This is the first picture I've seen of the new JS37ACi locomotives, 30 of which are being built for Freightliner (UK) where they will be known as "class 70". The outwardly projecting handrails are presumably temporary as they appear to be out of gauge. They are to be C-Cs, so the truck is presumably temporary too. I am sure we will all come to accept the aesthetics in due course...
http://twitpic.com/9vhyq
kbathgate I am sure we will all come to accept the aesthetics in due course...
I am sure we will all come to accept the aesthetics in due course...
Possibly not... but it must look better when painted, won't it?
M636C
kbathgate http://twitpic.com/9vhyq
Getting a message that this image doesn't exist anymore. It's OK as of now.
Mike
A locomotive in search of esthetics's...while art may be in the eye of the beholder....it looks like something out of super hero cartoons.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Found this on the Freightliner/UK web site.
http://www.freightliner.co.uk/default.aspx?PageID=131
doghouse Found this on the Freightliner/UK web site. http://www.freightliner.co.uk/default.aspx?PageID=131
The original link is still working, and yes I agree with the comments there. Not exactly pretty.
That makes a BL2 look like a PA by comparison.
Diesel Truck!
No. Too ugly for that.
There's now a video clip as well - first test
(but it's hard to tell if the engine noise is from the new loco or the one behind it - the JS37ACi uses a new, high-speed diesel engine from GE Austria)
Tony
beaulieuPart of the aesthetic problem is that the "Box" is of necessity, small. To stuff in all the components takes all the available space.
I agree - squeezing everything into a hood unit which needs to have twin cabs and to fit the small British loading gauge must be pretty challenging, and for freight power appearance is always going to be some way down the priorities list. These are also the first British locomotives to have dynamic brakes, which can't help - DB was considered for the EMD class 59 and 66 carbody units but was rejected because of the difficulty finding room for it. The only previous attempt at a British twin-cab hood unit was the BREL class 58, which wasn't exactly a looker either (http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=132669&nseq=15), though IMHO it wasn't quite as unfortunate as these new GE class 70s in this respect.
For small loading gauges like that in the UK I think a traditional carbody unit is almost always going to have more pleasing proportions than a hood unit. Conversely, for really large locomotives like those in North America a covered wagon can appear very boxy and plain - consider the GE E60 family.
YIKES!!!!! Lets hope that the preformance will overshadow the looks..Beyond a doubt, they did not waste any monies on style/esthetic design.
Gives the term "UGLY AMERICAN" a whole new perspective.English steam designers must be rolling in their graves ROFLTAO.
There's a nice video on YouTube of the first revenue run of a class 70 loco in the UK - the noise makes a nice change from all the EMD class 66's....
Ah! A "Deltic" (or, perhaps, a Baldwin "Centipede") fan heard from!
Hays
I quite like Deltics, but I'm more of a deep-throated 4-stroke fan e.g. ES44s/AC6000/old GE/Alco/English Electric/Sulzer (and old non-turbo EMDs) but I'll take anything as a break from endless DMUs on this side of the pond.....
owlsroost There's a nice video on YouTube of the first revenue run of a class 70 loco in the UK - the noise makes a nice change from all the EMD class 66's.... Tony
espeefoamerThat makes a BL2 look like a PA by comparison.
My thoughts exactly!
Modeling the fictional B&M Dowe, NH branch in the early 50's.
BaltACD Small train....what is the capacity of those cars?
Small train....what is the capacity of those cars?
28 tonnes tare / 74 tonnes capacity. British coal trains don't come much longer than about two-dozen bogie hoppers.
kbathgate BaltACD Small train....what is the capacity of those cars? 28 tonnes tare / 74 tonnes capacity. British coal trains don't come much longer than about two-dozen bogie hoppers.
BaltACDNot economically viable in the US at that train size or car capacity....130 cars...143 ton max car weight, 120 ton net load weight per car is the norm in many areas of the US.
Not economically viable in the US at that train size or car capacity....130 cars...143 ton max car weight, 120 ton net load weight per car is the norm in many areas of the US.
One man traincrew helps the economics.
beaulieu BaltACD Not economically viable in the US at that train size or car capacity....130 cars...143 ton max car weight, 120 ton net load weight per car is the norm in many areas of the US. One man traincrew helps the economics.
BaltACD Not economically viable in the US at that train size or car capacity....130 cars...143 ton max car weight, 120 ton net load weight per car is the norm in many areas of the US.
BaltACD beaulieu One man traincrew helps the economics. Right up until the time the train has a emergency brake application or Defect Detector (in the middle of nowhere) announces a defect that needs to be inspected. Then the train effectively becomes a line blockage. With the line blocked, all the one man traincrew economics go into the can.
beaulieu One man traincrew helps the economics.
An interesting point. Obviously single crewing always seems a geat idea right up to the moment that something goes wrong, however in the British context even a brief blockage has potential to cause serious delay, given that so many lines are intensively used by passenger traffic. As British freight trains are relatively short, and (as the wagonload business is negligible) are mostly unit trains of the same kind of wagon, often in semi-permanent sets (e.g. coal trains), perhaps emergency brake applications due to brake defects are relatively rare.
There are hotbox and some other types of detectors in the UK, but I don't think they communicate directly with the train crew - I think they give a warning to the signaller, and they are positioned on the approach to loops where any train that trips the detector can be diverted for inspection without blocking the running line.
Another factor is that the distances are relatively short in the UK, so there is perhaps less likelihood of a defect arising en route. As an extreme example of this, near where I grew up there used to be a working between Blindwells opencast colliery and Cockenzie power station, which lasted until the mine shut about ten years ago. The train comprised about 25 4-wheel 'HAA' hoppers (32 tonnes payload), which were loaded at the mine, run across the East Coast Main Line into a loop where the locomotive rounded its train, then hauled back into the power station sidings. Total distance as the crow flies - just over half a mile.
The map at the bottom of this page shows the mine loading building just below the number '29' and the power station discharge building just to the left of the B6371 road. The power station is off the map to the top left, linked to the discharge sidings by a conveyor. The train would shuttle back and forth several times a day. It was a good place to watch trains, but I always thought it would have been more efficient to have simply made the conveyor a little bit longer! (Obviously the power station received coal from more distant collieries as well).
What's the most common method of delivering locomotives to their overseas customers?
kingbee33 What's the most common method of delivering locomotives to their overseas customers?
Ship would be your only viable choice.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.