Display:
The problems come this way, most freight locomotives are just as busy during the day as at night, and when they do have a period when they are idle it frequently is at a location at some distance from where you might run a passenger train. You could stable a rake of passenger coaches at Maschen Yd. or Rostock-Seehafen but why would you? The alternative is to have light engine movements which clutter up the network and use up driver time, and electricity. Most passenger prefer an arrangement like the Swiss operate with a Clockface timetable. With an arrangement like this the availability of passenger assigned locomotives for freight is very small and limited to the very late night, early morning. But their domestic freight network is predicated on late afternoon freight pickups followed by a sort and then a line-haul period followed by a distribution sort, and then delivery, much like a parcel service.
by jfbeaulieu on Tue Jul 7th, 2009 at 09:47:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hm. There are multiple issues here.

  1. In most of Europe (unlike Maschen or Vaires), freight yard to passenger station distances aren't that great, especially where the two are adjacent -- in fact, they are comparable to servicing runs.

  2. There is, in fact, an enhanced problem of light engine movements in the new separated operations regime: maintenance yards have been separated, too, and centralised and specialised for specific types, thus runs to the maintenance yard can now be much longer (especially in Germany). If a company had one loco type only, the nearest electric locotive maintenance yard would always be suited.

  3. In local passenger clockface service, locomotives and coaches are de-facto permanently coupled -- except in rush-hour increased frequency service (say one-hour rythm increased to half-hour rythm), the locomotives of these can be used in another way just when there is more 'space' in the schedule.

  4. In long-distance service, locos may take trains on 6-14 hour rides, with the reverse train hours apart, or trains on looped routes (think Hamburg-Stuttgart-Munich-Hamburg or Vienna-Klagenfurt-Salzburg-Vienna). Thus, large gaps (typically in the night) could arise when locomotives are better utilised by switching to another service (be it freight or an express in another direction).

  5. For long-distance passenger services, before the proliferation of driving trailers, intermediate stops at terminal stations also meant locomotive change.

  6. Locomotive schedules involving freight/passenger interoperation in situations as in 3)-5) were common before proper universal locomotives, already (with locos suited for light freight/local passenger or mountain line express/freight pairings).

  7. I emphasize separately, for the case of freight/express passenger mixed operation, that multiple-day locomotive schedules are the norm (e.g. say the maintenance shop has 8 locos, sets up a 7-day schedule, thus 7 locos are active on any given day, with one in reserve resp. maintenance). That may include long runs or multiple runs in whole days in both kinds of services.

  8. For fairness I add one counter-point myself: freight trains are quite often late, thus a switch back

  9. As a general note: of the three envisaged advantages of universal locos I named, operation synergies was second or third. Thus, the expected benefits would be significant even if every single locomotive in a universal type would be permanently assigned to freight, passenger or express service only. (This benefit was partly realised by some semi-modular locomotive families, like the steam resp. electric Einheitslokomotive families in thirties resp. fifties-sixties Germany, the Italian electric type programme of the eighties, or indeed the diesel Ludmillas with their three versions.)


*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Jul 8th, 2009 at 07:50:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: #1 To a degree this is true, however this is changing as heavy industry is being pushed further from the city center, or the working port is moving further from the historical port near the city center (reference Hamburg, Rotterdam, Bremerhaven, Terneuzen). Another changing dynamic is the rise of the modern Intermodal Terminal replacing early cramped facilities close to city centers (München Riem, Köln Eifeltor, Busto Arsizio, Wüstermark). Basel badly needs to replace Basel Wolf.

Re#2 There is no reason for number this to be a big problem, if the MTBF isn't increasing noticeably, it is time to look for a new locomotive builder. The passenger locomotives are being stressed by the high speeds and high daily mileage. Freight locomotives are not stressed like passenger locomotives they cover less mileage (kilometreage?) than passenger locomotive in a given time period, there is no reason to see a maintenance facility more than once weekly. Also passenger locomotives become obsolete more quickly while the nature of freight transport changes more slowly. Energy efficiency is the main reason to replace some of the existing freight locomotive fleet, along with repair costs.

Re#8 There is a strong correlation between Market Share and reliability of the service provided.

Re: point #9 The Einheitsloks were only interchangeable to a small degree, the Class 110 were 150kph w/dynamic braking, the Class 113 were 160kph (needed for Rheingold and other trains), the 139 and 140 were 110 kph, so while they could do both passenger and freight they have widely differing capabilities. I am sure you have noted the Class 189s working some passenger services for DB Nachtzug, as a current example if you accept the limitations of the freight locomotive.

by jfbeaulieu on Wed Jul 8th, 2009 at 06:23:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re 2, I did not speak of a change in frequency of maintenance yard visits. But the average distances travelled when doing so.

The passenger locomotives are being stressed by the high speeds and high daily mileage. Freight locomotives are not stressed like passenger locomotives

They are stressed differently. Just for the slip problems discussed elsewhere, they need sand re-supply, and wheel re-profiling if there are blocked wheels. Add to that the consequences of using axle-hung motors (f.e. the bogie frame damage, hit even the TRAXX 2).

passenger locomotives become obsolete more quickly

Do they? Express locos over the past century yes, due to the continually increasing maximum speeds; but old locos (ÖBB 1042, MÁV MÁV V43.10, DB 110, 111, SNCF 8500), some with with retrofitting (ÖBB, ÖBB 1142 and 1144, MÁV V43.20 and .30) survive just fine in local service.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Jul 12th, 2009 at 04:15:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re#2 Freight locomotives are rarely worked at capacity, for US freight diesels the average is about 12% of the time in full throttle, I would expect it is similar for European freight locomotives. I would also expect much lower sand use compared to US operations. I would expect more sand use in shunting service with tighter curves and poorer track alignment. The newest generation of US locomotives use cell technology to report problems back to repair centers, I know Bombardier offers a similar system, and I would expect Alstom and Siemens do too.

The Austrian 1042/1142 locomotives served a long life, but the future for the 1044/1144 series has gotten a lot more uncertain, and the 1014/1114 series are about finished. The rapidly expanding demand for both passenger and freight service meant that it was hard to acquire locomotives fast enough, but it is no longer uncommon to see a Taurus lok on a stopping service now. The DB class 110 only have survived as long as they have because of the inadequacy of the former DR Class 143 loks with their 120kph top speed. In spite of the vast numbers of this model I would be surprised to see many survive to 2020, except for the few being converted to Class 114.

If the TRAXX2 are suffering bogie damage from their Tatzlager traction motors then they must have been designed by the same person who designed the axles for the DB Class 403, 411, 415, and 481 units.

by jfbeaulieu on Wed Jul 22nd, 2009 at 08:20:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re 8, I see I haven't completed the sentence: For fairness I add one counter-point myself: freight trains are quite often late, thus a switch back to passenger service may need a longer time gap. However, for example for those locos needed in passenger service for rush-hour extra trains, the benefit remains even so.

Re 9: in this point, I focused on benefits other than operational. The Einheitsloks (both the steamers of the thirties and the electrics of the fifties-sixties) had a geat many interchangeable parts. In the locomotive shop, even main parts could be cycled between locomotives of different classes in revision at the same time. There have even been conversions between the 110 (originally express), 139 (mountain freight) and 140 (freight) classes.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Jul 12th, 2009 at 04:24:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re#8 This point is no longer significant as the freight customers have to a large extent voted with their money and moved to trucks, the railroads that want their business will have to move the freight when the customer wants it moved. There are many freight trains moving during the peak commuter hours, just not in the zones where the commuter trains are moving. This is why the dedicated freight corridors are being proposed to prevent the interference between passenger and freight traffic. BTW have you noticed that even the staunch advocates of the Universal locomotives, the Austrians, have begun to break up the OeBB Traktion fleet, with some of the 1116s being equipped to operate in Hungary on non-ETCS lines.

Re#9 the Br 110s were converted to BR 139s by taking bogies from retired Br 140s, which probably required modifications to the traction motor cooling ducts as the  Br 140 uses a bogie with a longer wheelbase.

The death knell of the Universal locomotive was sounded by the increasing differences in the type of services they are needed for. Passenger locomotives are required to achieve higher speeds, supply electrical power to passenger cars, and operate in push-pull mode. While freight locomotives need signalling systems for multiple countries, and likely the ability to operate under at least two power systems. Trying two combine both in one locomotive will result in an unaffordable price.

by jfbeaulieu on Wed Jul 22nd, 2009 at 09:07:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re 1, there are those trends, but, even the new terminals that aren't built on the place of ripped-up tracks groups in old shunting yards don't tend to be that far from city centres, and maintenance yards are moving out, too (see ICE or Eurostar maintenance facilities). Also, there were some breakers on the green-field trend, for example the bad start of most East German GVZ, in particular Großbeeren (no traffic in its first year!) and Erfurt-Vieselbach (though both are now running fine).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun Jul 12th, 2009 at 05:51:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series