Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="jeaton"] I like this thread.  Three pages on a solution looking for a problem.There were basicly 2 objectives for 20th Century electrification.   It was either used to eliminate engine emissions in tunnels or densly populated areas or to provide a form of locomotion that was better than the steam power of the day for use in areas of frequent high grades.  The former produced relatively short stretches of electrification and at least in the case of the Milwaukee, the latter left gaps in the system.  I don't mean to suggest that electrification stopped at the exact point where steam could take over.  It's clear the PRR went beyond such a point.  However, there were obviously many places where the eletrification stopped short of a the complete route of traffic movement and that produced power management problems.  Whether successful of not, the dual mode unit was a reasonable effort to eliminate the costs associated with swapping power.Clearly, primary object of future electrification projects will be to reduce the use of petroleum based fuels.  Obviously, it will be decades between the time of the start of the first electrification project to the point where a very high percentage of mainline is under wire.  Getting the biggest bang for the buck will mean that the highest density lines will go first.  Along with that, I suspect that the scope of each project will take power management into consideration, and an effort will be made to have the segments extend between the existing major engine terminals.Of course the whole thing will complicate power management, especially so where there are now engine/train run through arrangements.  But, will dual mode power be the economic solution?  Frankly, I think not.  I can't see anything that will require that every train operating under wire must be pulled by a straight electric.  So, if there is a good reason to run a train with all diesel power, then run the train that way.  If there is a circumstance where both straight electric and diesel electric are needed for a particular train, it seems to me that keeping the two modes on separate platforms will likely be a better cost option than the manufacture and use of the apparantly very expensive dual mode locomotives.  Is frequent starting and stoping of the diesel prime mover in a mixed power mode train a real problem?  Then let it run in idle.  [/quote]You're fomenting an assumption based on past hypotheticals regarding the notion that a dual power locomotive would be "very expensive".  In case you haven't noticed, all new locomotives are very expensive, very complex, and are facing increasing emissions scrutiny overkill thanks to your econut friends.  In reality, a better template for the relative cost of a dual power locomotive would be the new GE concept which will store energy generated from dynamic braking and allow it's use during peak power demand.  Let's see how much that will cost relative to hybrids and gen-sets in addition to Tier II diesels, then we can make better assumptions regarding dual mode cost factors.Remember, a diesel is emitting the most emissions during peak demand.  If a dual mode allows for power to be drawn from overhead wire during peak demand, the average emissions from the dual mode drop precipitously, especially if the diesel engine can be shut off during electric mode.  Dual mode may represent the most efficacious way to meet future environmental demands.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag