88's on 4L48?

[US railfan]

Idk if it's been like this for a while but I've noticed 4L48 has over the past few months has had more 66's instead of 88's that had ran the train for years previously. Is there something weird going on like a timetable change or something else?

 

[jfollows]

This may be because for a number of months now it's cheaper for the operator of freight trains to use diesel engines rather than electric engines even if (and you don't say where 4L48 runs between) the route is electrified. There is some lack of sanity in the way in which energy costs are allocated to the end user, I think. This has been reported here for about a year now. It may not be the case specifically here, I don't know, it's just a guess.
EDIT See https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...electrified-routes.251781/page-2#post-6322070, for example.

 

[The Planner]

This may be because for a number of months now it's cheaper for the operator of freight trains to use diesel engines rather than electric engines even if (and you don't say where 4L48 runs between) the route is electrified. There is some lack of sanity in the way in which energy costs are allocated to the end user, I think. This has been reported here for about a year now. It may not be the case specifically here, I don't know, it's just a guess.

Daventry Tilbury