kgbw49 There are three transit agencies that utilize diesel propulsion in the United States that I know of - there might be more than these three: New Jersey Transit Trenton Line... North County Transportation District (San Diego)... Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (North of San Francisco)...
There are three transit agencies that utilize diesel propulsion in the United States that I know of - there might be more than these three:
New Jersey Transit Trenton Line...
North County Transportation District (San Diego)...
Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (North of San Francisco)...
Trimet WES?
http://trimet.org/wes/vehicles.htm
Or are those not considered DMUs?
Those sure look like DMUs to me! Thanks for the "find"!
D.Carleton Wizlish D.Carleton Even so, wedging a MTU V20 in place of a 12-710 would have been quite the trick only to be followed by new control hardware for the engine. I can understand LIRR balking at this. That pretty much sums it up. No one designs an engine without a means of controlling it. The issue with a repower is adapting that package with an existing platform; translation: money. The EMD GP/SD platforms are ubiquitous yet the repower contracts are far and few between. As for the LIRR DE/DMs the eldest of these will be 20 years old next year. One is already a parts donor, if it still exists. Siemens and EMD are offering new passenger locomotives: Charger and F125 respectively. If the DE/DM carbodies have held up perhaps there is a chance for a repower package from either builder utilizing the QSK or C175?
Wizlish D.Carleton Even so, wedging a MTU V20 in place of a 12-710 would have been quite the trick only to be followed by new control hardware for the engine. I can understand LIRR balking at this.
D.Carleton Even so, wedging a MTU V20 in place of a 12-710 would have been quite the trick only to be followed by new control hardware for the engine. I can understand LIRR balking at this.
That pretty much sums it up. No one designs an engine without a means of controlling it. The issue with a repower is adapting that package with an existing platform; translation: money. The EMD GP/SD platforms are ubiquitous yet the repower contracts are far and few between.
As for the LIRR DE/DMs the eldest of these will be 20 years old next year. One is already a parts donor, if it still exists. Siemens and EMD are offering new passenger locomotives: Charger and F125 respectively. If the DE/DM carbodies have held up perhaps there is a chance for a repower package from either builder utilizing the QSK or C175?
I see little chance of a repower project for the LIRR DE/DM's.While these locos may have been 'state-of-the-art' when built...today the Siemens GTO AC drive on the DE/DM30's is both technologically and economically obsolete. A good deal of replacement material is sourced from across the pond-with long lead times often creating availability issues for the fleet.
These locos actually have two separate electric lockers-the EMD cabinet and the Siemens cabinet-just like the MACS.
The cab A/C unit is proprietary (the product of NYS local sourcing regulations) and is 'somewhat less than reliable.'
One could write a good size book on the performance and maintenance issues of this fleet. One might say this design 'killed more than a few careers within the ranks of the supplier and customer.'
As there are currently (4) suppliers of passenger d/e locos, with three having delivered/or will deliver production AC passenger units, I would suspect new units (common to both LIRR and MNRR) will be the future direction.
CPM500
CPM500 I see little chance of a repower project for the LIRR DE/DM's.While these locos may have been 'state-of-the-art' when built...today the Siemens GTO AC drive on the DE/DM30's is both technologically and economically obsolete. A good deal of replacement material is sourced from across the pond-with long lead times often creating availability issues for the fleet.
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
This is from the same company that made the venerable F40?.................Heresey (thanks for the correction).
longhorn1969This is from the same company that made the venerable F40?.................Hearsay.
Did you mean 'heresy'?
I think it's great that EMD have finally got themselves a true successor to the E-unit, instead of producing Geeps in different clothing. The F125 is a proper, modern, passenger loco.
Yes a lot has changed at EMD since the F40 was assembled with GP40 parts that happened to be lying around the plant at LaGrange.
The DE/ DM fiasco was a joint venture with Siemens and assembled in Super Steel's plant in New York State. EMD only contribution was the diesel and possibly the generator.
The PR125 is being assembled in Progress Rail,s plant in Muncie, IN with parts sourced who knows where and EMD's only contribution is the builders plate.
Since CAT owns EMD (via Progress Rail), it's an 'in-house' engine and at least they are being built in the US (not Canada or Mexico like most of EMD's loco production for the last 25 years).
I think the F125 breaks down into (some of this is educated gueswork):
Bodyshell and trucks from Spain.
Diesel engine from CAT in the US.
Traction inverters from Mitsubishi (I don't know where these are actually manufatured).
Motors from the EMD plant in Mexico.
Alternator - don't know.
Electrical system and controls - EMD in the US (presumably).
Most of the other anciliary systems - brakes, lights, couplings etc. - are probably from US suppliers.
Final assembly and testing - EMD in the US.
Is that American enough for you? (by the standards of today's globalised companies and production, I think the F125 does pretty well in the 'Buy America' stakes)
owlsroostI think it's great that EMD have finally got themselves a true successor to the E-unit, instead of producing Geeps in different clothing
The 'true successor to an E unit' would have two prime movers and A-1-A trucks. The F125 is almost as much a successor to a 'cowled Geep' as it can be said to be a successor to an F unit (the additional 'similarity' in the latter case being the stressed carbody construction adding to chassis strength).
It would be interesting to see just what an actual modern E unit would involve in a modern context -- probably as many hp as a modern electric locomotive's continuous, and perhaps hourly, rating, but nearly as good riding and dynamics and, perhaps, better radial steering than with even low-unsprung-mass four-wheel trucks. 6000 hp or more achievable without needing to run the engines all the way up to 1800 rpm as an expected service speed.
Some potential economy for a given range of consist 'common' to Amtrak LD service, where the power needs call for two Genesis locomotives and the common-mode failures aside from those in the prime movers or alternators are relatively limited... ?
I suppose I was meaning the F125 was designed from the beginning as a passenger unit (like the E-unit), instead of being adapted from what was originally a freight unit. It's a nice breath of fresh air in the diesel locomotive world
Yet being a Geep in a fancy dress, is what made the F40 great, it was dependable,rugged and didn't look half bad.
Would like to see the F125 in phase three striping though.
owlsroost I suppose I was meaning the F125 was designed from the beginning as a passenger unit (like the E-unit), instead of being adapted from what was originally a freight unit. It's nice breath of fresh air in the diesel locomotive world
I suppose I was meaning the F125 was designed from the beginning as a passenger unit (like the E-unit), instead of being adapted from what was originally a freight unit. It's nice breath of fresh air in the diesel locomotive world
That is very true -- but there is also the general 'impediment' of EMD passenger locomotive development 'after the E unit' to provide utility in freight service as well. That was markedly observed as early as the N&W 'Redbirds' in a sense, and the use of 85 mph gearing in some of the NYC Geeps, and became a principle in the SDP units that substituted for anything a E unit would do, and then the SDP40 cowl units (for an Amtrak not intended to 'live' for the service lifetime of the locomotives). Then I think there were intentional 'economies of design' up to and including the infamous F40 that made them less effective as a distinct passenger-unit design optimized for that service (as I consider the Genesis units to be). Most of the 'subsequent' designs from EMD are really more 'commuter' units than high-speed passenger power, useful for high-horsepower accelerations more than sustained high speed.
Even though many of the F125 locomotives are going into some form of 'regional' service, I agree they are a good high-speed design and a worthy successor to any of the 'classic' high-speed EMD locomotives particularly including E units, both in terms of esthetics and performance.
Now if only the engines hold up as well as 567s did!
WizlishNow if only the engines hold up as well as 567s did!
I suspect they won't (there have already been a couple of minor fires on the CAT-powered class 68s in the UK, but I don't know if these are engine-related), but it's part of the price you tend to pay to get a high power-to-weight ratio in a passenger locomotive.
Passenger rail is a tough application for diesel engines due to the constant thermal cycling from full power to idle to full power at every stop or speed restriction. British Rail coined the term 'Binary Driving' to describe it when they were investigating engine problems on the HST trains in the 1970s/1980s (cracks in crankcases and exhaust manifolds, loose cylinder liners etc. - parts of the Paxman Valenta engines had to be re-designed to fix the problems)
What ever happened to "This Week at Amtrak" and the whole URPA website?
mdw What ever happened to "This Week at Amtrak" and the whole URPA website?
The first EMD F125 has arrived in Los Angeles! SCAX 905 was towed in today:
Just a thought here. If GE decides to re-enter the Passenger loco market, do you think they should blend in the PA/FA style nose? They WERE marketed as ALCO/GE, and GE did the PA styling.
(Any skilled member here is invited to do a drawing. :-) )
LensCapOn Just a thought here. If GE decides to re-enter the Passenger loco market, do you think they should blend in the PA/FA style nose? They WERE marketed as ALCO/GE, and GE did the PA styling. (Any skilled member here is invited to do a drawing. :-) )
In Steinbrenner's Alco History, there is an illustration of a passenger C636 with a PA nose, and this was discussed on the "Locomotives cataloged but not Built" thread.
The P30CH nose was fairly close to the PA shape while not trying to be a copy.
M636C
I always thought with that long "prow", the PAs all should have had "Cunard Lines" emblazoned on the side. Their lines reminded me of the late 1910s-1920s ocean liners like the Aquitania - stately and elegant in their conveyance...
Unfortunately, both crash standards and fuel economy targets have made anything but the modern sloped-front impossible.
In regards to the C636P, there is a Gil Bennett painting of a SP set on the web; Overmod posted a now dead link to the Diesels Catalogued but not Built thread, but it has been stolen and has reappeared here. I'd like to see the full big headlight and warbonnet dress, but you can't have everything.
If anyone has anything new for that thread, I'll happily bump it.
Oh, and as far as boats go, little beats the FM Erie Built.
M636CIn Steinbrenner's Alco History, there is an illustration of a passenger C636 with a PA nose, and this was discussed on the "Locomotives cataloged but not Built" thread.
(For some reason I remembered this as a Fogg and not a Gil Bennett painting; I think I got it confused with that 'other' famous painted-locomotive-that-never-was, the UP FEF-4. For anyone interested, here is the URL to the 'old' Gil Bennett 'anatomy of a painting' that showed this painting.
Joshua Moldover has a wide-cab freight cowl version that can be printed out and colored in -- it wouldn't be too difficult to modify this to have a World Locomotive-style cab:
Hi
Although the painting showing the C-636P in SP colours looks cool, it doesn't strickly follow the Alco drawings. The following N-Scale model was built using the Alco diagram with a couple of minor changes that I'm guessing would have been made to the production units.
CheersSteveNZ
M636C LensCapOn Just a thought here. If GE decides to re-enter the Passenger loco market, do you think they should blend in the PA/FA style nose? They WERE marketed as ALCO/GE, and GE did the PA styling. (Any skilled member here is invited to do a drawing. :-) ) In Steinbrenner's Alco History, there is an illustration of a passenger C636 with a PA nose, and this was discussed on the "Locomotives cataloged but not Built" thread. The P30CH nose was fairly close to the PA shape while not trying to be a copy. M636C
Already knew about the proposed ALCO passenger loco. That doesn't mean the pitures, drawings and Model aren't loved. :-)
NorthWest Unfortunately, both crash standards and fuel economy targets have made anything but the modern sloped-front impossible.
Those seem to put the opperating crew in a "you die first" position. A longer nose would give them some crush space at higher speeds. Aero is interesting, and there is often more than one working solution to a problem. EMD/CAT seems to just be using an existing EU model rather than an origonal design.
Some pics
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/583253/
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/583025/
Dutchrailnut look a better looking LIRR DE/DM ?? but why is it under selling by 3 to 1 ??
look a better looking LIRR DE/DM ?? but why is it under selling by 3 to 1 ??
Originally 46 DE/DM30AC, correct? So far Metrolink has ordered 40 F125s, that's 1.15 : 1 , and Metrolink still has a few un-exercised options.
I've done a little searching with no answer to the following:
Have any F125s visited TTCI/Pueblo for testing? If not, how soon?
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
creepycrank Yes a lot has changed at EMD since the F40 was assembled with GP40 parts that happened to be lying around the plant at LaGrange. The DE/ DM fiasco was a joint venture with Siemens and assembled in Super Steel's plant in New York State. EMD only contribution was the diesel and possibly the generator. The PR125 is being assembled in Progress Rail,s plant in Muncie, IN with parts sourced who knows where and EMD's only contribution is the builders plate.
owlsroost Since CAT owns EMD (via Progress Rail), it's an 'in-house' engine and at least they are being built in the US (not Canada or Mexico like most of EMD's loco production for the last 25 years). I think the F125 breaks down into (some of this is educated gueswork): Bodyshell and trucks from Spain. Diesel engine from CAT in the US. Traction inverters from Mitsubishi (I don't know where these are actually manufatured). Motors from the EMD plant in Mexico. Alternator - don't know. Electrical system and controls - EMD in the US (presumably). Most of the other anciliary systems - brakes, lights, couplings etc. - are probably from US suppliers. Final assembly and testing - EMD in the US. Is that American enough for you? (by the standards of today's globalised companies and production, I think the F125 does pretty well in the 'Buy America' stakes)
Very close re: your supplier list.
Alternator is of KATO manufacture. Given that Vossloh Espana has been sold to Stadler, the future of any more off-shore sourced carbodys is an open question.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.