New TPE Train Discussion

[dgl]

I'd have thought the diesel would be geared for at least 60mph, with good torque low down to ensure it can get a heavy train going again, plus, while the engine power is similar to a Class 20's, I'd expect power at the rail to be higher given 60 years of progress in between.

Remember that engine gearing doesn't matter too much when you are supplying a traction pack that also is connected to a 25kv source (well a lot lower at the motors/after the transformer) and that the motor gearing will be set-up to best use the power the overhead line gives out.



Also the size of the genset is a direct relation to the UK loading gauge, the size of the exhaust cleaning equipment, the size of the engine/generator, the engine control equipment and the space that is left after the transformer and the OHEL control equipment, hence the PRASA DUALS can have a larger engine. You simply (iirc) could not fit a larger engine in the 88's (well not one with significantly larger to make any real difference in usable power).



Just think that an engine not much smaller in terms of output than the ones in the Cl20's is able to be fitted underneath DMU's like the voyager.

 

[notlob.divad]

Loco road E between 6 and 7 has had its S&C removed recently however the other holding roads are still connected AFAIK (unless its been done very recently).

The one between Platform 1 & 2 is definitely 'broken' I checked as I was waiting for a train on Saturday. The point is rather moot, as the whole lot is going to get ripped out as part of the refurb next year before any of these new trains are seen. It will be a case of a few months dragging around a 2nd Loco per train loosing money, in track access charges and possibly reduced levels of seating. After which they will have the new 'other ends'.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The limitations of 88s on diesel for runs such as Mirfield to Leeds via Wakefield and Normanton will not just be down to power but also the size of the fuel tank. Given that the bodyshell is pretty much identical to the 68 but has to fit all the electrical gubbins plus the "donkey" engine, I wouldn't expect an 88 to have quite the range on diesel as a 68 does.

 

[WatcherZero]

2500l vs 5000l for the 68.

Tractive effort Speed Curve for the model

Electric 4KW/Diesel 2.8KW/Diesel 1KW

3600 ton 0%; 110kmh, 78kmh, 40kmh
3600 ton 10%; 45kmh, 22kmh, 8kmh
2800 ton 20%; 41kmh, 21kmh, 7kmh

A rake of 5 coaches would probably not exceed 200 tonnes

 

[Whistler40145]

I can imagine the small engine on the 88s would have the same feel as an unrefurbished Class 73/1.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[CosherB]

I can imagine the small engine on the 88s would have the same feel as an unrefurbished Class 73/1.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

How can you compare a 1960s EE 4SRKT with a contemporary Caterpillar C27?

 

[Whistler40145]

Strength of engine.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[CosherB]

Strength of engine.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

600 vs 950 bhp?

 

[Whistler40145]

Well 950 is 50 short of a Class 20, so even that's not overpowered.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[CosherB]

Well 950 is 50 short of a Class 20, so even that's not overpowered.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

What's a Class 20 got to do with it? I have, quite literally, no idea what you are trying to say.

 

[HSTEd]

A Class 88 would likely be capable of moving the train, it probably has more at rail horsepower than a Class 20 does due to advancements in the fitted electrical equipment.
The question is the ETS will be a large fraction of total power available if you aren't careful.
Whats the ETS index of a coach? 5? That is going to be like 100kW just for ETS.

It might work on some branchline where timings don't really matter, but I Wouldn't train main line operations with it.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I can imagine the small engine on the 88s would have the same feel as an unrefurbished Class 73/1.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

How can you compare a 1960s EE 4SRKT with a contemporary Caterpillar C27?

If you get technical the comparison isn't going to pass muster, but in terms of comparing a 73/1 on electric versus on diesel; and the presumed performance of an 88 on electric versus diesel there could well be some similarities. 73s tended not to be used on long diesel runs if it could be avoided, precisely because they were short on power. Not a huge problem when hauling 4-TCs which were fairly light, but on occasion they deputised on Intercity CrossCountry services (I think a pair made it to Brum a couple of times) and they generally lost time even on a railway which wasn't as busy as today's. They did a job when required but it wasn't encouraged by the powers that be. I imagine the approach will be similar with the 88s. Even if 88s take over on Transpennine services once the wires are up, for planned diversions off the wires I'd expect 68s to step in.

 

[Whistler40145]

I'm not technically minded, but was wondering how a 88 would manage the likes of Miles Platting Bank and the climbs either side of Standedge Tunnel if they had to work on the electrified sections?

 

[D6975]

I can’t believe this is still rumbling on.
The Diggle trans-pennine route is already very busy and going to get busier. Every available path will have a service running in it. The notion of letting loose trains that can’t keep pace with the others is ludicrous at best.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm not technically minded, but was wondering how a 88 would manage the likes of Miles Platting Bank and the climbs either side of Standedge Tunnel if they had to work on the electrified sections?

If they were working on the wires, I doubt even diesels could run. Diversion via Calder Valley would be more likely, probably with 68s hauling rather than 88s. If there was a power cut whilst an 88-hauled service was en-route it'd probably manage to get over but would almost certainly lose time.

 

[Whistler40145]

Thanks for your reply. I wasn't thinking that 88s would take over from 68s.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Thanks for your reply. I wasn't thinking that 88s would take over from 68s.

I didn't think you were, though many of us have anticipated 88s becoming the standard once the wires are up. This might not happen of course. My main point was that if wires are having work done the route is blockaded for the safety of the workforce.

 

[43096]

2500l vs 5000l for the 68.



Tractive effort Speed Curve for the model



Electric 4KW/Diesel 2.8KW/Diesel 1KW



3600 ton 0%; 110kmh, 78kmh, 40kmh

3600 ton 10%; 45kmh, 22kmh, 8kmh

2800 ton 20%; 41kmh, 21kmh, 7kmh



A rake of 5 coaches would probably not exceed 200 tonnes

Thanks for that.

On a point of complete pedantry I assume you mean MW not kW for the ratings.

 

[Spartacus]

I didn't think you were, though many of us have anticipated 88s becoming the standard once the wires are up. This might not happen of course. My main point was that if wires are having work done the route is blockaded for the safety of the workforce.

The diesel will come in handy for any branches, balloons or plastic bags on the OHL though, which normally mean a block to electric traction, but is safe for diesels. There's been two such incidents outside St Pancras in the last 24hrs. With an 88, or any other bi-mode such as the 802s you've the option to drop the pan and continue through the obstructed section on diesel.

 

[Roose]

Might well need a guard's office - he won't be able to usefully use the locomotive cab as it is isolated from the train.

Indeed so.

Otherwise where would (s)he hide when the train is full?

 

[D6975]

I'd guess at DFO (D), TSO and TSO (D) as the types.
The TSO (D) utilising the same bodyshell as the TSO.

The most logical spare would surely be an extra TSO (D).

Oh dear, a reasonable guess at the time, but if the driving ends aren't going to come till later then this would mean initially no first class.
A composite coach looks much more likely if the top n tail option is pursued initially as it seems it will. Still, it could use the same bodyshell as the SO, just different internal layout for part of the coach.

This would make a likely formation
CO (D), TSO, TSO, TSO (D), DSO
with possibly a guard's/bikes area in the DSO.

Also, the extra coach should be a driving one, as others have suggested - what was I thinking?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or will they go for a full FO? One in five isn't a huge ratio of First to Standard for a train being used for proper InterCity use.

 

[D6975]

A class 185 only has 15 FC seats, so 30 in a double set.
If the FC was in the driving coach, cab plus guard/bikes plus 30 seats would be about what would fit.
Put it in a coach on its own and you'd be looking at something like 45 if a big loo is fitted, probably a little too much judging by the takeup at the moment. This could change however if the perceived difference between SC and FC is increased.
Lets hope they get the balance right, the last thing the route needs is overcrowded services with empty seats in FC.

 

[ainsworth74]

I've been thinking a DFO would probably be about the right size. If you look at say a Voyager DMFO which has a universal access toilet, two sets of entry doors at each end, a wheelchair space and a space just behind the cab which could easily be used as a guards office and/or storage space for a trolley and has 26 seats in it. Seems like that would be about the right size of compartment. You could remove the doors between the seating and the cab and probably fit in another three seats (and then have access to the crew area via an emergency release like found on 180s so there are still two ways in/out in an emergency).