WestCountry
Member
Isn't that just Paul Bigland's one that's linked in the first post of this thread, but cropped a bit and without the copyright marking?
If not, it's taken from the same angle at the exact same time.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Ultra 73s
- Thread starter Domh245
- Start date
- Status
If not, it's taken from the same angle at the exact same time.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Why would they need to match the 67?
The idea behind using the 73 is because the 67 is over powered for the train it is pulling.
ac6000cw
Established Member
Is that true for the Inverness and Aberdeen portions ?
3200hp is rather excessive for an 8? coach train.
ac6000cw
Established Member
Reaching back into the memory banks, I think the Inverness sleeper (north of E/G) went from a pair of 26s/27s to an ETH 47 to a 67, so I don't think it's ever been a single Type 3 duty (the Highland mainline isn't exactly as flat as a pancake).
Close.
47's
Double no heat 37's with generator car
47's
67's
47's
37's+Generator Car
Back to 47's again
ac6000cw
Established Member
Thanks
The pairs of 26s/27s were back in Mk1 sleeper days, of course (and steam heating).
ac6000cw
Established Member
Yes - the overnight Glasgow/Edinburgh - Inverness trains were handy when doing Scottish Rovers
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,269
I just want to confirm.... we have two distinct 'Ultra 73' rebuilds at this point?
One with a 1600hp MTU diesel and one with a pair of QSK-19s?
I assume both will retain ED capability with a similar rated power to before? (~1500hp at rail continuous)?
One with a 1600hp MTU diesel and one with a pair of QSK-19s?
I assume both will retain ED capability with a similar rated power to before? (~1500hp at rail continuous)?
ac6000cw
Established Member
That is my understanding - the 'MTU' ones are a GBRf initiated project, the QSK-19 GenSet version seems to be a bit of a joint venture demonstrator, see http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...repowered-class-73-to-roll-out-next-year.html
Last edited:
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Isn't that just Paul Bigland's one that's linked in the first post of this thread, but cropped a bit and without the copyright marking?
If not, it's taken from the same angle at the exact same time.
I thought that to!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That was my first thought as well!
apk55
Member
Should we be considering spending a consderable sum of money on doing up 50 year locos, rather than looking at a new build design.
My own suggestion for a replacment would be a modified Vossloh class 88, with added 3rd rail caperbility. By modifing the 4 quadrent converter to condition the power I doubt it would add that much to cost. Even if the power on DC had to be limited maybe 2MW it would still be a very usefull loco.
It would offer the advantage of 60% more tractive effort, 100mph top speed as well as being able to operate on AC, (which means it could run electric on many inter regionals runs etc. While the diesel engine fitted is more powerfull than the unmodified class 73, it is not as powerfull as the modified version although it is stage 3b emision complient.
I can well see in the lifetime of these locos (50 years?) the vast majority of lines in the south east (and most of the country) being electrified, with diesel operation being confined to a small number of minor branch lines or industrial sidings. Otherwise diesel will be required to work engineering trains and provide rescue in event of a power failure- and a electro diesel would be ideal for all of these tasks.
My own suggestion for a replacment would be a modified Vossloh class 88, with added 3rd rail caperbility. By modifing the 4 quadrent converter to condition the power I doubt it would add that much to cost. Even if the power on DC had to be limited maybe 2MW it would still be a very usefull loco.
It would offer the advantage of 60% more tractive effort, 100mph top speed as well as being able to operate on AC, (which means it could run electric on many inter regionals runs etc. While the diesel engine fitted is more powerfull than the unmodified class 73, it is not as powerfull as the modified version although it is stage 3b emision complient.
I can well see in the lifetime of these locos (50 years?) the vast majority of lines in the south east (and most of the country) being electrified, with diesel operation being confined to a small number of minor branch lines or industrial sidings. Otherwise diesel will be required to work engineering trains and provide rescue in event of a power failure- and a electro diesel would be ideal for all of these tasks.
Chris125
Established Member
That isn't really necessary for the kind of work envisaged for these locos, such as Network Rail test trains - these will be relatively cheap, fuel efficient and lightweight to give them wide route availability.
Chris
ac6000cw
Established Member
These are very extensive rebuilds - most of the power equipment is new e.g. the 3rd rail power control is now DC-chopper, so I suspect that re-use of the original locomotive parts is mostly confined to the structure, bogies and motors (and these will have been extensively refurbished).
The point of them is to create a go-anywhere, medium power, loco for infrastructure maintenance/test train use primarily. DRS is looking at rebuilding 37's with a new power unit because they also see a continuing need for medium power locos.
- Status