• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Class 93 Tri-mode Loco

P

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
9,570
Location
Croydon
HST125Scorton said:
Current TOPS locations at 19:00 Monday 03/08, pretty much same as last night:

93001 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE
93002 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD
93003 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD
93004 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE
93005 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE
93006 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE
93007 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD
93008 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD
93009 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBMD
93010 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE
Click to expand...
That is still six moderately get-table with four hiding on Crewe South Yard !.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

47286Dan

47286Dan

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2018
Messages
2,011
Wednesday morning update

93001 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N
93002 GROG CREWE SYD 420H911J05 F RUGBY4184 N
93003 GROG CREWE SYD 420H911J05 F RUGBY4184 N
93004 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE N
93005 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N
93006 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE N
93007 GROG CREWE SYD 420H501H05 F PRESTON N
93008 GROG CREWE SYD 420H501H05 F PRESTON N
93009 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBMD F N
93010 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N

Dan
 
P

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
9,570
Location
Croydon
47286Dan said:
Wednesday morning update

93001 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N
93002 GROG CREWE SYD 420H911J05 F RUGBY4184 N
93003 GROG CREWE SYD 420H911J05 F RUGBY4184 N
93004 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE N
93005 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N
93006 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE N
93007 GROG CREWE SYD 420H501H05 F PRESTON N
93008 GROG CREWE SYD 420H501H05 F PRESTON N
93009 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBMD F N
93010 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N

Dan
Click to expand...
So moves afoot.

Is this testing or what ?.

There is a 0H53 back from Preston. But nothing for a return for the Rugby pair - are they entering the South Bay platform ?.
 
47286Dan

47286Dan

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2018
Messages
2,011
Peter Sarf said:
So moves afoot.

Is this testing or what ?.

There is a 0H53 back from Preston. But nothing for a return for the Rugby pair - are they entering the South Bay platform ?.
Click to expand...
They return from Rugby on 0N42

Dan
 
BRX

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
4,477
Adrian Barr said:
I didn't manage to record the weight on other northbound runs, but did note that the consist for 4Q45 on Sunday 19th July showed 1431 tons trailing, with 17 intermodal twins (16 loaded and 1 empty). Gross laden wagon weights on this run can vary quite a lot (typically between 60 and 90 tons for a loaded twin depending on container contents), so this was a heavily laden service by usual standards. Timing load was 1400 tons, which would be the normal weight limit for a single 88.

On this occasion (on the 19th July) 4Q45 departed over an hour late at 17:35. It recovered to 51 late by Wigan, was 55 late after being regulated through Preston, then had a clear run which gave some interest insights into performance. 4Q45 remained around 55 late (give or take a couple of minutes here and there) passing Tebay 57 late and Shap Summit 56 late, i.e. without losing time on the climb up Shap. The schedule allowed 6 and a half minutes from Tebay to Shap Summit. 4Q45 was looped at Penrith to allow 1S02 to pass, which had followed it from Preston. 1S02 was 25 late through Penrith as a result. 1S02 had been 14 late through Lancaster right behind 4Q45, meaning that on the 51 mile section from there to Penrith (including Shap bank) it lost 11 minutes following it. This doesn't seem too bad considering the weight 93009 was pulling, compared with the delay which would have been incurred if a 66 was slogging up Shap with the same load.

Although there would have been sufficient layover time at Carlisle to depart on time, 4Q45 departed 31 late (I think it was following delayed passenger trains). It lost a few more minutes by Lockerbie due a signalling issue, passing there 36 late and reaching Carstairs 34 late, after which it lost a few more minutes due to regulation and was diverted via Holytown, reaching Coatbridge 49 late. As for the climb up Beattock, it was 35 late at Beattock and 36 late at Beattock summit, with 13 minutes allowed between the two points - not bad considering it was pulling slightly in excess of the timing load.



I don't know anything beyond what I've read in this thread, but 47286Dan's comment in post #2494 about the lease for the 88s being up in 2027 strikes me as being potentially significant. I think the 93s could be a good option to replace 88s on Daventry - Coatbridge services. Single 88s sometimes struggle with the weight in poor weather conditions, and require double-heading in the autumn leaf-fall season. With 93009 working 9 services in each direction between the 12th and 22nd July (not just a single demonstration run as happened with DB and Freightliner on this route), it looks like the option is being seriously considered.

While on this topic, I might as well quote the relevant bit of a post I made in the thread about the adhesion problems occasionally encountered by single 88s on 4S43 doing the same Daventry - Coatbridge run:



===============================

I've never been entirely clear on the precise technical differences / improvements which seem to make 93s preferable to 88s in terms of their haulage capabilities up gradients in electric mode, but the comments by Adrian Nicholls (read the caption to his photo linked below) about the loco's performance on February's Seaforth - Mossend trial are interesting:

93006 at Carlisle on 4Q38 Seaforth - Mossend intermodal trial on 10/02/26:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/36034969@N08/55095958926/ (Photo: Adrian Nicholls)

In the comments under the photo I wrote the following:



The reply from Adrian Nicholls is interesting:



The detailed technical aspects are beyond me, but the general performance of the 93 has been encouraging for a Bo-Bo machine. If the 93s are given a chance and can reliably manage the DRS Anglo-Scottish intermodals from Daventry solo (particularly during the autumn and winter) they could hopefully solve the problem of 88s needing to be double-headed in autumn and occasionally slipping to a stand on this route in bad weather. The 93s have been tested with 1800 tons of box wagons up Shap in less-than-perfect weather conditions, so even allowing for the additional length and rolling / wind resistance of a long intermodal train, I'm cautiously optimistic they could manage 1400 tons successfully on a regular basis. Year-round performance would be the ultimate test of whether solo Bo-Bo machines are adequate on this route, or if a Co-Co machine like a 99 is needed (66s are reliable but too slow up the gradients, which causes pathing problems compared to the timings used for electrics).

If anyone knows more about the technical differences / improvements between class 88 and 93 that would make a difference on this route, I'd be interested to hear about them.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the improved performance of the 93s could be replicated on 88s with some modifications to them, or perhaps the designs are not similar enough.
 
H

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
8,233
BRX said:
I wonder if the improved performance of the 93s could be replicated on 88s with some modifications to them, or perhaps the designs are not similar enough.
Click to expand...
Minimal room for improvement:

Same traction motors but the main improvement on the hills at speed is the improved transformer in the 93s. [88 = 4MW, 93 = 4MW with boost function to 4.6MW with the boost period sufficient to cope with Shap then cool down enough before being able to be used again for Beattock and v/v southbound which isn't as hard performance wise). Hence it looks like the testing has shown that initial better running speeds at the start of the hill eventually helps as there is more momentum later and also TE tapers off with increasing speed more than adhesion limits assumptions do. (If I have the time in next few weeks I might do post on the maths behind this)
Most software improvement will only really be relevant at lower speed but there is some opportunity at higher speeds but different approaches to driver training might help too (Drivers need to understand the limitations of the software and how it responds)
 
47286Dan

47286Dan

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2018
Messages
2,011
Thursday afternoon update, all in the Crewe area apart from 93001

93001 GROG TYSELYLMD 665J671Q13 V * SOHO LMD N

Dan
 
S

scammell

Member
Joined
29 Dec 2019
Messages
14
Location
Beverley
Hi All. Can any kind soul help with which 93's were in Cewe South Yard on Tuesday 11th Aug mid afternoon. 93002 and 93003 were working back toward the Depot and 93010 was parked alongside the Depot. Thanks in advance.
 
Adrian Barr

Adrian Barr

Member
Joined
2 Jul 2020
Messages
743
Location
Doncaster
scammell said:
Can any kind soul help with which 93's were in Crewe South Yard on Tuesday 11th Aug mid afternoon.
Click to expand...

Going off TOPS, apart from 93002 / 93003 on 0Z93, locos shown in Crewe South Yard would have been 93005 / 93006 / 93007 / 93008 - but TOPS might not always accurately reflect local moves if any locos shuffle between South Yard and the depot.
 
C

Covshire1

Member
Joined
4 Jan 2018
Messages
302
It looked like 93005 and 93007 are still there. Was at least one between them. Just viewed from the Slate Miner railtour...
 
47286Dan

47286Dan

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2018
Messages
2,011
Sunday morning update

93001 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N
93002 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93003 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93004 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE N
93005 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93006 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93007 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93008 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93009 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBMD F N
93010 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N

Dan
 
47286Dan

47286Dan

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2018
Messages
2,011
47286Dan

47286Dan

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2018
Messages
2,011
Loadhaul60059 said:
Thanks, forgot that one!

Will be interested to see which one it picks up. Need to see 011 and 013!
Click to expand...

88003 said:
024
Click to expand...
Thursday morning update

93001 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N
93002 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93003 GROG EGHT RSMD 860Q591F20 F LESTER SD N
93004 GROG CREWE SYD GRESTYBGE N
93005 GROG CREWE SYD 420B931J20 F PRESTON N
93006 GROG CREWE SYD 420B931J20 F PRESTON N
93007 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93008 GROG CREWE SYD CREWE SYD F N
93009 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBMD F N
93010 GROG GRESTYBGE GRESTYBGE F N

93003 hauling 68024 to Leicester

68024 MBDL EGHT RSMD 860Q591F20 V * LESTER SD N

Dan
 
P

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
9,570
Location
Croydon
Covshire1 said:
Looks to be a move around on Tuesday.
0Z93 1030 Crewe South Yard to Crewe Gresty Bridge (Drs) via Rugby...
Click to expand...
I could not find this BUT it led me to happen upon these on Wednesday 26/08/2026. Not the same headcode or times but just as interesting ?.

0N93 13:32 Crewe South Yard to Rugby.
0H94 15:28 Rugby to Crewe Gresty Bridge (DRS)



I wonder if these runs (and yours) are used for keeping locos alive and rotated between South Yard and Gresty ?.
If only the runs were via Wembley !.

Afterthought - training ?.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top