Class 88 UKDual & EuroDual

[Sunbird24]

I did say "may not be available". All Pathfinders brochures state "may be used" not will be used. May is now a very tight timescale. The "end of February" announced last October was based on an arrival in UK of late December/early January and it was almost a month late on that. Add 8 weeks to that delay and you're looking at early June, which has already been mooted elsewhere. I very much doubt that DRS will want to rush things just to please a charter company. Only one has been released from the factory so far, the others are all still being worked on. Expected delivery to UK is by mid-spring = some time during May.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

88004 Pandora

They're asking for trouble with that one...

 

[boby32]

Class 88 Press Release

https://www.directrailservices.com/news-articles/2017/02/01/class-88-arrival-in-the-uk/

 

[palmersears]

Saw 88002 today outside Kingmoor depot as I passed on my way back from Scotland. Alongside all the 68s it was quite hard to tell the difference at first glance. Looked excellent however, can't wait to see it in action.

 

[furnessvale]

Just a thought.

Under most conditions a single 88 could handle the various container trains over the northern fells.

However, to cater for the worst theoretical conditions it is highly likely that at least some trains will require double heading.

I wonder if it is possible to use 1 x 88 + 1 x 68, only bringing the 68 into use in bad conditions, eg being brought to a signal stop at Scout Green in the rain!

This would spread the 88s further, making more use of their electric capability.

 

[59CosG95]

88008 has also been named; continuing the theme of Woodhead Electrics, it has received the name "Ariadne". https://flic.kr/p/RBKfHR

 

[captainbigun]

Just a thought.

Under most conditions a single 88 could handle the various container trains over the northern fells.

However, to cater for the worst theoretical conditions it is highly likely that at least some trains will require double heading.

I wonder if it is possible to use 1 x 88 + 1 x 68, only bringing the 68 into use in bad conditions, eg being brought to a signal stop at Scout Green in the rain!

This would spread the 88s further, making more use of their electric capability.

That's the point though, DRS have one container flow on the WC that could use electric traction? Tesco train, and it needs a pair.

I don't think it's a secret that these were really intended for the sleeper that DRS/First didn't win. In all honesty I see no real use for them. I think they will be spread far and wide as the 68s are/were in various locations to keep them out of the way. Nothing worse than having a line of brand new locos stored in a row costing, indirectly, the taxpayer tens of thousands a month each.

 

[Bertie the bus]

In all honesty I see no real use for them. I think they will be spread far and wide as the 68s are/were in various locations to keep them out of the way. Nothing worse than having a line of brand new locos stored in a row costing, indirectly, the taxpayer tens of thousands a month each.

Spread far and wide to keep them out of the way!?

Do you mean used quite intensively on various services around the country? I must admit using a mixed traffic loco on passenger and freight services does indeed keep them out of the way but obviously the only important thing is do they need 1 loco or 2 locos on one service.

 

[captainbigun]

Not sure I would call their use intensive.....

 

[Sunbird24]

Spread far and wide to keep them out of the way!?

Do you mean used quite intensively on various services around the country? I must admit using a mixed traffic loco on passenger and freight services does indeed keep them out of the way but obviously the only important thing is do they need 1 loco or 2 locos on one service.

There is a mandate to use two locos over the fells for the fastest freights so they can run at their maximum permitted speed throughout to avoid delays to the faster passenger services.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I’m not sure that is correct. Before DBS’s Mossend – Daventry intermodal went over to 2 * 90s it was a single 92, as was the Tesco Express for the short while DBS operated it. It isn’t important anyway. Whether a single 68 or 88 can haul the Tesco Express over Shap might be of interest but it isn’t important. It’s one train and one loco out of a combined fleet of 44 locomotives (Class 68 + 88).

 

[Sunbird24]

Remember that DRS have announced that they will be getting rid of most of their "heritage" traction due to the expense of running and maintaining it. Several are already up for sale and others in store. They also announced that the 88s will start initially with the WCML intermodal before progressing to other duties which have large mileages under the wires but also have long distances away from the wires, subject to the permitted load when running on diesel. The 1800 litre fuel tank will give it a reasonable range. Where two locomotives are required anyway for operational reasons they can run with a 68. The 88s performance at Velim with a 1580 ton trailing load and on diesel only was quite impressive and exceeded expectations in some areas.
BTW the 92 has a lot more power than the other locos, hence it is permitted over the fells on its own.

 

[HSTEd]

88 could probably handle flask duties with ease for example. If any of that is still actually running that is.

 

[Sunbird24]

Whether a single 68 or 88 can haul the Tesco Express over Shap might be of interest but it isn’t important. It’s one train and one loco out of a combined fleet of 44 locomotives (Class 68 + 88).

Come Spring 2018 the combined fleet will be 10 of each only. To add to the current 6 leased to Chiltern and 2 leased to Scotrail, a further 16 will be leased to TPE with the first two going there by end of this year for driver training, with leased refurbished Mk 3s.

 

[Bertie the bus]

No it won’t. It will be 44. You seem to be misunderstanding the point I have been making. Certain people have, and always will, criticise(d) the 68s, and will do so with the 88s, purely on the fact that a single loco can’t haul the Tesco Express over Shap and keep to time. The point I’ve been making is that for a mixed traffic loco that fact is totally unimportant.

 

[furnessvale]

No it won’t. It will be 44. You seem to be misunderstanding the point I have been making. Certain people have, and always will, criticise(d) the 68s, and will do so with the 88s, purely on the fact that a single loco can’t haul the Tesco Express over Shap and keep to time. The point I’ve been making is that for a mixed traffic loco that fact is totally unimportant.

A single 68, and presumably 88, or even 86 or 90, can haul ANY decent container train over Shap not only the Tesco.

However, it is not simply a matter of tractive effort, it is a matter of being able to restart a stopped train in the worst weather on the steepest gradients.

For that reason trains have either a Co-Co or 2 x Bo-Bos up front.

Except for certain expedited trains, eg some of the Malcolms, such power is overkill 99% of the time but for the other 1% it avoids blocking the main line.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A single 68, and presumably 88, or even 86 or 90, can haul ANY decent container train over Shap not only the Tesco.

Then why are single 66s on the front of most of them?
I saw one recently at Preston with 2x92s (dead) between the 66 and the containers.

 

[furnessvale]

Then why are single 66s on the front of most of them?
I saw one recently at Preston with 2x92s (dead) between the 66 and the containers.

Read the bit you snipped and you will find out why.

 

[Sunbird24]

So why use 2x66s which are Co-Cos when the 68s are not available?

 

[furnessvale]

So why use 2x66s which are Co-Cos when the 68s are not available?

Because the train booked for 2 x 68 is one of the expedited ones which needs more power than a single 66 can deliver.

On the majority of freights over Shap, one 66 will suffice even if they slow a little on the summits.

 

[Sunbird24]

Because the train booked for 2 x 68 is one of the expedited ones which needs more power than a single 66 can deliver.

On the majority of freights over Shap, one 66 will suffice even if they slow a little on the summits.

Exactly what I said back on post 370, though worded in a different way, and then you wrote above in 376: "For that reason trains have either a Co-Co or 2 x Bo-Bos up front." My understanding is that only the class 92 (and perhaps 70?) are permitted solo on the fastest intermodals.

Interestingly, the original DRS specification for the class 68 was for a Co-Co design but Vossloh stated this was not necessary and to prove their point trials were carried out with the Eurolight Bo-Bo with DRS present. The specification was for a mixed traffic locomotive capable of running at 100 mph. This included starting a heavy train on a steep gradient while the track was sprayed with 'soapy' water. I cannot recall the weight but I think it was 1800 tons. In the end DRS accepted the Bo-Bo design so they must have been happy with the tests.

 

[furnessvale]

Exactly what I said back on post 370, though worded in a different way, and then you wrote above in 376: "For that reason trains have either a Co-Co or 2 x Bo-Bos up front." My understanding is that only the class 92 (and perhaps 70?) are permitted solo on the fastest intermodals.

Fair enough, but I just wonder why you then felt the need to ask the question in #379.

It appears to me that we are both saying the same thing.

 

[Sunbird24]

It was the suggestion in line 3 that a single 66, being a Co-Co, could be used on its own, that was all.

 

[furnessvale]

It was the suggestion in line 3 that a single 66, being a Co-Co, could be used on its own, that was all.

Which can be done, and is in practice done for many trains.

 

[furnessvale]

Interestingly, the original DRS specification for the class 68 was for a Co-Co design but Vossloh stated this was not necessary and to prove their point trials were carried out with the Eurolight Bo-Bo with DRS present. The specification was for a mixed traffic locomotive capable of running at 100 mph. This included starting a heavy train on a steep gradient while the track was sprayed with 'soapy' water. I cannot recall the weight but I think it was 1800 tons. In the end DRS accepted the Bo-Bo design so they must have been happy with the tests.

I have only just picked up on this comment.

This is most interesting and I wonder what Network Rail make of it. I know trials have been made over the northern fells with a single 68 but I have seen no evidence of this being accepted as standard practice.

I could foresee one or two interesting law suits around this issue!

 

[Sunbird24]

Updated names carried so far:
88001 Revolution
88002 Prometheus
88003 Genesis
88004 Pandora
88005 Minerva
88006 Juno
88007
88008 Ariadne
88009
88010

 

[Cowley]

Nice to see some proper names being allocated to these locos. These names and the ones already given to their 68s are in my eyes a breath of fresh air even though they hark back to a more traditional way of doing things.

 

[richieb1971]

Do 88's and 68's share a common chipset and design that allows them to work in tandem with each other?

I'll try to explain better. If you coupled a 68 and 88 together, could you switch traction from electric 88 to diesel 68 at the flick of a switch seamlessly without stopping?

If I were building these I would definitely implement that into the spec.

 

[Roast Veg]

The locomotives are AAR compatible, right? If this feature is built into that multiple working system then yes that would be possible, but traction mode on the 88 will probably not be changeable from the cab of the 68. (this is speculative)

 

[Sunbird24]

The locomotives are AAR compatible, right? If this feature is built into that multiple working system then yes that would be possible, but traction mode on the 88 will probably not be changeable from the cab of the 68. (this is speculative)

There is a large amount of commonality between the two types including the control software. Modifications to both types is ongoing with both software and hardware so it is quite feasible that one will be able to control the other though this does not extend to use with other locomotive types.
I have not seen the two types being tested together yet but that is not to say it has not happened, nor that it will not happen in the near future, either in Spain or on the UK. The first of the latest batch of 68s have already appeared and the remaining 88s are still at the factory so it is possible that such testing could take place any time.
Forgot to add the the factory has already built and tested a system for remotely controlling the locomotive of another train and I was fortunate to be able to witness some of the test processes where a remotely controlled Euro 4000 was remotely controlled by an operator standing trackside with a portable controller, much like those used for remote control of model aircraft, only perhaps a little bigger and more complex. It went on to be tested in real life when it was tested in France with two Euro 4000s on two separate trains which were able to couple together and run as one very long train, controlled from the leading locomotive. This was known as Project Marathon. http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...-tested-on-europes-longest-freight-train.html