My assumption is safer with more than four axles if two 90s are used.
I can see the 93s being a good replacement for 66s on routes with only easy non-electrified parts. Subject to there only being four axles for gradients - I am thinking over the North WCML hills. The debates over the pros and cons of the class 89 spring to mind.
The southbound gradients are more forgiving than the northbound gradients and you would expect about 200tonnes extra trailing on the train should be sensible for any highish powered loco heading south. (ignoring practicalities of wagons need to go both ways, so tricky to use this in practice)
Nothing against the 93s - they are clearly a capable loco; just the fanboys are attributing near mythical properties to them which needs to be challenged. Thanks to @hwl for injecting a healthy dose of reality into the conversation.
If and it's a big if, Freightliner take them on, they are a small fleet so will be fairly constrained geographically.
It did indeed
Well yes, but would there be any economic benefit in using a 93 on routes that already use electric traction? I would have thought the most costs would be saved where a flow is part electric and part diesel. Or long stretches on diesel under the wires.
1 loco vs using 2 (crew and electric costs) and using the diesel in depot, vs using a depot shunter (more cost)
Potentially yes if it allows a more efficient overall diagram of the loco.
I’d still expect them to work Gateway services to be honest. Just seems the best use of the capabilities of the locos.
If the fleet was bigger, maybe. 10 is a small number of locos to then diagram your staff to cover. Especially from a base if 0 electric traction. If they already signed electrics, then it would be easier, but that's not the case.
I seem to remember 10 being only an initial order, with potential for a follow-up optional order of 20, so 30 total. Perhaps this is the critical moment where ROG will look to making the decision to go ahead with the follow-up if Freightliner are satisfied with the tests and want to use them long term.
Thanks!
I feel the whole point of these 93s is to reduce diesel running under the wires. Given these 93s only have a small engine I reckon this has to be routes with only a little non-electric working (otherwise a 99 fits the bill). So I would expect the aim would be to replace 66s on services that are mostly under the wires. For me that means routes involving London Gateway but not perhaps Felixstowe to/from Ipswich and definitely not Ipswich across country to Peterborough.
I’d expect them to use the 93’s for Gateway services. As has since been mentioned, it seems rather pointless to buy a multi-mode loco and only use it under the wires, meaning you still need to use your ageing and not particularly economical diesel fleet. The 66’s will need replacing at some point with a new fleet, so driver training would still need to be done. Makes more sense to have a one loco fits all, be it a 93 or 99.
Or they order more.
Twas ever thus.
Followed by ROG will order 30 > rog will order 100`s.
Mark Hopwood discussed the potential for 99s hauling the Great Weetern sleepers and commented that he wanted the power and triaxle configuration but also batteries to reduce noise nuisance at depots. This was also an issue with TPEx 68s at Scarborough. I wonder if a halfway solution will emerge.
Maybe install shore supplies in depots... ya know, like a sensible person?
The ability to cool the engine is the limitation not it's ability to produce more power.
If the economic benefits of the 93 compared to a 66 exceed the cost, then there will be a market for dozens of them. Otherwise, the market will be very small.
Interestingly Stadler have recently announced a new partnership with a coolingtech company
Good use of "can be"
Yes. There would be a market for them, but it is whether the freightcos could actually make the sums work.