NXEA! Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 For those of you that are interested in all things 90/92 and are unaware, all DBS 92's that aren't in traffic have been transferred to the WNWX for repair and reinstatement a few months ago, and a few of these have been out of service for the best part of 5/6 years. I realise that about 5 of the 92's have gone to Romania and Bulgaria, and more still might go overseas, but you will still see these DBS 92's come out of Crewe one by one over the next few months. 002/029/030 are in the WTAD pool for use with DRS, with others such as 024/026 recently being reactivated for use with DBS, with more to follow for the UK presumably as all DBS are assigned some form of OK date on TOPS, and I honestly wouldn't have thought they are all for Bulgaria/Romania. Also interesting is that 90034 which has been out of use since 2008 has been assigned to be repaired, apparently being relatively intact, and as some of you may know the DBS 90 pool has been very static since the fleet was culled several years ago. I understand the only other one with a chance of returning sometime is 90027, the rest apparently being in worse and worse condition as the months pass by. Hope this is of interest to some of you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I'd say that by the time the Scottish Sleeper franchise is re-let (starts in April 2015), a long, hard look will have been taken at Class 90's ongoing role, if any, in this. At that point there may be a medium-term future for barely the ten Freightliner machines on the WCML. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted October 9, 2013 Author Share Posted October 9, 2013 I'd say that by the time the Scottish Sleeper franchise is re-let (starts in April 2015), a long, hard look will have been taken at Class 90's ongoing role, if any, in this. At that point there may be a medium-term future for barely the ten Freightliner machines on the WCML. Indeed. Even the GA machines have an uncertain future post CP5. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 For those of you that are interested in all things 90/92 and are unaware, all DBS 92's that aren't in traffic have been transferred to the WNWX for repair and reinstatement a few months ago, and a few of these have been out of service for the best part of 5/6 years. I realise that about 5 of the 92's have gone to Romania and Bulgaria, and more still might go overseas, but you will still see these DBS 92's come out of Crewe one by one over the next few months. 005/024 have been quoted (somewhere, can't think where now!) as going to DRS for the hire-agreement, with 002/026/029 being reactivated over the last few months for use with DBS, with more to follow for the UK presumably as all DBS are assigned some form of OK date on TOPS, and I honestly wouldn't have thought they are all for Bulgaria/Romania. Unfortunately, the ex SNCF machines are still laid up at Crewe, not sure if we'll ever see any of these return! Also interesting is that 90034 which has been out of use since 2008 has been assigned to be repaired, apparently being relatively intact, and as some of you may know the DBS 90 pool has been very static since the fleet was culled several years ago. I understand the only other one with a chance of returning sometime is 90027, the rest apparently being in worse and worse condition as the months pass by. Hope this is of interest to some of you! I thought Europorte had bought all the ex-SNCF machines? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I thought Europorte had bought all the ex-SNCF machines? They have, haven't they...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted October 9, 2013 Author Share Posted October 9, 2013 My bad gents, had forgotten about that! A little look confirms that I had got it wrong. My mistake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted October 13, 2013 Author Share Posted October 13, 2013 I notice DRS 92 usage has begun, kicking off with 92002/030 on 4S43 Daventry-Mossend, 92030 being ripped at Crewe due to a windscreen wiper fault and being replaced by 002 for the rest of the journey. 029/030 have been transferred out of the DRS pool leaving only 002 in there at the moment. I presume another one or two machines will be transferred as driver knowledge increases to take over all the under-the-wires work from pairs of 66's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted January 9, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 9, 2014 Also interesting is that 90034 which has been out of use since 2008 has been assigned to be repaired, apparently being relatively intact, and as some of you may know the DBS 90 pool has been very static since the fleet was culled several years ago. I understand the only other one with a chance of returning sometime is 90027, the rest apparently being in worse and worse condition as the months pass by. Hope this is of interest to some of you! 90034 is being dedicated to the DRS/Virgin contract, even though DBS are supplying the loco, it will be painted in DRS colours. http://railpicturelibrary.zenfolio.com/blog/2014/1/virgin-trains-signs-class-90-deal-with-drsl Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I am really confused, we are electrifying a lot more of the UK railway for both passenger and freight however we are exporting perfectly serviceable electric locos (following overhaul) and the UK freight companies are ordering more diesel locomotives! Still the few electric loco left i the UK are going too be very busy in the near feature and I hazard a guess the route to Southampton will be provided with 25KV OHLE, however whether any electric freight loco will ever use it is open to debate! We no longer have British Rail however DaFT and co are trying to be dumbed down BR telling the privatised railways companies what to do - another railway farce on the horizon me thinks! Nigel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted January 9, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 9, 2014 I am really confused, we are electrifying a lot more of the UK railway for both passenger and freight however we are exporting perfectly serviceable electric locos (following overhaul) and the UK freight companies are ordering more diesel locomotives! Still the few electric loco left i the UK are going too be very busy in the near feature and I hazard a guess the route to Southampton will be provided with 25KV OHLE, however whether any electric freight loco will ever use it is open to debate! I believe that one of the last orders placed for locomotives is for electro-diesels................ Class 88's Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted January 9, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 9, 2014 I am really confused, we are electrifying a lot more of the UK railway for both passenger and freight however we are exporting perfectly serviceable electric locos (following overhaul) and the UK freight companies are ordering more diesel locomotives! Still the few electric loco left i the UK are going too be very busy in the near feature and I hazard a guess the route to Southampton will be provided with 25KV OHLE, however whether any electric freight loco will ever use it is open to debate! We no longer have British Rail however DaFT and co are trying to be dumbed down BR telling the privatised railways companies what to do - another railway farce on the horizon me thinks! Nigel Yes we are electrifying more UK railway - but in the most part that is for passenger traffic. Unless the wires extend into key freight terminals (and so far they don't - even the "electric spine" idea promoted by the government doesn't include freight terminals, not to mention the big gap between Sheffield & the Leeds area, but I digress) freight operators are not interested. The days of en-route traction changes are way behind us now and will not return, the economics of it simply don't stack up. The only slight leverage anybody has got is, with competition for paths at a premium on lines like the WCML, electric traction can be used as a carrot in the sense it allows more freight to operate. What NR cannot do is insist on electric traction - to do so is illegal under UK and EU legislation so if DBS decide a 66 slogging its way up Shap is the most economical option - thats what we get. Moreover freight companies operate on a strictly commercial basis - there is absolutely no way anyone can force the companies to use electric traction added to which things like the 90s & 92s are actually a very dated and inefficient design compared to the latest offerings from European manufacturers, especially when they have been left to rot for years in the open) While there has been some interest recently from DRS in the elctro-diesel platform, its worth remembering who the majority stakeholders in DRS are - and that is I believe HM Government (Remember DRS started life as a branch of British Nuclear Fuels and was initally only set up to move Nuclear fuel back to Sellafield). Its only when DBS or Freightliner decide to invest in substantial electric traction that we will know things have really changed with regard to Freight haulage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
definate maybe Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Stupid question probably.... but how can Virgin get a better deal from DRS then they can by going directly to DBS? Surely DRS are going to be charged the same as Virgin would but also add their own profit onto it. Seems really strange. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted January 9, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 9, 2014 Stupid question probably.... but how can Virgin get a better deal from DRS then they can by going directly to DBS? Surely DRS are going to be charged the same as Virgin would but also add their own profit onto it. Seems really strange. It all depends on how a deal is framed - I used to make my company considerable amounts of money hiring out Drivers at very competitive rates which looked and sounded good and were quite good until 'added hours' cut in at which point we made a massive killing as it was all pure profit; no other operator could compete with me on price. I was - I think - probably one of the first people, if not the first, to hire out locos on the national network and having had a bit of experience of it in the preservation field I knew exactly what sort of things to put into contracts as 'extras' and 'consumables' so yet again nice juicy profits (when someone else in the company subsequently negotiated a hire contract I reckon we came close to losing money on the deal he made, no wonder he had reputedly not been a successful rolling stock salesman in a past job; he was charging less for a loco per day than I was charging for a specialist wagon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 90034 has been noted under power around Crewe bolted to 90020 doing TDM tests the last few days, and is due to visit the paint shop at Toton on the 20th. Another 90 to return to the fold is 90037! Been out of traffic for 8 years, but apparently that's the next one, due to be taken inside soon. 90027 is apparently used for ETH still, so technically operational, however scrap wheels underneath, so don't expect this one to return yet, if at all... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Moreover freight companies operate on a strictly commercial basis - there is absolutely no way anyone can force the companies to use electric traction added to which things like the 90s & 92s are actually a very dated and inefficient design compared to the latest offerings from European manufacturers, especially when they have been left to rot for years in the open)I'd agree in the main, however I am of the view that each traction has it's own role to play and 90's and 92's don't seem to be past it. For example a 90 will do anything from a 16-coach ScotRail sleeper to a Freightliner, comparable to what the latest fancy Vossloh 88's will be able to do. 90's can seemingly go ton for ton with a 66 as they share turns under the wires for Freightliner, and if they were that dated and innefficent at pulling heavy freight, Freightliner would not be going to effort to repair 90042, or repair 48 year old 86's, a'la 86638! And 92's are the most powerful machines we've ever seen, unsurpassed at topping Shap with 2000t at around 55mph. I'd definitely agree that technology has moved on as we should be looking to order more, new, powerful European electrics, but current traction dated and innefficent? Not so much in my opinion, the FOC's seem to think otherwise! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted January 10, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 10, 2014 the FOC's seem to think otherwise! And thats the point. It doesn't mater what we or the Government might want them to do (with the possible exception of DRS). Money talks and as long as the FOC accountants are happy with the situation nothing will change Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 For example a 90 will do anything from a 16-coach ScotRail sleeper to a Freightliner, comparable to what the latest fancy Vossloh 88's will be able to do. Including regenerative braking or shunting it's train into an un-electrified intermodal terminal? Not saying that older electric traction has no role, but a new loco isn't likely to be just "the same, but newer". 92s seem to be somewhat "glass jawed" with regards to haulage capacity also, theoretically powerful, but... (sorry, edited to expand...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 And thats the point. It doesn't mater what we or the Government might want them to do (with the possible exception of DRS). Money talks and as long as the FOC accountants are happy with the situation nothing will change Just re-read my post, realised I worded it wrong. When I said "the FOC's seem to think otherwise" I was referring to the fact that they seem to think 90's/92's are not outdated, as they're reinstating some, and repairing heavily damaged ones! Think I must've made it look like I was saying something different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Including shunting it's train into an un-electrified intermodal terminal? A good point and of course definitely correct, but the point I was trying to allude to is that the electric traction that FOC's currently use is still extremely capable and just as useful to them as ever. However the electro-diesel nature of an 88 of course does make them an extremely attractive proposition, but the extra haulage capacity is minimal/negligible compared to their older equal, with 10mph less top speed too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traksy Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 88 has a problem. It's Bo-Bo. A Co-Co variant, a true electro-diesel not just a last mile electric would have a very good chance of replacing Freightliner's 86s (and some of their shunters). DBS seems to be giving away electrics so I don't think they will buy new tech soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted January 11, 2014 Author Share Posted January 11, 2014 Including regenerative braking or shunting it's train into an un-electrified intermodal terminal? Not saying that older electric traction has no role, but a new loco isn't likely to be just "the same, but newer". 92s seem to be somewhat "glass jawed" with regards to haulage capacity also, theoretically powerful, but... (sorry, edited to expand...) I see where you're coming from, however we haven't got a new monster Co-Co electric to really replace the older electric traction we've already got, and 66's when the new wires go up. It doesn't really bode well IMO when all we've got so far is DRS' willingness to purchase an electro-diesel which is pretty much 2013's answer to a class 90 under the wires, save for regenerative braking, AC traction motors, the ability to shunt into unelectrified terminals and a small smattering of extra horsepower. Personally I highly doubt that Freightliner is going to try out an 88 with a view to ordering some to replace any 90's for example, the benefits would be negligible, especially as the terminals that the 90's already work to/from are electrified, and an 88 won't have enough power on diesel to take it's train to Felixstowe, which is the real benefit they have over a 90. Plus I'm sure the leasing costs for Freightliners 90's and 86's are far more favourable. The only possible scenario for more 88's to be built is if Freightliner want to displace it's 86's and 90's at the same time, but as long as the economics of cheap, durable, Can's and Skoda's doing what they do now continues, I can't see the investment forthcoming. The only way these older electrics are going to go is if someone builds a UK version of one of the Co-Co Siemens/Bombardier products. 92's seem to be fragile as you say, but with no replacement on the horizon, they'll probably keep going. They're the only electric that can take those kinds of weights up Shap/Beattock as it stands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traksy Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I see where you're coming from, however we haven't got a new monster Co-Co electric to really replace the older electric traction we've already got, and 66's when the new wires go up. It doesn't really bode well IMO when all we've got so far is DRS' willingness to purchase an electro-diesel which is pretty much 2013's answer to a class 90 under the wires, save for regenerative braking, AC traction motors, the ability to shunt into unelectrified terminals and a small smattering of extra horsepower. Personally I highly doubt that Freightliner is going to try out an 88 with a view to ordering some to replace any 90's for example, the benefits would be negligible, especially as the terminals that the 90's already work to/from are electrified, and an 88 won't have enough power on diesel to take it's train to Felixstowe, which is the real benefit they have over a 90. Plus I'm sure the leasing costs for Freightliners 90's and 86's are far more favourable. The only possible scenario for more 88's to be built is if Freightliner want to displace it's 86's and 90's at the same time, but as long as the economics of cheap, durable, Can's and Skoda's doing what they do now continues, I can't see the investment forthcoming. The only way these older electrics are going to go is if someone builds a UK version of one of the Co-Co Siemens/Bombardier products. 92's seem to be fragile as you say, but with no replacement on the horizon, they'll probably keep going. They're the only electric that can take those kinds of weights up Shap/Beattock as it stands. What Co-Co Bombardier/Siemens? Traxx, Prima, Vectron are all Bo-Bo. Only Vossloh are willing to produce a Co-Co electro-diesel based on what I know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted January 11, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 11, 2014 If the government did want to push the freight companies into electric traction and avoid subsidies they could potentially do it the back door way by applying some sort of emissions charge on non electric trains to inflate their costs. The problem with that is it'd inflate rail freight costs and possibly result in modal shift which may end up completely negating the whole point of the exercise. Linking emissions to running costs and tax liabilities has been a pretty effective mechanism to promote low emissions cars but you can't really compare a consumer market for millions of cars with an industrial market for a (relatively) small number of trains. If subsidies were acceptable then personally I have no issue with the government offering them, these could take various forms (lower track charges, tax incentives, subsidised finance) and would enable the government to promote electric traction without the risks of increasing rail freight costs associated with a penalty based approach. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NXEA! Posted January 11, 2014 Author Share Posted January 11, 2014 What Co-Co Bombardier/Siemens? Traxx, Prima, Vectron are all Bo-Bo. Only Vossloh are willing to produce a Co-Co electro-diesel based on what I know. Could've sworn that the Traxx and the Vectron were Co-Co! Thanks, learn something new everyday! A Vossloh Co-Co electro-diesel could just be the ticket, but I suppose the weight might be a fair problem, especially if they want it do what a 92 does and 66 does in one bodyshell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted January 11, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 11, 2014 Could've sworn that the Traxx and the Vectron were Co-Co! Thanks, learn something new everyday! A Vossloh Co-Co electro-diesel could just be the ticket, but I suppose the weight might be a fair problem, especially if they want it do what a 92 does and 66 does in one bodyshell. I very much doubt you'll get 6700hp electric/3300hp diesel in one shell. I think the future lies in "last mile" stuff of about 1600hp. 1600hp would probably be good enough to get by localised OLE problems and maybe a pair could be used for longer mileages away from the wires for emergency purposes, such as WCML diverts to the S&C route if the load warrants it. Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.