Class 93 Tri-mode Loco

[Bob Price]

The way I read it was 30 ordered with 10 arriving in the first batch. Ten would replace the older 37's etc

Rail Operations (UK) Ltd orders Class 93 tri-modes

First ten mixed-traffic bi-modes due for delivery in early 2023.

www.railmagazine.com

Thirty Class 93 tri-mode locomotives will be built by Stadler for Rail Operations (UK) Ltd, with the initial batch of ten due for delivery in early 2023.

 

[43096]

The way I read it was 30 ordered with 10 arriving in the first batch. Ten would replace the older 37's etc

Rail Operations (UK) Ltd orders Class 93 tri-modes

First ten mixed-traffic bi-modes due for delivery in early 2023.

www.railmagazine.com

It's a framework agreement for 30 locos with an initial delivery of 10 - or in other words 10 ordered with options for 20 more.

 

[furnessvale]

No, I don't think he has the power, but this is politics. With the growing concerns about urban air pollution, this will look like an easy win for a politician on the make. And didn't Manchester manage to stop Nuclear Waste trains passing through the city? They didn't have the formal power for that, either.

Manchester Council put lots of expensive signs all around the perimiter of Greater Manchester declaring itself nuclear free. This amounted to diddly squat. As far as I am aware, nuclear waste trains were never routinely routed through the city centre, but were, and still are regularly routed up the WCML through Wigan, which is part of Greater Manchester.

So far as Manchester being nuclear free, most hospitals, especially Christies, use nuclear power in the form of isotopes for treatments.

 

[Richard Scott]

Manchester Council put lots of expensive signs all around the perimiter of Greater Manchester declaring itself nuclear free. This amounted to diddly squat. As far as I am aware, nuclear waste trains were never routinely routed through the city centre, but were, and still are regularly routed up the WCML through Wigan, which is part of Greater Manchester.

So far as Manchester being nuclear free, most hospitals, especially Christies, use nuclear power in the form of isotopes for treatments.

Massively digressing there is background radiation everywhere!

 

[themiller]

Not to mention smoke detectors and Brazil nuts!

 

[hooverboy]

It's a framework agreement for 30 locos with an initial delivery of 10 - or in other words 10 ordered with options for 20 more.

So presumably the rest of the specification is also arbitrary at present. ROG have ordered 10 off of something sort of off-the-shelf available at the moment, but may alter the criteria /quantities depending on the loco's performance and business case outlook.

By the way they have been eyeing up old MU's/HST's as well, it looks like they see an opportunity in increased logistics for the online retail/small consignment sector, as the igh street retail goes down the toilet.

Wouldn't dispute the logic in finding a more efficient method of transport than hauling 500-600 tonnes of cargo with a 66.to be honest a 37 is basically ideal traction for such a job, however that retains the mantle of "go anywhere", so the lower RA rating does have it's bonuses too, which I hope ROG could also sot the niche and exploit it.

A loco that can do that job too with 1/2 the fuel costs of a 37 would also be extremely valuable.

 

[hooverboy]

So presumably the rest of the specification is also arbitrary at present.ROG have ordered 10 off of something sort of off-the-shelf available at the moment,but may alter the criteria /quantities depending on the loco's performance and business case outlook.

By the way they have been eyeing up old MU's/HST's as well, it looks like they see an opportunity in increased logistics for the online retail/small consignment sector,as the igh street retail goes down the toilet.
Wouldn't dispute the logic in finding a more efficient method of transport than hauling 500-600 tonnes of cargo with a 66.to be honest a 37 is basically ideal traction for such a job,however that retains the mantle of "go anywhere",so the lower RA rating does have it's bonuses too,which I hope ROG could also sot the niche and exploit it.
A loco that can do that job too with 1/2 the fuel costs of a 37 would also be extremely valuable.

They could probably reduce the electric side of things to make space for some extra diesel/battery gear.4MW(5500hp) is really overkill, that's a class 90 basically, and class 86 was able to haul express passenger service with way less than that.

A co-co 93 with 3200kW(about 4000hp) on electric will still have a much pulling power as a pair of 86's,which will barge in on freightliner territory....if they can mate that with around 2MW from the hybrid side(lets say 1200Kw Diesel/800kW battery) that is one hell of a loco.Even more so if they could get it to weigh in sub 100 tonnes.

I'd say it would be worth them spending that little bit extra for the versatility such a vehicle could give them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Feb 2021 ==

They could probably reduce the electric side of things to make space for some extra diesel/battery gear.4MW(5500hp) is really overkill, that's a class 90 basically, and class 86 was able to haul express passenger service with way less than that.

A co-co 93 with 3200kW(about 4000hp) on electric will still have a much pulling power as a pair of 86's,which will barge in on freightliner territory....if they can mate that with around 2MW from the hybrid side(lets say 1200Kw Diesel/800kW battery) that is one hell of a loco.Even more so if they could get it to weigh in sub 100 tonnes.

I'd say it would be worth them spending that little bit extra for the versatility such a vehicle could give them.

A bit off topic, but maybe there is also a market for stadler hybrid shunters at this point.the old class 08/09's are really geriatric now arent they,and spend most of their time idling which must be a serious waste of fuel.

 

[Nottingham59]

Obviously there could be changes to the specification, but I'm sure that ROG would have done their sums very carefully and will have chosen what they have ordered from Stadtler to optimise these locos for the work they envisage them doing.

 

[squizzler]

They could probably reduce the electric side of things to make space for some extra diesel/battery gear.4MW(5500hp) is really overkill, that's a class 90 basically, and class 86 was able to haul express passenger service with way less than that.

A co-co 93 with 3200kW(about 4000hp) on electric will still have a much pulling power as a pair of 86's,which will barge in on freightliner territory....if they can mate that with around 2MW from the hybrid side(lets say 1200Kw Diesel/800kW battery) that is one hell of a loco.Even more so if they could get it to weigh in sub 100 tonnes.

Your proposed power output of 3.2MW is precisely half of that offered by the full strength EU 4 axle locos: 6.4MW has become the benchmark offered by the Siemens Taurus / Vectron, Alstom Prima, Skoda 109E. I suggest that mainstream manufacturers may not bother to manufacture components with such low power, and also doubt that such a reduction in power would allow proportionate weight savings.

Also, the railway network will get more not less electrification in future, so the diesel part of the equation can only become of less significance during the expected lifetime of the locos. If the promoter feels that the diesel power is sufficient now, that is unlikely to change. On the other hand, the expectation for freight to keep up with a passenger driven railway is likely to increase.

I think the present spec would seem a little underpowered,but am optimistic that that can be improved- I see caterpillar have now released a yet newer version of C32 on the marine front.The C32B triple turbo marine is now rated at 2400 Horses up from the 1900 of the original C32 marine.
If a rail variant can be adapted that would theoretically give a 20% or so boost to the 900kW initial specification( 1100kw/ 1500BHP).
That combined with a suitable boost in battery grunt of 20% or so will give a very robust loco indeed.Just get the extra axles on for RA5 rating and your sorted.

If the diesel is likely to be 20% more powerful, imagine how much more improvement might be possible from the faster evolving battery technology in due course?

 

[hooverboy]

Your proposed power output of 3.2MW is precisely half of that offered by the full strength EU 4 axle locos: 6.4MW has become the benchmark offered by the Siemens Taurus / Vectron, Alstom Prima, Skoda 109E. I suggest that mainstream manufacturers may not bother to manufacture components with such low power, and also doubt that such a reduction in power would allow proportionate weight savings.

Also, the railway network will get more not less electrification in future, so the diesel part of the equation can only become of less significance during the expected lifetime of the locos. If the promoter feels that the diesel power is sufficient now, that is unlikely to change. On the other hand, the expectation for freight to keep up with a passenger driven railway is likely to increase.

If the diesel is likely to be 20% more powerful, imagine how much more improvement might be possible from the faster evolving battery technology in due course?

the lower power is compensated for by the extra traction points on a 6 axle loco.hence my equation that you can get the same pulling power as 2*cl86.There are still some points on the network which require either co-co or 2*bo-bo haulage.

As for the improvements in battery technology,I wholeheartedly agree,but at present it is by no means a panacea. Up there in sky -fairy land we could use miniature thorium reactors as power plants,negating the need for any fossil fuel or overhead wires, but that is a long,long,long way off.

 

[squizzler]

the lower power is compensated for by the extra traction points on a 6 axle loco.hence my equation that you can get the same pulling power as 2*cl86.There are still some points on the network which require either co-co or 2*bo-bo haulage.

As for the improvements in battery technology,I wholeheartedly agree,but at present it is by no means a panacea. Up there in sky -fairy land we could use miniature thorium reactors as power plants,negating the need for any fossil fuel or overhead wires, but that is a long,long,long way off.

My take is that there is no prospect of the leasing company handicapping their loco under electric just so that it can have more power under diesel/battery. Besides, your argument strikes me as rather contradictory.

Your suggestion the loco ought to have six axles because it will have the same "pulling power" as a pair of class 86 locos. Actually on an electric mainline it is power output that will allow your train to keep schedule and fit in around other fast traffic. Nobody in their right mind is going to build an electric loco - and a six axle one at that - with rated power output not all that much greater than a four axle class 68. That belongs - to borrow your expression - in "sky fairy land". Not when high power under electric is so easy you might as well do it whether you need it or not. Even a three car class 755 has 2.6MW under electric.

The contradiction is that, if power output is dismissed as less relevant than number of driven axles under electric, why does high power suddenly become important for non electrified lines? Modern power electronics mean that the full "pulling power" of the loco can be exploited under relatively modest diesel or battery power to get the train moving, and the traffic on non-electrified lines will be less demanding of train performance.

These are fast mainline goods locos, and our network is progressively being electrified, negating the features you insist the engines need. Unless there is a major intermodal terminal in Pwthelli I don't know about, for which your proposed design, with high number of axles to spread the load over the Barmouth Bridge and good diesel power to get it over the Cambrian mountains, would be ideal.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

According to the Sept 2020 article in RailEngineer the "Class 93 is capable of hauling 1,500 tonnes on non-electrified routes." And apparently it's intended to haul intermodal traffic. See here: https://www.railengineer.co.uk/re-engineering-rail-freight/

With 1800hp at best? Seems optimistic to me, especially if you throw in some gradients.

 

[Nottingham59]

There are still some points on the network which require ... co-co

With 1800hp at best? Seems optimistic to me

I'm sure there are intermodal routes on the network where the increased weight and greater tractive effort of a Class 66 will still be necessary. And there will be plenty of Class 66's around for those jobs.

But for the majority of such routes, the lower weight and lower track access charges, the much lower fuel and other operating costs, and the higher top speed and lower emissions of the Class 93 would give them a distinct competitive advantage. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[InOban]

I thought that the point of modern electrodiesels is that the starting tractive effort is the same in both modes. Sure they won't be fast up hill...
Weren't the class 59s quite low powered but they could haul heavy loads, just took a long time to get up to speed even on level track?

 

[Nottingham59]

the starting tractive effort is the same in both modes

Yes, that's right. Certainly the tractive effort curve of the Class 88 has the same shape in each mode at lower speeds. It's only above 10-15mph (I think) that the diesel curve starts to fall away. I'm sure the Class 93 will be the same. At low speeds, even a very large tractive force doesn't need much power to deliver it.

 

[Richard Scott]

Yes, that's right. Certainly the tractive effort curve of the Class 88 has the same shape in each mode at lower speeds. It's only above 10-15mph (I think) that the diesel curve starts to fall away. I'm sure the Class 93 will be the same. At low speeds, even a very large tractive force doesn't need much power to deliver it.

Would also imagine a 93 in diesel mode will get maximum power down on diesel from almost a standing start, something no older diesel will do so giving it an advantage over older types with same installed power.

 

[TRAX]

That the locomotive is in diesel or electric mode indeed doesn’t make any difference in tractive effort; in both cases, it’s the electric traction motors that apply power to the rails.

 

[Nottingham59]

doesn’t make any difference in tractive effort

It doesn't make any difference at low speed. But the power (in terms of energy per unit time) needed to apply that force increases with speed. Above a certain threshold, the diesel / hybrid will not be able to deliver the power required, and the tractive effort and therefore acceleration will start to fall away.

 

[Richard Scott]

It doesn't make any difference at low speed. But the power (in terms of energy per unit time) needed to apply that force increases with speed. Above a certain threshold, the diesel / hybrid will not be able to deliver the power required, and the tractive effort and therefore acceleration will start to fall away.

This is true. Think they'll be more than a match for a 37 as long as the batteries can supply power. If I remember rightly the 37/9s used to haul up to around 1000tonnes singlely so sure a 93 on diesel won't be too bad. Expect all told the 93 will have more power at rail in diesel/battery mode, obviously less once it is diesel only and may make sustained inclines a challenge but sure with careful planning they'll work fine. Think we've got too used to 3000hp plus diesels in recent years. Know they need to keep ahead of passenger trains but high speed two track diesel only routes getting less and less common now.

 

[TRAX]

It doesn't make any difference at low speed. But the power (in terms of energy per unit time) needed to apply that force increases with speed. Above a certain threshold, the diesel / hybrid will not be able to deliver the power required, and the tractive effort and therefore acceleration will start to fall away.

Yes absolutely. I should’ve said "starting tractive effort".

 

[Andrew @Denchi]

Anyone here able to comment or assist;
Reading that the Stadler cl.93 has LTO batteries, does anyone know what standards the battery will have been tested to, and what safety approvals achieved?

 

[Wyrleybart]

A bit off topic, but maybe there is also a market for stadler hybrid shunters at this point.the old class 08/09's are really geriatric now arent they,and spend most of their time idling which must be a serious waste of fuel.

Have a look at the Clayton products which have recently been ordered and which some sources are classifying as class 18. Pretty sure there are 25kV and battery versions planned.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

Would also imagine a 93 in diesel mode will get maximum power down on diesel from almost a standing start, something no older diesel will do so giving it an advantage over older types with same installed power.

Regardless, you're still giving a currently carried out by a 3300hp loco to a loco with 1800hp at best. While I don't doubt that the 93 has its benefits on certain flows, I don't see how this can be one of them. For things like charter work, test trains, stock moves and light freight (mail/parcels etc.) and passenger work (dare I say it the CNR) the 93's would be ideal, but for heavy freight I just don't see it.

 

[Richard Scott]

Regardless, you're still giving a currently carried out by a 3300hp loco to a loco with 1800hp at best. While I don't doubt that the 93 has its benefits on certain flows, I don't see how this can be one of them. For things like charter work, test trains, stock moves and light freight (mail/parcels etc.) and passenger work (dare I say it the CNR) the 93's would be ideal, but for heavy freight I just don't see it.

Agree if it's on diesel for a long period but if fairly flat and no high speed passenger flows then should be fine. Something running from bottom of Lickey to South Wales would probably be ok as fairly flat (and got the wires to get back up the Lickey), quiet from Gloucester to Severn Tunnel, as far as passenger traffic goes, and get back on the wires at Severn Tunnel. How much of the 3300hp is actually used? Seem to remember a statistic (admittedly from around late 1980s) stating a freight loco spent around 3% of its time on full power.

 

[Roast Veg]

Agree if it's on diesel for a long period but if fairly flat and no high speed passenger flows then should be fine. Something running from bottom of Lickey to South Wales would probably be ok as fairly flat (and got the wires to get back up the Lickey), quiet from Gloucester to Severn Tunnel, as far as passenger traffic goes, and get back on the wires at Severn Tunnel. How much of the 3300hp is actually used? Seem to remember a statistic (admittedly from around late 1980s) stating a freight loco spent around 3% of its time on full power.

3% sounds about right to me. When pulling away full power won't be applied until a certain speed to avoid slipping, and "fast" frieghts running on slow lines will be cruising somewhere below 75mph. That 3% isn't as insignificant as it sounds though.

 

[InOban]

I can see no difficulty in a 93 hauling a full intermodal train from Felixstowe to anywhere in the UK (except the North of Scotland )

 

[Charlie Smythe]

Agree if it's on diesel for a long period but if fairly flat and no high speed passenger flows then should be fine. Something running from bottom of Lickey to South Wales would probably be ok as fairly flat (and got the wires to get back up the Lickey), quiet from Gloucester to Severn Tunnel, as far as passenger traffic goes, and get back on the wires at Severn Tunnel. How much of the 3300hp is actually used? Seem to remember a statistic (admittedly from around late 1980s) stating a freight loco spent around 3% of its time on full power.

3% seems a little low to me, although it will depend on the route and the load. A light 1500t intermodal train on a flat route will spend far less time at full power than a 3000t freight on a hilly route. While 3% sounds small, it’s important. Not being able to perform 3% of the time won’t go down well.

What kind of fuel capacity does the 93 have as that will also dictate its usefulness on diesel. I assume it will be the same as an 88 but I don’t know what that is either.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Feb 2021 ==

I can see no difficulty in a 93 hauling a full intermodal train from Felixstowe to anywhere in the UK (except the North of Scotland )

Why? Unless it’s wired then there is a major power issue.

 

[Bald Rick]

They could probably reduce the electric side of things to make space for some extra diesel/battery gear.4MW(5500hp) is really overkill, that's a class 90 basically, and class 86 was able to haul express passenger service with way less than that.

4MW isn’t overkill when you’re going up Brentwood bank / Shap / Beattock with 1600t on the back and a Stadler / Pendolino chasing you down. You need every one of those Kilo-horses.

 

[43096]

4MW isn’t overkill when you’re going up Brentwood bank / Shap / Beattock with 1600t on the back and a Stadler / Pendolino chasing you down. You need every one of those Kilo-horses.

And Type 3 rating isn't going to cut it out of Felixstowe even with full battery power on a loaded 'Liner. It's firmly Type 5 heavy haul territory down there.

 

[Bald Rick]

And Type 3 rating isn't going to cut it out of Felixstowe even with full battery power on a loaded 'Liner. It's firmly Type 5 heavy haul territory down there.

It didn’t used to be of course. It will be interesting to see what diesel+battery can do in terms of running times on the branch.