GBRf Class 99 - 30 locomotives now ordered

[northernbelle]

GWR do not have the final say. If DfT say “contract out Night Riviera operation” then that’s what will happen.

In any case, I’m sure those Cardiff-Taunton replacements a few years ago with assorted 57s, 66s and 66s were driven by FOC staff.

They don't have the final say, but they do have a say which will be influenced by factors including industrial relations.

The Cardiff-Taunton loco hauled services were driven by FOC staff but on a temporary basis. It was understood that those services would return to the FGW roster when appropriate traction was available.

 

[GB]

For a UK size loco, I think only Stadler would know, but the European size version has been built in the past with a 2800kW/3750hp CAT C175 engine fitted (same as used in the cl. 68). However that was before the latest emissions rules came in, so that might be more difficult to fit in now.

Thanks. Was trying to see what might be available to maintain performance and timetable on the Felixstowe branch.

 

[ac6000cw]

Thanks. Was trying to see what might be available to maintain performance and timetable on the Felixstowe branch.

The Railway Gazette article suggested Felixstowe port to Ipswich timings within 2 min of class 66 timings, which suggests to me the diesel engine would be a less powerful than the 3300hp in a 66, compensated to some degree by the better performance of a modern AC-drive traction system (better acceleration at lower speeds, but losing out at higher speeds due to less engine power).

Waving a wet finger, I'd hazard a guess at 1800 - 2500hp maybe?

 

[ac6000cw]

This is what the European spec. Stadler 6-axle EuroDual looks like in action - https://railcolornews.com/2020/05/0...x-axles-the-hvle-eurodual-in-regular-service/

It's hard to find weight and length information, but it's probably about 23m long and about 123 tonnes. So around 1.5m longer than a 59/66/70 and a bit lighter.

 

[GB]

The Railway Gazette article suggested Felixstowe port to Ipswich timings within 2 min of class 66 timings, which suggests to me the diesel engine would be a less powerful than the 3300hp in a 66, compensated to some degree by the better performance of a modern AC-drive traction system (better acceleration at lower speeds, but losing out at higher speeds due to less engine power).

Waving a wet finger, I'd hazard a guess at 1800 - 2500hp maybe?

This is what the European spec. Stadler 6-axle EuroDual looks like in action - https://railcolornews.com/2020/05/0...x-axles-the-hvle-eurodual-in-regular-service/

It's hard to find weight and length information, but it's probably about 23m long and about 123 tonnes. So around 1.5m longer than a 59/66/70 and a bit lighter.

Thanks for the extra info!

 

[hwl]

The Railway Gazette article suggested Felixstowe port to Ipswich timings within 2 min of class 66 timings, which suggests to me the diesel engine would be a less powerful than the 3300hp in a 66, compensated to some degree by the better performance of a modern AC-drive traction system (better acceleration at lower speeds, but losing out at higher speeds due to less engine power).

Waving a wet finger, I'd hazard a guess at 1800 - 2500hp maybe?

Provided the engine is vaguely sensibly sized there will be very little or no difference below 20mph as everything is limited by weight on the axles (unless the engine is very puny.) but 3 phase traction equipment should improve on this.

Which 66 timings -e.g. how heavy/ long is the train? Easier to get near existing timings with shorter trains...

As speeds on the branch don't get that high you might not need that large an engine especially with more efficient traction electronics. the 88s/93s use a CAT c27s (950hp) but the sensible (and Stage V certified) choice from CAT for the 99 is probably the 3516E at 2100hp

 

[GB]

Provided the engine is vaguely sensibly sized there will be very little or no difference below 20mph as everything is limited by weight on the axles (unless the engine is very puny.) but 3 phase traction equipment should improve on this.

Which 66 timings -e.g. how heavy/ long is the train? Easier to get near existing timings with shorter trains...

As speeds on the branch don't get that high you might not need that large an engine especially with more efficient traction electronics. the 88s/93s use a CAT c27s (950hp) but the sensible (and Stage V certified) choice from CAT for the 99 is probably the 3516E at 2100hp

Speeds not high but the branch is very stop/start so smaller engine would affect acceleration. Plus the bank climbing up from Ipswich to Westerfield and out of the terminals.

 

[ac6000cw]

Plus the bank climbing up from Ipswich to Westerfield

You could solve that one by electrifying from Ipswich to probably just beyond Westerfield (so the electric to diesel changeover happens on the level) - maybe just do the 'uphill' track if money is really tight.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Provided the engine is vaguely sensibly sized there will be very little or no difference below 20mph as everything is limited by weight on the axles (unless the engine is very puny.) but 3 phase traction equipment should improve on this.

Which 66 timings -e.g. how heavy/ long is the train? Easier to get near existing timings with shorter trains...

As speeds on the branch don't get that high you might not need that large an engine especially with more efficient traction electronics. the 88s/93s use a CAT c27s (950hp) but the sensible (and Stage V certified) choice from CAT for the 99 is probably the 3516E at 2100hp

Speeds not high but the branch is very stop/start so smaller engine would affect acceleration. Plus the bank climbing up from Ipswich to Westerfield and out of the terminals.

You could solve that one by electrifying from Ipswich to probably just beyond Westerfield (so the electric to diesel changeover happens on the level) - maybe just do the 'uphill' track if money is really tight.

But surely the Felixstowe branch has to be one of the busiest and therefore most profitable routes for Network Rail. Ergo it should be electrified soon - towards the top of NR's plans. The passenger trains are already able to run under 25kV, and FL, GBRf and DBC all have AC locos which could work through to the port. In this instance it is crazy to even think about battery Bimode locos and Felixstowe in the same sentence. There needs to be an East-West spine as follows

Felixstowe-Ipswich / Bacon Factory
Haughley Junction-Ely Dock Jn
Ely-Peterborough.
Peterborough-Syston Jns
Wigston-Nuneaton
Nuneaton-Grand Jn / Proof House Jn

In conjunction with the MML electrification this would provide through electric traction for anything out of Felixstowe towards London, but also to the ECML north, the MML north and south, the WCML at Nuneaton, inland container ports at Hams Hall, Lawley St, Cannock etc etc

It would also allow the Birmingham - Leicester - Ely - Stansted Airport passenger service to be turned over to EMUs and probably BEMUs for the Nottingham - Norwich service too - assuming Nottingham-Grantham and Ely-Norwich is achievable with batteries. It would allow some Bimode class 755s to be replaced by straight EMUs and released to other lines where Bimode is useful.

The "stones throw" Manton Jn - Corby should also be wired to allow both freight and passenger services.

 

[hwl]

But surely the Felixstowe branch has to be one of the busiest and therefore most profitable routes for Network Rail. Ergo it should be electrified soon - towards the top of NR's plans. The passenger trains are already able to run under 25kV, and FL, GBRf and DBC all have AC locos which could work through to the port. In this instance it is crazy to even think about battery Bimode locos and Felixstowe in the same sentence. There needs to be an East-West spine as follows

Felixstowe-Ipswich / Bacon Factory
Haughley Junction-Ely Dock Jn
Ely-Peterborough.
Peterborough-Syston Jns
Wigston-Nuneaton
Nuneaton-Grand Jn / Proof House Jn

In conjunction with the MML electrification this would provide through electric traction for anything out of Felixstowe towards London, but also to the ECML north, the MML north and south, the WCML at Nuneaton, inland container ports at Hams Hall, Lawley St, Cannock etc etc

It would also allow the Birmingham - Leicester - Ely - Stansted Airport passenger service to be turned over to EMUs and probably BEMUs for the Nottingham - Norwich service too - assuming Nottingham-Grantham and Ely-Norwich is achievable with batteries. It would allow some Bimode class 755s to be replaced by straight EMUs and released to other lines where Bimode is useful.

The "stones throw" Manton Jn - Corby should also be wired to allow both freight and passenger services.

That is actually part of the plan, just GBRf want to make something happen sooner. I'd expect to see London Gateway service as first use for 99's.

 

[MattRat]

I think a good nickname for these locos might be 'Warship IIs'

 

[gg1]

Why are they giving it a ship classification when 94-96 & 98 aren't taken? Also, if they are just going to be Stadler EuroDuals, why not use the 93 classification? It feels like they're using new classifications for the sake of it, and soon, we'll run out.

Indeed.

I know that ultimately it doesn't really matter and many people don't care one way or the other but it does irritate me when unused class numbers are skipped in favour of something snappier.

 

[Cowley]

I’ve moved a couple of the TOPS discussion posts into this thread to keep this one on topic:

Confused over TOPS multiple unit numbers.

Hi, I always under stood that multiple unit numbers under TOPS were defined thus: 1xx DMU 2xx DEMU 3xx AC or dual voltage EMU 4xx DC EMU 9xx Departmental Is the above correct? Also why are some DC units numbered 5xx? And 7xx is another odd one? Some bran new units are being given 7xx such...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bald Rick]

But surely the Felixstowe branch has to be one of the busiest and therefore most profitable routes for Network Rail. Ergo it should be electrified soon - towards the top of NR's plans.

Playing devil’s advocate here... if it is a profitable line, then why spend money electrifying it when that doesn’t result in extra profit?

(FWIW, I think th3 line should be an early candidate for electrification. Can’t see it happening though, especially with bi mode electro diesel locos).

 

[norbitonflyer]

Playing devil’s advocate here... if it is a profitable line, then why spend money electrifying it when that doesn’t result in extra profit?

It is difficult to consider the profitability of any line in isolation. Certainly it would carry much less traffic if it wasn't connected to anything at Ipswich. If electrifying it would allow simpler, more reliable locomotives to be used on the entire journey, it would be worth doing even if the cost of electrification outweighs the savings in costs attributed to that line alone.

To take an example - electrifying the short spur between Acton Yard and Acton Wells junction would allow conversion to electric traction of freight trains over a wide swathe of the Western Region, as it would give electric trains from the GWML access to the Great Eastern and East Coast Main lines

 

[Bald Rick]

To take an example - electrifying the short spur between Acton Yard and Acton Wells junction would allow conversion to electric traction of freight trains over a wide swathe of the Western Region, as it would give electric trains from the GWML access to the Great Eastern and East Coast Main lines

Which trains? There’s not that many that this alone would trigger electric traction.

 

[westcoaster]

There is a trial going on at Wellingborough on the MML for a retractable OHLE (rigid conductor bar), over a stone unloading siding. To allow electric locomotives to operate stone trains.

 

[GB]

There is a trial going on at Wellingborough on the MML for a retractable OHLE (rigid conductor bar), over a stone unloading siding. To allow electric locomotives to operate stone trains.

Can't see that being shoe-horned into an existing container terminal.

 

[Wyrleybart]

It is difficult to consider the profitability of any line in isolation. Certainly it would carry much less traffic if it wasn't connected to anything at Ipswich. If electrifying it would allow simpler, more reliable locomotives to be used on the entire journey, it would be worth doing even if the cost of electrification outweighs the savings in costs attributed to that line alone.

To take an example - electrifying the short spur between Acton Yard and Acton Wells junction would allow conversion to electric traction of freight trains over a wide swathe of the Western Region, as it would give electric trains from the GWML access to the Great Eastern and East Coast Main lines

Sorry. There is no comparison. Everything that runs along the Felixstowe line needs to be electrically powered, and could be if NR / GBR installed to catenary.

There is very very little, or actually nothing at all through Acton Wells which could currently be converted to electric traction and save the planet. If the Berks & Hants were electrified, and FLHH were so minded then the jumbo trains from the Westbury quarries could run under AC traction to Acton for diesels forward, but that would involve using diesels to trip the wagons into Westbury, and would require access to Acton yard to forward the traffic from there.

There are, or should be, shovel-ready electrification projects which NR could get on with, if only it had a budget. The completion of Filton - Chippenham for a start, but the reason I mentioned the Felixstowe branch is because it is a fairly simple standalone route, which, although tricky to arrange possessions etc is relatively simple to be done, partly because it is single line.

 

[hwl]

Can't see that being shoe-horned into an existing container terminal.

The bigger container terminals with decent number of train per day are ideal for a decent battery spec battery shunter e.g. Clayton Class 18.

 

[Wyrleybart]

The bigger container terminals with decent number of train per day are ideal for a decent battery spec battery shunter e.g. Clayton Class 18.

Especially if they can stand under the 25kV or over a charging rail between shunts and keep topping the batteries up. .

 

[norbitonflyer]

Everything that runs along the Felixstowe line needs to be electrically powered, and could be if NR / GBR installed to catenary.

It won't get further than Stowmarket if it's heading for the Midlands

 

[Bald Rick]

Especially if they can stand under the 25kV or over a charging rail between shunts and keep topping the batteries up. .

They won’t need to. Their battery capacity covers over an hour at full power. They also regen back into the battery. 2-3 hours a day plugged into the equivalent of a Tesla supercharger will be enough.

 

[66701GBRF]

Can’t say to much but announcement to be made sometime tomorrow.

 

[Doomotron]

All main line-registered steam locos are class 98 in TOPs. The 92s are already rated at 87mph (140kph) - would a re-gearing allow 100mph?

Well, they're certainly powerful enough for 100mph or even more.

 

[XCTurbostar]

Following the success of the EURODUAL, Stadler is delighted to announce the introduction of 6-axle dual-mode locomotives in the UK. Stadler, Beacon Rail and GB Railfreight (GBRF) have signed an agreement for the supply of 30 Class 99 locomotives including spare parts.
Able to reach speeds of up to 120 km/h, the powerful machines can run on 25 kV AC electrified lines with a power of 6,000 kW at wheel. In addition, they feature a high-power low-emissions Stage-V engine allowing operations on non-electrified lines. In line with our commitment to decarbonising rail transport, the Class 99 represents a new generation of locomotives that offers rail operators many economic and environmental benefits facilitating the modal shift from road to rail.

From the Stadler Facebook Page

 

[Spartacus]

Stadler's Press Release, carrying on from the above: https://www.stadlerrail.com/media/pdf/2022_0429_media releases_class99 locomotives_en.pdf

30's a decent order for a first batch of locos.

 

[bnsf734]

Here is an artists impression of the new locos

 

[Roast Veg]

Well they certainly carry that Albuixech heritage, and no odubt Co-Co will be welcome on what I assume is a longer and heavier build.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Is there any information on how much power they will have on diesel?