oltmannd wrote: jrw249 wrote:Do the E units have two diesel engines and generators?Yes. One powers the front truck and the other the rear truck.
jrw249 wrote:Do the E units have two diesel engines and generators?
Yes. One powers the front truck and the other the rear truck.
FYI: the Metra E units had 3 motors inside: the two mentioned above, and the third for coach power. The motors were Cummins for many years, which were replaced by Detroit engines.
I'm sure part of it is that Amtrak needs engines that will work everywhere in the U.S., not just in one specific region.
When E-units were being made, the individual railroads were the ones buying them, so a flat-land railroad (like the Burlington) would buy E-units for high-speed passenger service, whereas a line that went thru mountainous territory (GN,NP) would choose F-units. The F's worked fine on flat prairie lines too, but the E-units had trouble in the mountains, so the F's with two axle trucks were more versatile.
beaulieu wrote: jrw249 wrote:So E units don't have 3 traction motors per truck?No, just two motors. If they had three it would be a C-C locomotive. Letters indicate powered axles, numbers indicate unpowered.
jrw249 wrote:So E units don't have 3 traction motors per truck?
No, just two motors. If they had three it would be a C-C locomotive. Letters indicate powered axles, numbers indicate unpowered.
Would having a C-C arrangement have helped these units run longer/better?
Dan
CNW 6000 wrote: beaulieu wrote: jrw249 wrote:So E units don't have 3 traction motors per truck?No, just two motors. If they had three it would be a C-C locomotive. Letters indicate powered axles, numbers indicate unpowered. Would having a C-C arrangement have helped these units run longer/better?
There is no room in the A-1-A truck for a 3rd motor. You'd have to go to the Flexicoil truck and 40" wheels. (E's have 36" wheels) Flexicoils aren't exactly a high speed design....
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd wrote: CNW 6000 wrote: beaulieu wrote: jrw249 wrote:So E units don't have 3 traction motors per truck?No, just two motors. If they had three it would be a C-C locomotive. Letters indicate powered axles, numbers indicate unpowered. Would having a C-C arrangement have helped these units run longer/better?There is no room in the A-1-A truck for a 3rd motor. You'd have to go to the Flexicoil truck and 40" wheels. (E's have 36" wheels) Flexicoils aren't exactly a high speed design....
With the long vertical suspension travel and a little more lateral added to the secondary suspension along with a good damping package, the SD Flexicoil would be the best choice if there was really a need for a 3 motor, 3 axle truck in passenger service. Certainly a much better choice than the HTC truck EMD put under the SDP40F's. But today, any pedestal truck in passenger service creates a lot of wheel and truck maintenance to maintain stability. And with AC traction, 2 motors per truck are sufficient if you want to go fast.
FYI: The FL9 was not originally designed for the New Haven and Park Ave. viaduct. The FL9 was an EMD solution to the problem of not having enough water on board for steam heat on long distance passenger trains that normally used F-units. They took the FP9, stretched it, and added water tanks both fore and aft of the prime mover. As the total water capacity was then quite large, they added the 5th axle to deal with the weight. They never sold.
Meanwhile, the New Haven came knocking, looking for a dual-mode loco. Since cost is always a concern (especially for the NH), EMD took the unused FL9 design, removed the new water tanks and added 3rd rail gear. The NH orded 30 of them (orignally they wanted 88). The first two had Blomberg front trucks. These were found to be unsuitable, so they were switched out for B-Flexicoils. A few years later in 1960, the NH desperately needed more passenger locos, and applied to the Gov't for a loan for more units (as EMD would not accept the NH's credit). The Gov't agreed, but only if 1) the units were of existing design, and 2) they were to be used in passenger service only. Only, EMD had started making GP18's by then, so EMD cranked out 30 of what should be called FL18's (567D, 1800Hp)...but they called them FL9's for the Gov't's agreement. Also, they removed nose MU and the 3rd seat in the cab for the brakie (the NH didn't really care, they just stuck an older unit between two new ones).
It is interesting to wonder what would have happened if EMD had not had the FL9 "water buffalo" design in the books. Would an 4-axle FL9 w/ 3rd rail gear be within the axle loadings of Park Ave.?
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.