• 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!

GBRf Class 99 - 30 locomotives now ordered

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
4,515
The 99s somehow look taller and thinner than all other UK locos, when viewed head on. But this must just be a kind of illusion, as I imagine all locos will pretty much fill out the full loading gauge?
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,908
I believe it is something to do with the suspension on a certain type of wagon (twin single deck, single axle), but it has been a long time since I have dealt with those trains.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


From what I remember, Fords only put out wagons that were in use.
Therefore it would be a ride issue and ONE empty wagon would mean the whole train would be classed as empty for safety reasons.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,560
Location
Somewhere
Therefore it would be a ride issue and ONE empty wagon would mean the whole train would be classed as empty for safety reasons.
The whole train wouldn't be classed as empty, but yes the whole train would be speed restricted if it had one or more empty wagons of that type.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,908
The whole train wouldn't be classed as empty, but yes the whole train would be speed restricted if it had one or more empty wagons of that type.
Fair enough, that is what I was getting at.

Given that many such trains have at least one empty wagon it would appear to be a serious potential hindrance to speedier running.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
18,532
Location
Northampton
The whole train wouldn't be classed as empty, but yes the whole train would be speed restricted if it had one or more empty wagons of that type.
Would it be acceptable to ballast the wagon to allow the higher speed?
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
17,839
Location
Epsom
The 99s somehow look taller and thinner than all other UK locos, when viewed head on. But this must just be a kind of illusion, as I imagine all locos will pretty much fill out the full loading gauge?
It's an optical illusion caused by the tapered ends and the colour contrast.
 

99009

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2025
Messages
314
Location
Chesterfield
Upcoming workings planned for 99001, 99002 or 99004 are as follows subject to all the usual caveats:

Today

6Q40 Peterborough - Doncaster Decoy via Spalding and Lincoln Central:

6Q41 Doncaster Decoy - Peterborough via the ECML:

6Q42 Peterborough - March via Whittlesea:

NOTE: If 99002 works 6Q40 like it has all week, 6Q41 or 6Q42 will be 99002's 99th working that it was involved in. It isn't known precisely which one it is due to the mystery of 0Q99 Leicester - Leicester on 27/11/25.

Tomorrow

0Q37 March - Peterborough via Manea and Whittlesea (whichever 99 works all the above works this):

0Q75 Peterborough - Leicester via Oakham in daylight throughout:

4Q04 Peterborough - Ipswich via March, Ely and Stowmarket:

Saturday

4Q18 Ipswich - Temple Mills Loop via the GEML:

4Q25 Temple Mills Loop - Ipswich via the GEML:

4Q19 Ipswich - Temple Mills Loop via the GEML:

0Q19 Temple Mills Loop - Peterborough via Broxbourne, Audley End, Cambridge, Ely and March in mostly daylight:

I really hope people reading this find the info helpful. If anyone knows which 99 (001 or 002) led 0Q98 Leicester - Peterborough on Monday I would still like to know please.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
9,647
Location
Croydon
Upcoming workings planned for 99001, 99002 or 99004 are as follows subject to all the usual caveats:

Today

6Q40 Peterborough - Doncaster Decoy via Spalding and Lincoln Central:

6Q41 Doncaster Decoy - Peterborough via the ECML:

6Q42 Peterborough - March via Whittlesea:

NOTE: If 99002 works 6Q40 like it has all week, 6Q41 or 6Q42 will be 99002's 99th working that it was involved in. It isn't known precisely which one it is due to the mystery of 0Q99 Leicester - Leicester on 27/11/25.

Tomorrow

0Q37 March - Peterborough via Manea and Whittlesea (whichever 99 works all the above works this):

0Q75 Peterborough - Leicester via Oakham in daylight throughout:

4Q04 Peterborough - Ipswich via March, Ely and Stowmarket:

Saturday

4Q18 Ipswich - Temple Mills Loop via the GEML:

4Q25 Temple Mills Loop - Ipswich via the GEML:

4Q19 Ipswich - Temple Mills Loop via the GEML:

0Q19 Temple Mills Loop - Peterborough via Broxbourne, Audley End, Cambridge, Ely and March in mostly daylight:

I really hope people reading this find the info helpful. If anyone knows which 99 (001 or 002) led 0Q98 Leicester - Peterborough on Monday I would still like to know please.
Yes, appreciated.

Question - is there one missing on tomorrow after 0Q75 and before 4Q04 ?.
 
Last edited:

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,908
Would it be acceptable to ballast the wagon to allow the higher speed?
I would see no reason why not.

Given how lightweight cars are, it seems a bit strange that the absence of 3 or 6 cars on a wagon can have such a drastic effect. e.g. Would 2 cars on a wagon render it safe? If yes, then more careful loading could ensure NO wagon is left empty as loads were redistributed. All theoretical of course.
 

99009

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2025
Messages
314
Location
Chesterfield
Yes, appreciated.

Question - is there one missing on tomorrow after 0Q75 and before 4Q04 ?.
Not as far as I know. 0Q75 had a path for both Wednesday and Friday but was cancelled both days.

4Q04 will run. 99001, 99002 and 99004 all to choose from at Peterborough.

Next week there will be more of the same runs as there were this week between Peterborough and Doncaster, but with different timings. A 99 will collect the wagons from March yard again.
 

Obar123

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2024
Messages
116
Location
Cambridgeshire
Not as far as I know. 0Q75 had a path for both Wednesday and Friday but was cancelled both days.

4Q04 will run. 99001, 99002 and 99004 all to choose from at Peterborough.

Next week there will be more of the same runs as there were this week between Peterborough and Doncaster, but with different timings. A 99 will collect the wagons from March yard again.
99001, 99004, 66301, 66713
 

99009

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2025
Messages
314
Location
Chesterfield
I believe 4Q04 has had a couple of issues en-route to Ipswich that have caused some small delays. Not sure what the issues were, but 4Q04 is on the move again now approaching Stowmarket.
 

saismee

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2023
Messages
1,734
Location
UK
I believe 4Q04 has had a couple of issues en-route to Ipswich that have caused some small delays. Not sure what the issues were, but 4Q04 is on the move again now approaching Stowmarket.
It is now stopped at Stowmarket and will be there until 2230 due to being too long to fit into the Ipswich reception!

Trains are now running both directions on P2 at Stowmarket.
 

Obar123

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2024
Messages
116
Location
Cambridgeshire
It is now stopped at Stowmarket and will be there until 2230 due to being too long to fit into the Ipswich reception!

Trains are now running both directions on P2 at Stowmarket.
How can they keep messing up the length and being too long to fit in Ipswich RS1. I can understand it happening once but now multiple times?
 

saismee

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2023
Messages
1,734
Location
UK
How can they keep messing up the length and being too long to fit in Ipswich RS1. I can understand it happening once but now multiple times?
I don't know but there were some very grumpy people at Stowmarket who were messed around back and forth over the awful temporary footbridge to get their train. Cyclists included.
 

99009

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2025
Messages
314
Location
Chesterfield
Of potential interest to some people this morning, 0Q19 has been replaced by 0Q20.

0Q20 Temple Mills Loop - Peterborough:

This is noteworthy as 0Q20 is booked via Finsbury Park, Gordon Hill, Stevenage, Hitchin and Huntingdon and will be the first time a 99 has appeared on this route and on the ECML south of Peterborough.

EDIT: 0Q20 consist order 100% confirmed as 99004+99001+66713 with pan raised on 99004 at Crews Hill.
 
Last edited:

Rail Quest

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2023
Messages
757
Location
Warrington
I believe 4Q04 has had a couple of issues en-route to Ipswich that have caused some small delays. Not sure what the issues were, but 4Q04 is on the move again now approaching Stowmarket.
This YouTube video is saying there was an issue with the DSD at March and an adhesion issue on the gradient approaching Elmswell (where the video was filmed). In the video, you can hear they've got both 001 and 004 under power, presumably to overcome the gradient.
[URL directs to YouTube video of 99001 & 99004 hauling 4Q04 through Elmswell]

The adhesion issue is the first thing Ive seen happen to the locos that concerns me. Would a single 66 have also slipped to a stand on the same section with the same weight and conditions? I'd find it hard to believe if a nearly 30-year old design was beating out a brand new locomotive with advanced WSP control.
 

Adrian Barr

Member
Joined
2 Jul 2020
Messages
776
Location
Doncaster
The intermodal wagons used on these moves reached Peterborough on 4Z98, 06:39 from Doncaster Iport on Friday morning.

Trailing weight of the loaded wagon set is 1894 tons. With the added weight of a dead 99 and two dead 66s it would have been 2261 tons trailing on the test runs if one 99 was working solo.

After arriving on 4Q19, the wagons were left at Temple Mills loop along with 66301, with the other locos departing on 0Q20 as per post #1429.

66301 is now hauling the wagons as 4Z98 11:34 to London Gateway via High Meads Jn and Stratford.

I really hope people reading this find the info helpful.

Yes the info in this thread on upcoming 99 movements is very welcome, if not for this thread I wouldn't notice these moves were happening...
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,560
Location
Somewhere
Tops list for 4Q18 shows total weight of 2374 tons against maximum authorised load of 2450 tons. Length was 110SLU (698m) against max authorised length of 111 SLU.
 

Adrian Barr

Member
Joined
2 Jul 2020
Messages
776
Location
Doncaster
Tops list for 4Q18 shows total weight of 2374 tons against maximum authorised load of 2450 tons

Yes, the train document includes the weight of the hauling loco(s) so 2261 trailing + 113 tons for the hauling loco = 2374. I would guess the authorised maximum loads for the 99s are being input to cover the requirements of the planned testing until something more official is eventually worked out and the capabilities of the locos are understood.

Would a single 66 have also slipped to a stand on the same section with the same weight and conditions?

The Ian Allan gradient profile book shows Elmswell at the top of a 1-in-159 climb, which isn't normally a concern for a 66. Loads book has the standard trailing weight for a 66 as 2430 tons, or 3010 tons for the "66H" loading (used for specially authorised loads) on this section of line.

I'm not sure what the situation was with 4Q04 in the video. 4Q04 lost 14 minutes between Bury St Edmunds and Haughley Junction - Elmswell is only 3 or 4 miles from Haughley Junction and all the delay from Bury St Edmunds to Ipswich has been attributed to the length issue at Ipswich mentioned in post #1426. Judging from the open trains time map, CO691 signal at the end of the platform at Elmswell is the penultimate one before the junction, so I wonder if 4Q04 was being signal checked before they decided to let it move forward to Stowmarket? Or perhaps approaching Elmswell running slowly on adverse signals caused a problem with adhesion... not sure.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
9,647
Location
Croydon
Yes, the train document includes the weight of the hauling loco(s) so 2261 trailing + 113 tons for the hauling loco = 2374. I would guess the authorised maximum loads for the 99s are being input to cover the requirements of the planned testing until something more official is eventually worked out and the capabilities of the locos are understood.



The Ian Allan gradient profile book shows Elmswell at the top of a 1-in-159 climb, which isn't normally a concern for a 66. Loads book has the standard trailing weight for a 66 as 2430 tons, or 3010 tons for the "66H" loading (used for specially authorised loads) on this section of line.

I'm not sure what the situation was with 4Q04 in the video. 4Q04 lost 14 minutes between Bury St Edmunds and Haughley Junction - Elmswell is only 3 or 4 miles from Haughley Junction and all the delay from Bury St Edmunds to Ipswich has been attributed to the length issue at Ipswich mentioned in post #1426. Judging from the open trains time map, CO691 signal at the end of the platform at Elmswell is the penultimate one before the junction, so I wonder if 4Q04 was being signal checked before they decided to let it move forward to Stowmarket? Or perhaps approaching Elmswell running slowly on adverse signals caused a problem with adhesion... not sure.
Or they deliberately stopped to see how a single 99 would cope from a standing start. That would be my preferred test.
 

Harlequinuk

On Moderation
Joined
15 May 2025
Messages
343
Location
UK
Does the 99 have the same traction control system as the 93? or could be be less advanced?
 

47286Dan

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2018
Messages
2,125
Mondays movements

99001 MBEL PBOROSDGB 450Q011J09 F LESTER SD B
99002 MBEL PBOROSDGB 450Q011J09 F LESTER SD B
99003 MBEL LESTER SD LESTER SD F B
99004 MBEL DONCDNDCY 230Q341N09 F PBONYGBRF B
99005 MBEL PBONYGBRF PBONYGBRF F B
99006 MBEL PBONYGBRF PBONYGBRF F B

99005 & 99006 earlier worked 0Q98 to Peterborough

Dan
 

99009

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2025
Messages
314
Location
Chesterfield
Urgent request if I may please.

1. Does anyone know which 99 led 0Q98 Leicester - Peterborough yesterday between 99005 and 99006? An urgent request because it was the first move under its own power for whichever 99 led!

2. Does anyone know if 0Q98 actually went via Peterborough station? I have doubts considering these moves don't normally.
 
Last edited:

Spartacus

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2009
Messages
3,828
Urgent request if I may please.

1. Does anyone know which 99 led 0Q98 Leicester - Peterborough yesterday between 99005 and 99006? An urgent request because it was the first move under its own power for whichever 99 led!

2. Does anyone know if 0Q98 actually went via Peterborough station? I have doubts considering these moves don't normally.

I don't know which was leading but it definitely went via the station, platform 4.
 

The_Train

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2018
Messages
5,247
Urgent request if I may please.

1. Does anyone know which 99 led 0Q98 Leicester - Peterborough yesterday between 99005 and 99006? An urgent request because it was the first move under its own power for whichever 99 led!
From a photo I have seen 99006 led
 

Top