It's time for more electric loco's!

[ChrisCooper]

Modern diesels are over 3000hp and electrics 5000hp continuous, a 73 was 600 and 1600 respectively, might be a bit under-powered.

Any extra equipment adds weight and so access charges and lowers haulage capacity, is more to go wrong so increases maintenance costs and down-time, because of our loading gauge our trains are small so lack the room for extra equipment.
But apart from that its a good idea

Erm, did I actually suggest using 73s? The 73s were built in the 60s, at which time diesels of over 3000hp were around (Deltics) and Electrics of over 4000hp (86s), so were somewhat underpowered back then. Their electric power was restricted by the fact they were third rail. They were underpowered for mainline use on diesel, but they were not intended for that, the diesel engines were for working in yards and for branchlines where electrification was not provided. That's where my suggestion came from, that the problem with electrics locos is that they cannot work into a lot of yards.

Weight is an advantage to freight locos, not a disadvantage, as it increases haulage capacity. More weight means more adheasion. A 92 weighs over 100t compared to around 80t for the passenger electrics. I expect most of it is ballast for adheasion (especially for in the tunnel with steep gradients). Even on freight diesels, a lot of the weight is ballast. The 37/7s have around 15t of ballast, giving an increase in tractive effort and therefore hauling capacity. Yes, space would be an issue. Going back to the 73s though, more powerful engines than they had are now found under various DMUs. It might be tight, but I'm sure space could be found to fit a 1000hp engine into an electric loco. It's not like it would need large fuel tanks due to it's fairly limited use.

 

[captainbigun]

One key issue. A 73 doesn't have a transformer. AC locos do have transformers and they are big and heavy.

The 92 is over 100 tonnes as it is crammed full of kit, duplication provided for use in the Chunnel. There's no ballast. The 89 is also over 100 tonnes, it is less crammed full of kit, but does have two oil filled converters which a 92 doesn't. There's no way you'd get an engine, alternator and the additional control kit as well as fuel tanks in and keep the axle weight down to a sensible number.....if you could fit it all in anyway.

 

[Voyager 2093]

So if the Class 90s are withdrawn what will operate on the GEML?

 

[A0]

So if the Class 90s are withdrawn what will operate on the GEML?

Almost certainly an EMU of some description. After all, EMUs have been used on Bournemouth / Weymouth services for many years now and they are a similar distance / journey type. So I'd expect a Desiro / Electrostar variant with a 'long distance' emphasis - 2+2 seating, doors at vestibule ends etc.