GBRf Class 99 - 30 locomotives now ordered

[Trainman40083]

Seems to be heading towards Musselburgh

 

[Jessicas Dad]

Seems to be heading towards Musselburgh

Look like they are reversing a Prestonpans - presumably heading for Millerhill.

Maybe 4Q42 will run but just late.

 

[800001]

Look like they are reversing a Prestonpans - presumably heading for Millerhill.

Maybe 4Q42 will run but just late.

Post 1103 may help about why they have headed to Prestonpans to get to Millerhill.

 

[Jessicas Dad]

Post 1103 may help about why they have headed to Prestonpans to get to Millerhill.

Thanks - I saw that but if it's a problem with the changeover could they not have just run on diesel all the way from Waverley and not need to changeover?

 

[800001]

Thanks - I saw that but if it's a problem with the changeover could they not have just run on diesel all the way from Waverley and not need to changeover?

It mentions clearance.

 

[Jessicas Dad]

It mentions clearance.

Are the clearance issues not at Portobello Junction though?

They were originally meant to run via the Sub this evening which they are cleared for, unless I've misread some posts, which is entirely possible!

 

[D365]

GBRf has already advised that there will be a ’99/4’ subfleet with ETH fitted. Ostensibly for use on Belmond’s Britannic Explorer charter.

As I said, it is a non-standard system so you’d be adding a load of cost in to the loco build for a very niche use. Added to that it would limit Belmond’s options if it wanted to change traction supplier.

Having gone back and re-read the Rail Magazine article I can see that the plans for a ’99/4’ subfleet are, at this moment in time, only tentative:

GB Railfreight has confirmed it is in negotiations to have ten locomotives in its order for Stadler Class 99 bi-mode electro-diesels fitted with Electric Train Supply (ETS) at construction.

GBRf has also not ruled out having a further batch of Class 99s, possibly a dozen, fitted with Dellner couplers and increased ETS output.

The latter would make them ideal for working Caledonian Sleeper trains, following the operator’s recently announced aspiration to start using bi-mode locomotives on its Anglo-Scottish Sleeper services.

The first 20 of the Stadler locomotives, being built in Valencia in Spain, will remain as 75mph ‘no heat’ freight locomotives (numbered 99001- 020).

But the next ten are likely to be 100mph ETS locomotives. And while they are presently expected to be 99021-030, that could change if a different sub-class differentiation is required.

The ten ETS ‘99s’ would also be able to work both the Royal Scotsman and the Britannic Explorer train without the need for an onboard generator car.

However you are right in that the Belmond trains use a three phase ETH/ETS supply provided by the generator car(s) rather than single phase provided by a locomotive.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

It would make sense to have a separate sub-class for higher speed, ETS locos.

 

[99009]

So reading the posts above, did 0Q42 run from Edinburgh to Millerhill via Portobello Jn, Musselburgh, Wallyford and Prestonpans UPL? If so, that route would suggest they're both unable to run in diesel mode, otherwise they would have gone via the booked route.

I wasn't able to watch 0Q42 move on the maps, so I'm confused because the RTT schedule shows it departing Edinburgh at 21:23 but arriving at Millerhill at 20:46! I suspect the arrival time at Millerhill is wrong and if so, does anyone know what it was please?

 

[Jessicas Dad]

So reading the posts above, did 0Q42 run from Edinburgh to Millerhill via Portobello Jn, Musselburgh, Wallyford and Prestonpans UPL? If so, that route would suggest they're both unable to run in diesel mode, otherwise they would have gone via the booked route.

I wasn't able to watch 0Q42 move on the maps, so I'm confused because the RTT schedule shows it departing Edinburgh at 21:23 but arriving at Millerhill at 20:46! I suspect the arrival time at Millerhill is wrong and if so, does anyone know what it was please?

I was watching it move on Traksy and it did run via Portobello Jn to Prestonpans UPL where it reversed and then headed into Millerhill via Monktonhall Jn. I didn't note the time of arrival but it was around 22:00, maybe slightly earlier.

If there is a problem with diesel mode then that would explain why 4Q42 is cancelled.

Will just need to catch them another time if / when they come back to Scotland.

 

[99009]

I was watching it move on Traksy and it did run via Portobello Jn to Prestonpans UPL where it reversed and then headed into Millerhill via Monktonhall Jn. I didn't note the time of arrival but it was around 22:00, maybe slightly earlier.

If there is a problem with diesel mode then that would explain why 4Q42 is cancelled.

Will just need to catch them another time if / when they come back to Scotland.

Thank you very much, that's really helpful. Let's see if 4Q43 runs or if they stay in Millerhill yard. If 4Q43 does run then I'm sure they'll return to Scotland eventually and I'll post here when I know.

 

[Jessicas Dad]

Thank you very much, that's really helpful. Let's see if 4Q43 runs or if they stay in Millerhill yard. If 4Q43 does run then I'm sure they'll return to Scotland eventually and I'll post here when I know.

No problem - glad to help.

Will keep an eye here for any more info.

 

[Trainman40083]

It would make sense to have a separate sub-class for higher speed, ETS locos.

Do locos on the sleepers need to be higher speed. Don't want people falling out of bed in the middle of the night.

 

[800001]

Do locos on the sleepers need to be higher speed. Don't want people falling out of bed in the middle of the night.

Isn't 80mph the speed deemed 'fast enough' to ensure customers get a good, comfortable sleep?

 

[The_Train]

Isn't 80mph the speed deemed 'fast enough' to ensure customers get a good, comfortable sleep?

The speed is irrelevant - the Mk5 coaching stock makes sure that doesn't happen

 

[BorderCollie]

Ain't that the truth.

 

[Tony2]

Thank you very much, that's really helpful. Let's see if 4Q43 runs or if they stay in Millerhill yard. If 4Q43 does run then I'm sure they'll return to Scotland eventually and I'll post here when I know.

Yes 4Q43 ran last night.

Realtime Trains | 4Q43 0130 Millerhill S.S. to Peterborough North Yd Gbrf | 13/11/2025

Real-time train running information for 4Q43 0130 departure from Millerhill S.S. to Peterborough North Yd Gbrf on 13/11/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

The 99s did the Prestonpans move again last night to get back from Waverley to Millerhill.

I watched on Traksy to see them arrive at Millerhill, where they ran through the yard and attached to the north end of 4Q42, which was activated on RTT and the 3 locos allocated. Therefore it looked like 4Q42 would be running although an hour late. That code didn’t appear on Traksy and it eventually got cancelled on RTT, so they possibly did try to run it but encountered problems again.

This poses the question, did 69003 lead 4Q43 all the way from Millerhill to Peterborough, or was shunting done to get the 99s on the south end before departure?

 

[92002]

Yes 4Q43 ran last night.

Realtime Trains | 4Q43 0130 Millerhill S.S. to Peterborough North Yd Gbrf | 13/11/2025

Real-time train running information for 4Q43 0130 departure from Millerhill S.S. to Peterborough North Yd Gbrf on 13/11/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

The 99s did the Prestonpans move again last night to get back from Waverley to Millerhill.

I watched on Traksy to see them arrive at Millerhill, where they ran through the yard and attached to the north end of 4Q42, which was activated on RTT and the 3 locos allocated. Therefore it looked like 4Q42 would be running although an hour late. That code didn’t appear on Traksy and it eventually got cancelled on RTT, so they possibly did try to run it but encountered problems again.

This poses the question, did 69003 lead 4Q43 all the way from Millerhill to Peterborough, or was shunting done to get the 99s on the south end before departure?

Train left Millerhill 17L Noted at Doncaster this morning 2L with 99s leading. Has now arrived at Peterborough 2L

 

[ac6000cw]

Isn't 80mph the speed deemed 'fast enough' to ensure customers get a good, comfortable sleep?

The Caledonian Sleepers are pathed at 80mph on the WCML (according to RTT).

 

[92002]

The Caledonian Sleepers are pathed at 80mph on the WCML (according to RTT).

Although in the event of late running they can be authorised to the maximum speed of vehicles and line to make up time.

 

[bideford1]

I saw 99004 today whilst on Line 10 of the Barcelona metro. It's currently in the port awaiting shipping.

 

[Nym]

Although in the event of late running they can be authorised to the maximum speed of vehicles and line to make up time.

So a whole 7mph faster?

 

[92002]

So a whole 7mph faster?

On the current design yes. Perhaps a /4 design could have a higher speed.

 

[BRX]

I saw 99004 today whilst on Line 10 of the Barcelona metro. It's currently in the port awaiting shipping.

Good work, this is at the more dedicated end of 99-spotting.

 

[themiller]

Good work, this is at the more dedicated end of 99-spotting.

Why move it from Valencia to Barcelona to put it on a ship?
Is there a standard gauge line from Barcelona to France? There is a standard gauge line from Barcelona into France which would allow 99004 to be delivered to the UK by rail.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Although in the event of late running they can be authorised to the maximum speed of vehicles and line to make up time.

Which is 87mph for the class 92s and 100mph for the Mk5s.
Maybe GBRf could approach Stadler with an "upgrade" to get the class 99s up to 80mph, or even dispensated to 80mph when working class 1s subject to a more intense exam regime. I appreciate the 99s are locomotives as opposed to coaching stock, but remember the 110mph vans that EWS used on the Walsall - Law junction parcels flow. Were they specifically modified B4 bogies, or just more rigorous exams ?

 

[92002]

Which is 87mph for the class 92s and 100mph for the Mk5s.
Maybe GBRf could approach Stadler with an "upgrade" to get the class 99s up to 80mph, or even dispensated to 80mph when working class 1s subject to a more intense exam regime. I appreciate the 99s are locomotives as opposed to coaching stock, but remember the 110mph vans that EWS used on the Walsall - Law junction parcels flow. Were they specifically modified B4 bogies, or just more rigorous exams ?

The 87mph is good for a freight train. Unless freight speeds increase. However the /4 99 will no doubt be built for a higher speed. No doubt with a different gear ratio of wheels.

 

[prj372]

The 87mph is good for a freight train. Unless freight speeds increase. However the /4 99 will no doubt be built for a higher speed. No doubt with a different gear ratio of wheels.

I think I read that Class 99 is capable of higher speed if a relatively simply software change is done rather than re-gearing, I could be wrong though!

 

[Rail Quest]

I think I read that Class 99 is capable of higher speed if a relatively simply software change is done rather than re-gearing, I could be wrong though!

Software change and bogie damper change to get them up to 100mph, according to Bob Tiller.

It wasn't clear if this electronically limits the loco's starting tractive effort though. Not sure if anyone could clarify that as I don't see why this wouldn't have been done from factory if there wasn't some downside.

Source:

(timestamp: 4:58)

 

[prj372]

Software change and bogie damper change to get them up to 100mph, according to Bob Tiller.

It wasn't clear if this electronically limits the loco's starting tractive effort though. Not sure if anyone could clarify that as I don't see why this wouldn't have been done from factory if there wasn't some downside.

Source:

(timestamp: 4:58)

Many thanks, ah yes I forgot about the damper change.