D.Carleton 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. Very true; "repower" would not be enough for the LIRR DE/DMs. What I had in mind was a full blown rebuild where all they keep is the frame/body and retrofit new electricals, engine and transmission electronics. The advantage of a rebuild is keeping a Tier 1 generation line-haul locomotive thus saving money on unnecessary after-treatment appurtenances. If they can save on cost for the overall project some politico can sell it as "we saved the taxpayer money and made the locomotives more friendly for the environment." In this day and age some people still go for that sort of thing.
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.
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.
Very true; "repower" would not be enough for the LIRR DE/DMs. What I had in mind was a full blown rebuild where all they keep is the frame/body and retrofit new electricals, engine and transmission electronics. The advantage of a rebuild is keeping a Tier 1 generation line-haul locomotive thus saving money on unnecessary after-treatment appurtenances. If they can save on cost for the overall project some politico can sell it as "we saved the taxpayer money and made the locomotives more friendly for the environment." In this day and age some people still go for that sort of thing.
The only future for these beasts will be the scrapyard. Too many long standing design issues that have never been 'solved'...and never will.
Thw locos were designed with the alternator/engine/plumbing stack mounted to something called the 'skid' or 'sled.' In turn, the sled was mounted on a number of elastomeric vibration isolators. When the time came for overhaul, the worn sled would be swapped out with a 'fresh' one, the worn sled would be re-conditioned...and the process would continue ad-infinitum.
The sled itself turned out to have some serious structural issues, which involved the services of a structural engineering consultancy and repairs at Juniata in order to remediate the problem(s). The extra sled assembly was never purchased...nor was the purpose built shop that was required ever constructed. The part numbers for the isolators went dead, as they were never ordered by the LIRR.
CPM500
FWIW: EMD/Progress Rail primer gray demonstrator EMD-906 (F125) was seen late Saturday afternoon in Denver on BNSF bracketed by a pair of empty bulkhead flats and towed by NS-9134 in a special move bound for TTCI in Pueblo.
In referring to maintenance requirements for the various diesels, don't forget the very different usage requirements for a diesel in commuter service and one in freight or long-distance passenger service. The commuter-railroad diesel usually sees four or five hours or use each day with perhaps 1/4 the fleet seeing 12 or 16 hours, where the freight diesel on a Class I or even many regionals may run 24 hours per dqy minus just the tine for servicing.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.