see if its worth hiring some of them? The railcam allocation claims 66512 is in the consist, perhaps for insurance purposes?

 

[172007]

Oh nice! Could this be a trial for Freightliner to see if its worth hiring some of them? The railcam allocation claims 66512 is in the consist, perhaps for insurance purposes?

A class 99 can work in multiple with a 66, can a class 93 do like wise?

 

[Trainman40083]

Oh nice! Could this be a trial for Freightliner to see if its worth hiring some of them? The railcam allocation claims 66512 is in the consist, perhaps for insurance purposes?

Understand the 66 is dead in train.

 

[Rail Quest]

Understand the 66 is dead in train.

Yes, I meant that its there in case the 93 fails, similar to how all of the 99 tests so far have had either a 66 or 69 tucked in behind.