Locomotives

The Gen-Set idea seems to be great at least on paper. So far they have a lot of favorable publicity. Well be so green it will be St. Patrick's day everyday. They'll save so much fuel that they'll have to bring up tank trucks to unload them before they spill fuel on the ground. Now we need some operating personnel to report in on operations. The standard by which comparisons are made is the GP38, mechanically and electrically as simple as you can get. Remember that the newest GP 38 has got to be about 30 years old. GE has a thoughtful comparison in their "Faster Freight, Cleaner Air-2008 publication that of course pushes their rebuilt 4 axle locomotive with the GEVO I6 engine and modern controls. If it wasn't for fuel consumption and I don't think the data is going to show the GP 38 in its best light, the GP 38 would have them both beat on costs. The GP 38 isn't tier anything and the gen-set and GE are. The point is that the GP 38 is the target. Whenever I see picture of gen-set locomotives in action they seem to be mu'd with other locomotive which seems to negate the advantage of multi engines. They also can pour out the black smoke on a heavy load. Brookville claims that for switching they keep the engine(s) at fast idle to reduce turbo lag and be able to pick up the load faster. Nothing new there but negates some of the fuel savings. I also read that to put another engine on line takes about 40 seconds. A long time to wait for instant power. I think operationally that all the engines would be run as a rotating reserve further negating any advantages. Well now I need to be set straight so have at it.

Well there are a lot of GP38 type locomotives in use, they all are going to have to go away within 7 years or so. For my mind the likely successful replacement is going to be something more like MPI's GP15D or GP20D locomotives. But the GP22ECO is also possible. In any case I expect there to be less kick of cars of carload freight in the future, it won't go completely away, but it will be done in fewer locations, by fewer locomotives.

  Gen-Set is the current rage for yard/local engines.  The fuel saving can be quite impressive(and they meet the current emissions standards).  The down side is that they have experienced quite a few engine fires.  I suspect this will be fixed over time as the the actual modular generator sets get 'railroad ruggedized'.  Many of these outrage have been due to electical cable or a fuel line breaking loose from their brackets.  Swithcing service can be quite rough with lots of 'G' forces.

  As these units 'age', it will be interesting to see in maintenace costs stay in-line or rise as there are 3 of everythign to go wrong.  Time will tell.

  EMD also has a 2200 hp V8 710ECO package to upgrade exising GP's as well(and has even sold this to KSC).  EMD also offers a 3000 hp V12 710ECO package aimed at upgrading the SD40-2 market.  EMD get around the 'turbo lag' issue by direct coupling the the crankshaft to the turbo at low RPM.  A centrifical clutch disengages the turbo at high RPM when there is enough 'boost' preassure to drive the turbo.  The GE 'Straight 6' GEVO has been announced, but I have heard of no orders at this time.  Perhaps as the economy recovers, we will see enough new locomotive orders to see what direction the railroads are going.

Jim

creepycrank:

The Gen-Set idea seems to be great at least on paper.

I'm not a fan, even on paper. Too many moving parts to do too small a job. One high speed diesel engine/gen set with storage batteries as a hybrid might be OK for low duty cycle service, but three of them? Forget it. Otherwise, I'd rather a 8 cylinder 710 or 6 cylinder GEVO - something that wouldn't eat me out of house and home should I need to place it in high duty cycle service for a while (GP38s running flat out in road service always make me wince when I think about the fuel!)

BNSF and UP have lots of gensets down here in Houston. Most of UP's are along the ship channel on the east side since there is loco maintenance facilities over there. Supposedly they are really working hard to try to improve their reliability as they are down on average about 40% of the time. They have called it "teething problems". The heaviest switching in town, at least by UP, is still not done by gensets.

I think the concept is just fine. As with the first of anything, there are going to be lots of issues to work out. My biggest complaint is that they are so ugly.

jrbernier:

  Gen-Set is the current rage for yard/local engines.  The fuel saving can be quite impressive(and they meet the current emissions standards).  The down side is that they have experienced quite a few engine fires.  I suspect this will be fixed over time as the the actual modular generator sets get 'railroad ruggedized'.  Many of these outrage have been due to electical cable or a fuel line breaking loose from their brackets.  Swithcing service can be quite rough with lots of 'G' forces.

  As these units 'age', it will be interesting to see in maintenace costs stay in-line or rise as there are 3 of everythign to go wrong.  Time will tell.

  EMD also has a 2200 hp V8 710ECO package to upgrade exising GP's as well(and has even sold this to KSC).  EMD also offers a 3000 hp V12 710ECO package aimed at upgrading the SD40-2 market.  EMD get around the 'turbo lag' issue by direct coupling the the crankshaft to the turbo at low RPM.  A centrifical clutch disengages the turbo at high RPM when there is enough 'boost' preassure to drive the turbo.  The GE 'Straight 6' GEVO has been announced, but I have heard of no orders at this time.  Perhaps as the economy recovers, we will see enough new locomotive orders to see what direction the railroads are going.

Jim

 Interstingly, UP is apparently rebuilding some SD60's with the SD32 ECO packages according to some reports I have read recently..

oltmannd:

(GP38s running flat out in road service always make me wince when I think about the fuel!)

 

Sure does sound neat though.  

Gensets save fuel by being broke a good chunk of the time.  I think it is telling that there are very few not purchased with some sort of government subsidy.  Maybe it is part of the stimulus package, more jobs in the shops to fix them after failure.  

I'm not really a fan of turboed EMDs for switching either.  They don't always stay running when you go from idle to run 8 when switching.  Not to mention the wear on the turbo clutches and gear train.

WSOR 3801:

oltmannd:

(GP38s running flat out in road service always make me wince when I think about the fuel!)

 

Sure does sound neat though.  

Yeah, man!

oltmannd:

Yeah, man!

 

My employer used to send us out with 2-3 GP38s, try to wind them out to 50 mph.  This run is now handled pretty much exclusively by SD40-2s now.  

UP runs a local job past my house with 2-6 GP38s lashed together.  On a quiet night with a heavy train you can hear him coming 5-10 minutes before he gets here.

What about the 6 cylinder GEVO or the 8 cylinder 710 for passenger locomotives?

Do you really need 4200 HP for a 4-car corridor train?  How about a low-horsepower but lightweight passenger locomotive, like the FM "Speed Merchant" that was tried out with Talgo train consists on the New Haven?

There are advantages to a lightweight locomotive in passenger service -- less impact on the rails, less side force on the rails if you are using them with Talgo or other tilt trains and running with high "cant deficiency."  Since for a corridor trains it seems you need a non-revenue locomotive or cab car at each end for push pull and grade crossing protection, how about a 70 ton 2000 HP locomotive at each end instead of a 125 ton 4000 HP locomotive at one end and a ballasted 125 ton "cabbage car" at the other?

GP 38's functioned very well as passenger locomotives for the Long Island RAilroad for twenty years and now 24 have been refurbished in Canada with dynamic brakes added and are running in Oklahoma as line haul freight for a regional line. The GP 38's are durable, simple to maintain, can run hard forever if necessary and at low power aren't that bad on fuel. Its the parasitic power loss above 700 rpm that turbos don't have that hurts them fuel wise. They are 3000 hp engines running at 2000 hp. SD 40's are 3000 hp at 3000 and MTU's are 1000 hp engines running at 2000. That's my opinion anyway.