The Freightliner 86's

[andrewmay]

Hi all,

I was wondering...

Why do Freightliner still own and use their 86's? I love the cans myself and long may they continue but I do wonder why they're still running. Apologies for my naivety on the matter but are there not enough 90's spare or is the reliability better than the 90's or any other reasons as to why they're still here. I don't know if I'm just biased but 90's have never seemed to have a decent reliability so maybe the 86's are better for that?

Any answers are welcome.

Go forth and enlighten me...

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Freightliner only have ten 90s one of which is out long term with fire damage. Fifteen 90s are ex-virgin engines in use with NXEA and the other twenty five 90s are EWS owned. Freightliner has little choice but to use the 86s.

 

[87015]

Cheap and cheerful
or
Cheap and nasty

Take your pick!

Presume they'd need mega bucks to get their hands on 90s/92s.

 

[Nym]

a pair of 86s is cheaper to run (because the're simpler) than a 90, gives more traction than a 90, is more powerful than a 90, and doesn't wheelslip like a 90, theres nothing wrong with the old stock..!

 

[Phoenix]

a pair of 86s is cheaper to run (because the're simpler) than a 90, gives more traction than a 90, is more powerful than a 90, and doesn't wheelslip like a 90, theres nothing wrong with the old stock..!

Just to add It fail's alot less.

 

[87015]

Just to add It fail's alot less.

FL ones have been sitting down all over the place recently. I know skodas have crappy reliability as a rule but doubt the cans are much better at the moment. 501 also seems to have skoda reliability to go with its skoda diagramming!

Any sensible railway system would have seen the excess 92s in use with FL, but this is Britain :roll:

 

[Turbostar]

Any sensible railway system would have seen the excess 92s in use with FL, but this is Britain :roll:

That's very true, but are 92's still limited on where they can be used? Can they be used around FL routes in Essex & Suffolk etc?

 

[Phoenix]

You would think with the new incentives to reveret to more electric power that a new fleet of AC's will be produced soon.

 

[BJMorley]

That's very true, but are 92's still limited on where they can be used? Can they be used around FL routes in Essex & Suffolk etc?

FL Liveried Class 92's now there's a thought...
Brandon

 

[driver9000]

Class 92s are permitted to work over most of the WCML length the exception being Armitage Jn-Norton Bridge Nth Jn, They arent permitted to run double head with both locos drawing power, the inner loco must be hauled 'dead' with the battery isolation switches out and ETS must not be connected. Im not sure if any other operating restrictions would stop them working Freightliner trains on AC routes or even in DC land. Arent some of them still owned by SNCF though albeit stored at Crewe?

It would be nice to see these underused modern electrics being utilised on trains instead of rotting away in a yard - I wonder how many are already green with moss?

 

[Nym]

I think most of the 92s are in 'warm storage' so they don't rot, the're much more expensive than any other electic loco because of the GTOs and the Chunnel clearences. so we never know, that might find use with EWS again though DB Skindler

 

[class 313]

92 can't really run up the GEML, they suck up too much juice.

 

[Turbostar]

I agree, they are nice locos, & very handy to have & use I'm sure, but the problem is, they're so god damn expensive to run & maintain, hence why some are in store, & why not alot of companies are jumping at the chance to get them.

 

[class 313]

Also 92s wouldn't need to run double headed. Isn't the reason the 86s run double headed is because the loads they normally do are too heavy usually for one? (apart from 86501)

 

[Turbostar]

Ok, just had a look on Wikipedia & Answers.com about the 92's, & it mentions about the 7 that are stored, & states that these seven have complex electrical systems, & are unlikely to see further service in Europe again, & they no longer meet European safety standards. (????) Apparently, 5 have been purchased by Eurotunnel to be used by their Europorte 2 railfreight sector for short runs in France.

 

[class 313]

Ok, just had a look on Wikipedia & Answers.com about the 92's, & it mentions about the 7 that are stored, & states that these seven have complex electrical systems, & are unlikely to see further service in Europe again, & they no longer meet European safety standards. (????) Apparently, 5 have been purchased by Eurotunnel to be used by their Europorte 2 railfreight sector for short runs in France.

Does it say why they no longer meet the safety standards?

 

[Turbostar]

Nope, but it just seems a bit odd that these 7 are supposedly 'different' from the others, as I thought they were all made to the same specifications, & for running on different voltages, & signalling systems.

 

[class 313]

Nope, but it just seems a bit odd that these 7 are supposedly 'different' from the others, as I thought they were all made to the same specifications, & for running on different voltages, & signalling systems.

Oh, fair enough!

 

[87015]

Oh, fair enough!

Will the long stored ones have OTMR or even TPWS?
Certainly got the power to work mega liner trains over Shap/Beattock where 2x86/90 will slip and slide up the hill with a bit of rain!

 

[class 313]

Will the long stored ones have OTMR or even TPWS?
Certainly got the power to work mega liner trains over Shap/Beattock where 2x86/90 will slip and slide up the hill with a bit of rain!

I would of thought they have. But they might not.

The thing is about 92s, they can only really work the WCML/ECML/SEML but that's on par with the 86s so I don't know really. Maybe 92s could be used down to Southampton if the depot was electrified?

 

[Turbostar]

That's prob why they don't meet European Safety Standards, as they were withdrawn in 2000, so they wouldn't have had TPWS, OTMR, & all other sorts of safety stuff we have today, fitted. And, I'm sure I read somewhere ages ago, because these highly complex machines are so sophisticated, & bundled with all sorts of electrical & computer equipment, the safety systems (TPWS, OTMR, etc.) the rest of the fleet have, are specially modified, to stop any interference etc. with the on-board systems.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I would imagine the odd seven are the EPS locos which have bearly turned a wheel in umpteen years, although the five that Euro tunnel have bought are from that group so really only two could be non-standard in the near future. The other 39 92s are rotated between store and service depending on what exams are due and are used jointly by SNCF and EWS (or whoever it is now).

 

[33056]

92 can't really run up the GEML, they suck up too much juice.

Yes they can, have been cleared to Ipswich and Harwich for years now.

 

[RJ]

Maybe 92s could be used down to Southampton if the depot was electrified?

And run more freight trains through London which is already congested enough (particularly Clapham - Staines)?

 

[class 313]

Yes they can, have been cleared to Ipswich and Harwich for years now.

Cleared yes. Practical? Not really. When 92002 went up the GEML on tour, it apparantly took soo much of the power in the section, it had to be looped several times because it was taking up too much power from the trailing 321s and other units behind.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And run more freight trains through London which is already congested enough (particularly Clapham - Staines)?

Of course I can't decide that.

 

[The Planner]

Class 92s are permitted to work over most of the WCML length the exception being Armitage Jn-Norton Bridge Nth Jn,

Thats wrong, its class 91s that are banned Armitage - Norton Bridge. 92s are cleared on all of the WCML.

 

[33056]

Cleared yes. Practical? Not really. When 92002 went up the GEML on tour, it apparantly took soo much of the power in the section, it had to be looped several times because it was taking up too much power from the trailing 321s and other units behind.

Not so sure about that, the only reason they do not go to Ipswich etc is down to lack of suitable trains / drivers traction knowledge.

 

[driver9000]

Thats wrong, its class 91s that are banned Armitage - Norton Bridge. 92s are cleared on all of the WCML.

my apologies, I misread the D4 table in section 1 of the sectional appendix :roll:

 

[metrocammel]

Cleared yes. Practical? Not really. When 92002 went up the GEML on tour, it apparantly took soo much of the power in the section, it had to be looped several times because it was taking up too much power from the trailing 321s and other units behind.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Of course I can't decide that.

That sounds very much like an 'urban myth'. If you can cite some sort of factual reference for it, then fair enough- it reminds me of the story of everyones' house lights in Ongar (on the Epping to Ongar LUL line) dimming when a train accellerated on that section of track(!)

Thats wrong, its class 91s that are banned Armitage - Norton Bridge. 92s are cleared on all of the WCML.

Jeez, when was the last time a cl91 worked on the WCML!!?? I'd imagine that was back in 1988/9 when they were on test - I've seen a picture of a 91 being hauled by a roarer thru' Crewe around that time.

 

[djw1981]

a 47/67 on one end of a Mk3 rake and a 92 on the other end would be the almost perfect for the Glasgow - Nottingham route/.......I suppose I can dream!