Serco sleeper 73's

[DarloRich]

but the 92 will pull the 16 car section to Edinburgh surely

 

[jopsuk]

it is only load 5 or 6 i think these days on the inverness sleeper 1x brake 1x lounge 1x seats 3xslep

The Inverness portion HAS to be an 8-car "half set". The seated coach is the brake coach. so, one BSO, one lounge, 6xSLE/SLEP.

Reason it has to be this is that the maintenance facility is at Inverness. As I understand it, there's always a 9th 8-car set there, either available or being maintained.

 

[NotATrainspott]

but the 92 will pull the 16 car section to Edinburgh surely

Yes. The plan is that the 92s will replace everything that the 90s do - Euston to Glasgow and Edinburgh, both lowland and highland - and the 73s will replace everything that the 67s do. That both locomotives are fitted with third rail shoes is irrelevant for the sleeper operation as two 400m sleeper platforms are still included in the two remaining Euston rebuild options.

 

[170401]

While I feel that one of these “new” class 73s is much more appropriately suited to hauling the lightweight Fort William sleeper over the West Highland line than a class 67, I do wonder what Serco and GBRf’s proposal is for the Inverness sleeper over the steeply graded Highland main line. Granted, the Inverness sleeper has shrunk considerably since privatisation, but in the past 25 years before the current class 67 operation the train was routinely worked by 47s or class 37s in pairs. Even with basic rules of thumb about horse power per carriage considered, I still wonder whether a single class 73 might struggle on the challenging grades.

The plan is most likely to put two 73's on the inverness portion. this train is normally load 8 although often runs with 9 or even 10 when the Fort William day coaches require a maintenance change. I'd imagine a single loco would handle the Fort William easily, even with load 5 in summer (do they still do that?). Load 6 on the Aberdeen shouldn't be much of a problem as it isn't nearly as challenging a route. 90 mph top speed is no problem either as these trains don't normally exceed 80 under normal circumstances and theirs little opportunity to top 90 by much north of Edinburgh anyway.

Something not mentioned so far is that it might well suit GBRF to put a sizeable fleet of these rebuilt loco's into Scotland. I wouldn't be surprised if the West highland freights went over to pairs of them. It may also allow them to bid for more new to rail freight in Scotland that would otherwise be uneconomical with a 66. With a small go anywhere type 2 style loco their may be many untapped possibilities out there.

 

[Jonny]

I find this puzzling too - bearing in mind that an HST with a failed power car (and hence only 2250bhp) isn't allowed north of Blair Atholl without assistance.

I suspect that there are other issues, arising from the high-speed gearing meaning that the traction motors may end up spinning more slowly than they are meant to, hence less back emf* and the resultant reduced impedence causes a current surge that heats the armatures up and burns them out.

* back emf occurs because motors are also generators, and increases as rotational speed increases, and provides impedance (reactive resistance) to the current being driven across the motor.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes. The plan is that the 92s will replace everything that the 90s do - Euston to Glasgow and Edinburgh, both lowland and highland - and the 73s will replace everything that the 67s do. That both locomotives are fitted with third rail shoes is irrelevant for the sleeper operation as two 400m sleeper platforms are still included in the two remaining Euston rebuild options.

One advantage of the Class 73 is that their route availability is two levels lower (6 vs the Class 67 at eight) and it therefore enjoys the privilege of not having to slow down for (or even being allowed to cross) certain bridges. This would be particularly desirable on the West Highland line and if need be, doubling up is still an option.

 

[starrymarkb]

I suppose a really outlandish idea would be to run the sleeper out of waterloo with the 73 dual heading to cover in case the 92 broke down or the wires were stuffed. at least if would naturally find its way back to it's 3rd rail home.

The 92 can also run on Third Rail

 

[sprinterguy]

I'd imagine a single loco would handle the Fort William easily, even with load 5 in summer (do they still do that?).

Yep, still runs as load 5 during the summer.

 

[thetangoman]

Heard a statement from a First Scotrail Empolyee that Serco may not be getting the contract as they were banned from contract bidding due to irregularities in an MOD contract last year which they were fined for.

 

[bigdelboy]

Heard a statement from a First Scotrail Empolyee that Serco may not be getting the contract as they were banned from contract bidding due to irregularities in an MOD contract last year which they were fined for.

Smells like a rat ... indeed a class 1550hp 33/1 complete with ETH and bagpipes seems ideally suited for the mission ... a super mcrat ... if they weren't clapped out ....

 

[NotATrainspott]

Heard a statement from a First Scotrail Empolyee that Serco may not be getting the contract as they were banned from contract bidding due to irregularities in an MOD contract last year which they were fined for.

The FT says the ban was lifted at the beginning of February and Serco won another defence contract on Feb 10th, so I don't see that being correct somehow.