SD45-2xr

[broncoman]

Does anyone happen to know what Montana Rail Link did to put the SD45s into an (extra realiable catagory ... XR)? I know that EMD had some enhancements near the end of production of the SD45-2 run, but never heard whether these were successful or not. It seems that most of the class Is just depowered or went to 16 cyl.
Also does anyone know how successful the SD45-2XRs are for the MRL.

Thanks in advance!

[arbfbe]

Mark is correct and the MRL SD45-2XR units have proven to be reliable units for the MRL or whomever they are leased to this week. Almost all of the improvements involved are in the electrical cabinet at the rear wall of the cab. The first thing you notice when opening the cabinet doors is how few wires there are compared to a normal SD45 or even and SD45-2. The old air activated power contactors are also replaced with rotating contactors at the same time. MRL has stuck with Q-Tron equipment but has not upgraded any units recently. The last batch of SD45-2s were MRL 314 to 331 that had already been upgraded to -2 standards by the SP. They retain their flared radiator carbody and MRL has not done any upgrade to Q-Tron with these units.

MRL has recently done some fuel use comparisions between their SD45-2XR units and SD70MAC units. The idea is to see if fuel savings would pay the capital costs of replacing MRL's older units. The main problem is MRL units just don't run enough miles in a day to make brand new units economical.

[broncoman]

Thanks for the information guys. Especially you Mark; was worried that we may have lost you. I have another question that may even attract Peter. In the other SD-45 post they talk about the turbos buring out their clutches because the engine is not being pushed hard enough to create enough exhaust pressure to run them normally( i.e run of exhaust pressure). That being said do they (railroads, marine, etc.) not play with different compressor/turbine sections to tailor the turbo to where a railroad runs an engine.
Also at what point does it become more economical for a railroad to rebuild rather than buy second hand, not counting the recapitalization crap, which depending on you accountant could swing either way.

Thanks for the info guys.

Dave

[arbfbe]

Mark,

We have to quit meeting like this. I am glad you signed up. I come here once in a while but maybe it will be more often now. My email is still the same. There may be some MRL news soon.

Alan

[arbfbe]

Dave,

The buy new, buy second hand, rebuild argument is mostly financial and it seems like everyone has their own interpretation of what the numbers mean. Class One RRs work on a wholey different set of books than the Class Two or shortline railroads do. MRL started out with the XR class rebuilds with the intention of rebuilding the entire fleet of SD40s and SD45s to the -2XR specs with Q-Tron. After a couple of years they decided it was not worth the cost to rebuild working locomotives but would do it if there was a major failure. Later on that plan fell by the wayside and units have just been getting needed repairs. There are several reasons for this and the age of the MRL fleet is one of them.

The failure rate of EMD turbochargers at 5 years is 100%. That is pretty much the way it has been all along. The service is hard with the temperatures these moving parts are forced to work in. The design of a two cycle units requires some sort of a mechanical drive at lower speeds but the true effeciency of the turbo is when all that is driving the turbine is the exhaust gassses and thence you need the clutch. There are indeed different models and capacities of turbo chargers. You can figure an engine in marine service will always be at sea level and usually at full throttle. Locomotive service is much more variable. The elevation can be anywhere from sea level to over a mile high. From the computer screen data I have seen on SD70 units the most commonly used throttle settings are run 8, idle and dynamic braking.

[Paul Milenkovic]

What determines the lifetime of a Diesel? Electric locomotives seem capable of lasting nearly forever -- think GG-1.

If a turbo lasts only 5 years, why not replace the turbo? If a Diesel prime mover has a limited lifetime, why not put in a new prime mover? What is it about Diesels that they seem to last 20 years tops while electrics seem to last for half a century or more?

[Randy Stahl]

Electric locomotives are my favorites, mainly because of thier simplicity and reliability. electrics are alot cleaner to work on, no leaking lube oil etc. Electrics have about a zillion fewer moving parts than a diesel , less parts to go to hell thats for sure. Many difficultys for the maintenece of way people though, can't raise track during resurfacing, unless you raise wire too. Track must be kept on center and smooth as possible ( to prevent pantograph bounce) The main wearing parts of an electric RR is the whole elecrical distribution system.
Randy

[Hugh Jampton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill

Paul:

You can repair a diesel-electric locomotive virtually forever, and some people do. There are quite a few locomotives working today that were built during World War II -- 60 years ago.

The estimate of 20-year lifetime for a locomotive is very low. For a good design, the lifetime seems to be more like 40 years.

Ultimately it comes down to the condition of the frame, even then they can be repaired/replaced. (Ronnie Barker once said in a sitcom he was in; "I've had this broom 15 years,, its only had 5 new heads and 3 new handles")

QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill
The comparison to electric locomotives is really invalid -- the electric locomotive because of its rarity is a hand-built machine custom-designed for a given installation, which makes it VERY expensive. The economics of replace vs. rebvuild are entirely different. Besides, as Randy points out, it has much fewer parts.

This applies where there isn't significant electrification of the network. But where there is a lot of electrification the price difference is minimal.

QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill
The reason why diesel locomotives are replaced instead of rebuilt forever has almost nothing to do with their wear-out rate, and almost everything to do with the continual advancement of the technology and the changing needs of railroads. If I was a Class I Chief Mechanical Officer, and I had the choice between a brand-new SD70M at $1.2 million, or rebuilding my SD40-2s to better-than-new condition for $400,000, I would buy the SD70M. No question about it. The SD40-2 is just too much of a fuel guzzler and hanger queen in comparison to the SD70M. You see railroads like MRL and WC make the decision for the rebuilt SD40-2 because their local conditions don't need an SD70M.

You'd have to put a good case forward to the bean counters though.

[Randy Stahl]

Remember too that the purchase price on the WC SD45s was VERY low . WC was able to aquire a fleet of locomotives for the price of a new one. In my experience locomotives do wear out, carbodys start to sag, cabs rust away, carbody doors don't fit anymore. After griding off gaskets on the prime mover for 20 years the actual gasket surface is ruined and is very difficult to get a good seal. High voltage cabling is always moving in thier cleats so all the cabling goes bad in 10 years. Electrical equipment is obsolete after a few years. Truck frames develop cracks and twist out of shape ( especially on older non htc trucks). As the locomotive becomes more flexible it is difficult to maintain the critical alignments like the generator etc. I guess it depends alot on how the locomotive was maintained and how many collisions, derailments etc, are in it's record.
Randy

[broncoman]

At what point is it better to rebuild a unit than buying a new one. It seems as if it would be cheaper and more reliable to keep up a SD40-2 than buy a new SD-50. I know technology helps things along, but how much more technology can you put into something before it becomes less reliable due to number of parts. All things being equal, an loco like a SD70 seems like it would be a whole new ball game even if your railroad was EMD proficient or are there a lot of crossover parts?
What is the major factor in a railroads decision not to renew a series of locos leases (i.e. UP let about 50 conventional cab SD-60s go but re-leased some SD40-T2s).

[arbfbe]

The point you talk about is not fixed for any railroad or any point in time. Each railroad and each manager involved will make a choice at that time for what is best AT THAT TIME for THAT RAILROAD and for HIS CAREER. Hopefully it will be best for the stockholders as well. Theoretically, a diesel locomotive can be rebuilt forever. MRL is still using GP9 and SD9 units that the class 1s have mostly abandoned. They work well for the MRL both mechanically and financially but a larger road would not make the same conclusion.

The SD70 is a very reliable unit. The SD40-2 was a very reliable unit. SD9s were very reliable units. The UP could be using fleets of SD9s to run their mainline trains right now if the SD70s had not been invented. There are several technical innovations that make the SD70 a better buy for the UP. These units run hundreds if not thousands of miles every day for the UP and their capital costs are amortized over all of these miles. On the other hand, an SD70 on the MRL will only run at best 300 or so miles each day with significant down time between trips waiting for the next connection. That makes the capital costs per mile very, very expensive. It makes more sense to spend less money to overhaul a unit than to buy a new one. Now that I have said that, word has come that MRL will soon begin testing two or three CSX SD70ACE units and two of the EMD SD70ACE demonstartors. The reason is the fuel effeciencies of the new units as well as the added tractive efforts of the improved wheel slip systems. Findings from tests MRL ran this spring comparing the fuel use of the 45-2 fleet against BNSF SD70MAC units tend to indicate the savings in fuel costs might be enough to offset the increased capital costs. Two SD70MACs will replace three SD45-2s and three SD70MACs will replace 5 SD45-2s. It will be Fall before the decision will be made and next year before new units might be delivered.

Generally, for locomotives, technology has reduced the number of components rather than increase them. Sometimes it is possible to incorporate the new technology into older units and indeed, the MRL has a GP9, an SD9 and an SD35 equipped with Q-Tron systems. They work well and these units have put out amazing performance. The SD35 has even had tractive efforts equal to SD50s. Even MRL decided that it was just too expensive to continue with such a program on other older units. The biggest reason was that used SD45-2 units became available at very, very reasonable prices. Had the used locomotive market remained tight the decision likely would have gone the other way. It is amazing how the effects of a downturn in the economy can affect the decision making process. It may make sense for a railroad to continue with their SD40-2s rather than buy the new SD50s The same may hold true for the SD60 model. By then the SD40-2 fleet is older and the improvements in the SD70 are greater. The SD40-2 model is no longer produced so any new units the railroad buys will have to be SD70s. The question then becomes how many of the SD40-2s will you replace? Certainly, all of the priority mainline trains will get the new units but how many of the secondary trains, locals and helpers will justify the older units. Then the decision has to be made as to how many of the remaining older units will be a)overhauled or b) upgraded. Would the overhaul or upgrade be too expensive relative to the capital costs and effeciencies of the new units. Those are the problems managers are hired to solve. There is no absolutely correct answers and the day the decision is made outside events might just make all of the decisions less favorable.

[Anonymous]

Everybody has hit the nail on the head about the justifactions for buying new or rebuilding a older unit. However one item that has been over looked is that Class One's need to buy new every so often depending on the financing of the purchases they made before. One person talked about a 20 year life of a diesel,to a Class 1 this may be correct not because the locos are used up but because the tax life the units are has expired. when this happens the Railroad must look at the units and decide to rebuild in kind to as new condition or to buy new units. The last I knew a rebuilt unit is good for 10 more years of tax right offs where a new unit will give you 20 more years. Most Class1's do decide to buy new because of the upgrades in new locos which now means better fuel economy and reliabilty. This also means that the is a good selection of good used locos for smaller lines. There is also other varibles like most roads dumping SD40-2's, SD50'S, SD60's, GP50's, and loads of GE's in the used market was these units were leased and are not eleigable for tax credits to the Railroad. This is one reason that UP has kept many SD40-2's and let newer units go.
The whole issue is money driven for sure

[broncoman]

Thanks for the information guys. I just hopes this doesn't mean that all we will be railspotting in the future is SD70's or a GE EVOs. Variety is the spice of life!

[Anonymous]

Running a railroad in a country with so many miles of track and so many companies vying for the available motive power is facinating for me to read. Here in New Zealand there is one company running on tracks owned by the Government. Thanks for your information. JohnM

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by broncoman

Does anyone happen to know what Montana Rail Link did to put the SD45s into an (extra realiable catagory ... XR)? I know that EMD had some enhancements near the end of production of the SD45-2 run, but never heard whether these were successful or not. It seems that most of the class Is just depowered or went to 16 cyl.
Also does anyone know how successful the SD45-2XRs are for the MRL.

Thanks in advance!

They bought several SD45s from several sources. They were rebuilt by the MRL
And or LRC .

[Anonymous]

I've really enjoyed the loco discusion! Thanks to everyone for their input.
What I'd really like to find is a website on which there was an ongoing loco discussion---re the performance of the new GEVOs, the SD-70s etc etc. Real techie details!

Does anyone know of a site like this? It's rare to read a good loco discussion---thanks for the info!!

Paul in Atlanta

[Randy Stahl]

This is the place for on going locomotive discussions, look back in the forums and revisit some old threads. Or ask the question if GE locomotives are better than EMD's, that thread will last a while>
Randy

[kevarc]

We are still using 1950 vintage FM units for back up generators in many of our towns. Most still run decently. We also have a few old Nordbergs fo the same vintage.

[broncoman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Randy Stahl

This is the place for on going locomotive discussions, look back in the forums and revisit some old threads. Or ask the question if GE locomotives are better than EMD's, that thread will last a while>
Randy

I second that Randy,

How long did the last EMD vs. GE post go 8 pages or so.
I am a euipment mechanic (power company) and you learn pretty quick what brand/type equipment operators like. I have been very surprised that among engineers that respond to post like that, that there hasn't been an overwhelming amount one way or another (GE vs. EMD). I would be curious under this post for example, if there are any engineers out there, which loco would you prefer to run a U33C or a SD-45 and why.

[arbfbe]

When they were both new, I would take the SD45 any day. They were more reliable, they had better heaters, more room in the cab and rode better. The earliest U33Cs had a baseball bat throttle that took a long reach to change and it took the unit forever to load. The GEs were quieter since the turbo was at the rear of the unit and there was an empty compartment behind the cab to sort of insulate the crew compartment. The SD45 steps were more crew friendly and the unit rode better until the trucks got worn when neither model rode well at all.

Now it is a moot point, all the U33Cs are gone. The SD45s on the MRL are showing their age but put in a good day's work. If the trucks have been overhauled recently they give a decent ride. They don't pull quite as well as the newer units and they are the noisiest units around. I don't miss the U33Cs at all and I will only miss the SD45s visually when the last is retired. They were good during their time but technology has made the new one so much better. I will miss the GP and SD9 units, they are so old they are still fun.....and they sound just right when you get 3 or more together.