Why not cowl locomotives?

[Ulrich]

I can understand why a GP9 or even a GP40 might be designed as a road switcher...but why wouldn't a large locomotive like an AC4400CW be designed as a full cowl? Up here there's alot of snow, and I see crews having to shovel catwalks and spend alot of time chipping away at ice...a full cowl would solve that problem. Backward visibility could be solved with a mirror..it not as if anyone is going to run an AC4400CW long hood first as a rule.

[zugmann]

Around yards and terminals, those big engines do make a lot of reverse moves.  Lot easier to have a window than a mirror to look back.  And I'd rather walk on the ground or use the catwalks than walk through the greasy engine room.

[Ulrich]

Well...I knew there had to be a reason and that sounds as plausible as any.

[wjstix]

I believe since maybe the sixties or seventies F-units are not supposed to be used in way-freight service (not sure if was due to regulations or just railroad rules) because it was so difficult to see back when dropping off or picking up cars. Those visibility problems coupled with the difficulty of accessing the interior parts for maintenance (yes it was nice to be in out of the cold, especially on a day like this when it's -13F at 8 a.m., but it could be very cramped inside an F or E unit, and it can be hard moving tools and parts in and out to fix something) is a lot of the reason why railroads quit buying new "covered wagons" by 1955-1960.

[Paul Milenkovic]

How does the CN Draper Taper work out in terms of rearward view?

From what I have read about automotive streamlining, a hood unit can also be streamlined to reduce aero drag, mainly by rounding the square corners.

The other idea I have had for passenger trains relates to the original Vista Dome concept, which was meant to give the visual experience of a cab ride to the passengers.  How about a forward-looking observation car?

If you had front windows on a passenger coach on each side of the aisle corridor, and if the locomotive was a streamlined hood unit (with a wide cab for crew safety of course -- much like the GE "Pepsi Cans" Amtrak acquired between the F40 and the Genesis), the passengers could look out the front, much like the Draper Taper gives engine crews a view out the back.  It might be kind of neat not only to see out the front, even if only for a partial angle view, but you could also see the locomotive out front from where you are seated.

The Vista Dome concept puts people up high so they can look out the front.  This has the advantage of a panoramic front view, but for the reasons I just outlines, a "side dome" in the form of a Draper Taper cutout of a passenger coach may also provide an interesting view for making passenger travel more fun, especially in the scenic mountain West. 

Of course I am a "front-seat" foamer -- loved the Vista Dome, the Power Dome Car on the Turbo Train with the plexi partition to also see the crew, always go for front seating on SEPTA Silverliners, CTA El trains, and push-mode gallery cars.

[CPRail modeler]

How about the CPR SD40-2F's? To solve the rearward visibility problem, there were parts of the hood cut away:

Other side:

Thing is, these locomotives were delivered in 1988, a few years earlier than the CN SD50F/SD60F locomotives.

[BentnoseWillie]

Thing is, these locomotives were delivered in 1988, a few years earlier than the CN SD50F/SD60F locomotives.

The 5400-series SD50Fs arrived between 1985 and 1987. The 5500-series SD60Fs were delivered beginning in 1985 with the "SD50AF" demonstrators (the 9900s - SD60 innards in an SD50F carbody). The "true" SD60Fs began to arrive in 1989. These were not the first "Draper Taper" units, however - the 2100-series HR616s began to arrive in 1982.

CP's 9000-series "Red Barns", meanwhile, began to arrive in 1988 - three years behind the SD50Fs and SD50AFs, and sixteen years behind the "Honky Tonks" (2100s).

The 9000s were the first and last CP cowl locomotives. CN went on to order the 2400-series C40-8Ms in 1990. The first 2500-series C44-9s were spec'ed as cowl bodies, but this was changed to the 4-window cab only, to increase the number of locomotives that the same total price would purchase. By the time the second C44-9 order was placed, they had gone to a cab more similar to the standard GE safety cab - doubtless to further reduce cost and delivery time.

The cutouts behind the cab alleviated the rearward-visibility issue, but certainly did not solve it completely. Since a new cowl locomotive hasn't been ordered by either road in eighteen years, it's safe to say that the drawbacks (cost, clearances in shop spaces, visibility) outweighed the benefits (access in cold weather). Sure looked neat though.

[trolleyboy]

As Willie stated the draper tapers or a cowel body just cost more.I know a few CN guys that were never too keen on the carbody loco's anyway , even with the cutaways backing up in yards espeacially at night the vision rearward was poor. Alot of CN crews prefer to have the 50f's and 60F's and their GE cousins as trailing locomotives ,not as the lead unit.

Rob

[Lyon_Wonder]

There were F/FP45's that EMD built in the late 60s for ATSF, GN and MILW.  When ordering GP60Ms in 1990, Santa Fe originaly wanted them to be full-body cowls, but instead opted for standard frame bodies with the then-new safety cab.  I can't think of any practical reason why a modern freight railroad would order cowls.  They'd look nice hauling business cars or on the lead in excursion-type trips, but railroads like UP, KCS, CN, CSX and NS have second-hand Es, Fs or F40's for that.   Maybe a cowl-body SD70MAC or ACe would benefit ARR with their below zero temps in the Alaskan winters, but even they probably thought it wasn't worth the cost.

[JonathanS]

Repairs are another big matter.  If something larger than can easily be lifted needs replaced or repaired on a hood unit all you need to do is remove some doors which is easy, and maybe remove a section of handrails which is a few bolts, then use one of those pickup truck mounted cranes that diesel mechanics have.  With a cowl you need to remove side panels of the locomotive and you are left with significant vertical and horizontal movement limits.

[WSOR 3801]

Opening the doors on a hood unit is usually enough room to work on most things.  If not, the whole long hood can come off.  On Es and Fs, a crane was required for many repairs. 

CN stopped getting cowl units with the Draper Taper shortly after Mr. Draper retired... 

[ValorStorm]

When ordering GP60Ms in 1990, Santa Fe originaly wanted them to be full-body cowls, but instead opted for standard frame bodies with the then-new safety cab. 

Also the Santa Fe mentioned concerns about additional weight of cowl-unit GP60Ms, altho it doesn't seem there'd be that much extra.

As it concerns aerodynamics of freight trains, a streamlined locomotive offers virtually no advantage. The unfavorable drag coefficient of the entire train makes streamlined motive power irrelevant.

[edbenton]

In order to even get the Widecab on the GP 60 and get the weight within the weight limit Santa Fe had to put a smaller tank of 3500 gallons instead of 4000 gallons and also can only fuel it to 2900 gallons.  They found out in order to get the full cowls they would of had to go with a TITATUIM BODY SHELL.  Great in a crash but VERY EXPENSIVE just ask the military.

[cprted]

How about the CPR SD40-2F's? To solve the rearward visibility problem, there were parts of the hood cut away:

Other side:

Thing is, these locomotives were delivered in 1988, a few years earlier than the CN SD50F/SD60F locomotives.

Fixed dead link.

[Lord Atmo]

modern cowl units look hideous to me anyway. i'm glad the draper taper idea didnt catch on

[enr2099]

As Willie stated the draper tapers or a cowel body just cost more.I know a few CN guys that were never too keen on the carbody loco's anyway , even with the cutaways backing up in yards espeacially at night the vision rearward was poor. Alot of CN crews prefer to have the 50f's and 60F's and their GE cousins as trailing locomotives ,not as the lead unit.

Rob

 

You don't see much out those cutaways. When you're backing up all you see is the ballast next to the track, right beside the engine. You might get a better view on a curve, but you have to have the conductor riding the point if making a reverse move.  

[enr2099]

i'm glad the draper taper idea didnt catch on

For once Atmo I totally agree with you. I hate the cowl units. 

 

[Flint Hills Tex]

What about aesthetics? Why do you think that most Class I's have purchased and rebuilt F units for their business trains? Because they are icons of American railroading! Yes, most modern cowled units are ugly, but the MP commuter units and GE's passenger locos aren't that bad. I think that they definitely have their place on passenger trains, where the first impression on travellers is important.

 I would agree that freight locos are more functional units and don't really need a fancy, aesthetically pleasing outward appearance, although the German locomotive builder MaK/Vossloh recently introduced its new 3000 and 4000 h.p. dieselelectric freight locomotive at the Innotrans 2007, the Euro 3000/4000. It is a full cowled, dual cab loco, and it looks really good. The dual cab solves the visibility problem and saves having to turn the loco on a table when running solo. Check out the details at:

http://www.vossloh-espana.com/fs_cms/en/products/diesel-electric_locomotives/euro_4000/EURO_4000.html

[YoHo1975]

In order to even get the Widecab on the GP 60 and get the weight within the weight limit Santa Fe had to put a smaller tank of 3500 gallons instead of 4000 gallons and also can only fuel it to 2900 gallons.  They found out in order to get the full cowls they would of had to go with a TITATUIM BODY SHELL.  Great in a crash but VERY EXPENSIVE just ask the military.

 

My understanding is a standard GP60 has a 3800 gallon tank and the 60M has a 3200 gallon tank offset to the rear to counteract the cab weight.

I'd never heard they weren't filled all the way up. 

[Railway Man]

What about aesthetics? Why do you think that most Class I's have purchased and rebuilt F units for their business trains? Because they are icons of American railroading! Yes, most modern cowled units are ugly, but the MP commuter units and GE's passenger locos aren't that bad. I think that they definitely have their place on passenger trains, where the first impression on travellers is important.

 I would agree that freight locos are more functional units and don't really need a fancy, aesthetically pleasing outward appearance, although the German locomotive builder MaK/Vossloh recently introduced its new 3000 and 4000 h.p. dieselelectric freight locomotive at the Innotrans 2007, the Euro 3000/4000. It is a full cowled, dual cab loco, and it looks really good. The dual cab solves the visibility problem and saves having to turn the loco on a table when running solo. Check out the details at:

http://www.vossloh-espana.com/fs_cms/en/products/diesel-electric_locomotives/euro_4000/EURO_4000.html

It's easy to underestimate the influence of culture and tradition.  This applies both inside and outside the railroading tribe.  For passenger services, since the funding, approval for funding, approval of service characteristics, and marketing for these approvals, all occurs outside the tribe there is an interesting cultural dynamic that appears.  I am often surprised how dead wrong I am about what I think the public wants passenger railroads to do and how it should go about doing them, e.g., a recent discussion I had with a city where I was flabbergasted that they would prefer DMUs over EMUs because they thought the catenary was ugly, whereas another city preferred EMUs over DMUs because they thought the catenary would make the line appear "more trolley-like and less bus-like, thus easier to market to the public."  Both decisions were grounded entirely in interpretations of culture rather than any quantifiable economic or technical basis.

Railroads like to use F- and E-units for their business trains mostly for internal cultural reasons, mostly paying homage to their roots and because they "look cool."  Almost anyone that wants to succeed at the railroad has to have an obvious passion for the business.  After a fashion they are railfans.

RWM

[Flint Hills Tex]

Hello, Railway Man,

Yes, the influence of culture and tradition are immense. Most railway management here in Europe prefer fully cowled locomotives, at least for their road motors, maybe because they fit in better with the more prevalent electrics. There are a few hooded body (diesel-) locos on the market (for example ADTranz Blue Tiger or Vossloh's GG2000), but they are still few and far between. Most yard power is center cab with 2 low hoods.

Out of tradition and in deference to domestic locomotive manufacturers, the German Federal Railways (Deutsche Bundesbahn, später Deutsche Bahn AG) resisted diesel-electric traction, buying diesel hydraulic up to the new millenium!