Multi (freight) operator loco convoys

[sprinterguy]

While at Stafford earlier this evening, I witnessed 0Z91 Wembley - Crewe Basford Hall passing through:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/R04126/2019/08/05/advanced

This was formed of 92010 hauling fellow GBRf classmates 92028 and 92032, as well as Freightliner's 90043 - See attached photo (Apologies for poor quality, I was in the process of boarding a train myself as it passed through).

While I know that multi-loco formations to return them to depots are common, this was the first time, outside of loco convoys to preserved railway diesel galas, that I can personally recall witnessing the locos of two different privatised freight companies being moved in a single convoy. I wondered if anyone more knowledgeable could tell me if this is a common occurrence?

Thanks in advance.

 

[221129]

Is the 90 not on hire to GBRF for sleeper duties?

 

[43096]

Is the 90 not on hire to GBRF for sleeper duties?

You are correct.

 

[sprinterguy]

Is the 90 not on hire to GBRF for sleeper duties?

Ah that would explain it, thanks.

I hadn't realised that this far into the sleeper franchise, GBRf still aren't providing a full compliment of class 92s for sleeper duties!

 

[ash39]

Non-availability of 92's is no longer the issue. The problem is mk3 sleepers are still in use, and the delner couplings fitted to the sleeper-dedicated 92's are not compatible with the mk3s.

 

[Bevan Price]

While at Stafford earlier this evening, I witnessed 0Z91 Wembley - Crewe Basford Hall passing through:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/R04126/2019/08/05/advanced

This was formed of 92010 hauling fellow GBRf class 92s 92028 and 92032, as well as Freightliner's 90043 - See attached photo (Apologies for poor quality, I was in the process of boarding a train myself as it passed through).

While I know that multi-loco formations to return them to depots are common, this was the first time, outside of loco convoys to preserved railway diesel galas, that I can personally recall witnessing the locos of two different privatised freight companies being moved in a single convoy. I wondered if anyone more knowledgeable could tell me if this is a common occurrence?

Thanks in advance.

It does seem to happen occasionally. Presumably if one company wants to move a light engine, it is probably cheaper to pay another company to haul it in a booked service than to run your own dedicated light engine movement. For example, I have seen (occasionally) 6K05 Carlisle - Crewe freight worked by DRS, but including a Freightliner 66 in the consist.

 

[43096]

Non-availability of 92's is no longer the issue. The problem is mk3 sleepers are still in use, and the delner couplings fitted to the sleeper-dedicated 92's are not compatible with the mk3s.

That is sort-of correct in that it is the Dellner fitted 92s that cannot work with the Mark 2/3 stock, but not because of the coupler (it can be dropped out of the way with a conventional draw hook then available). It’s because the 92s have had their train supply reconfigured to 1500V to work with the Mark 5s; “conventional” stock is a nominal 1000V.

 

[sprinterguy]

It does seem to happen occasionally. Presumably if one company wants to move a light engine, it is probably cheaper to pay another company to haul it in a booked service than to run your own dedicated light engine movement. For example, I have seen (occasionally) 6K05 Carlisle - Crewe freight worked by DRS, but including a Freightliner 66 in the consist.

It did occur to me that such a movement might save cost for the operator - I wondered whether it was something that occurred elsewhere around the country, so thanks for that.

That is sort-of correct in that it is the Dellner fitted 92s that cannot work with the Mark 2/3 stock, but not because of the coupler (it can be dropped out of the way with a conventional draw hook then available). It’s because the 92s have had their train supply reconfigured to 1500V to work with the Mark 5s; “conventional” stock is a nominal 1000V.

Ah, after it was noted that the 90 was being hired by GBRf for sleeper duties I did wonder whether it was something to do with maintaining backwards compatibility with the mark 3s. I hadn't considered that the train supply had been altered on the 92s.

This has been a very informative thread, I'm glad that I asked. Thanks folks.