THE magazine of railroading

SEARCH TRAINSMAG.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

F125 Possibility

1368 views
11 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October, 2003
  • 7,540 posts
F125 Possibility
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Thursday, June 29, 2017 9:54 AM

F125 Possibility

In a Los Angeles, CA yard the new F125 locomotives for the commuter agency Metrolink sit idle.  Reports are they don’t meet some Federal regulation(s).  But the focus in this thread is the fleet numbers.  Internet info indicates the first TEN units are Nos. 903 to 912.  But, Nos. 913 and 914 are known to be in Los Angeles too!  So, is the Nos. really 905-914 instead!  No. 905 is serial numbered as unit three, which is consistent with 903-912, but 913 and 914 being on site suggests otherwise.  Anyone have input on this?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is believed that the overpowering stench of photobucket.com is what killed me! Coming to you from the afterlife … On the other hand, PostImage.io is cool!
  • Member since
    October, 2003
  • 7,540 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Thursday, June 29, 2017 8:04 PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is believed that the overpowering stench of photobucket.com is what killed me! Coming to you from the afterlife … On the other hand, PostImage.io is cool!
  • Member since
    November, 2015
  • 829 posts
Posted by ATSFGuy on Thursday, July 06, 2017 12:35 PM

I thought Metrolink was testing them, what happened?

  • Member since
    October, 2015
  • 31 posts
Posted by longhorn1969 on Wednesday, July 26, 2017 1:36 PM

K. P. Harrier

F125 Possibility

In a Los Angeles, CA yard the new F125 locomotives for the commuter agency Metrolink sit idle.  Reports are they don’t meet some Federal regulation(s).  But the focus in this thread is the fleet numbers.  Internet info indicates the first TEN units are Nos. 903 to 912.  But, Nos. 913 and 914 are known to be in Los Angeles too!  So, is the Nos. really 905-914 instead!  No. 905 is serial numbered as unit three, which is consistent with 903-912, but 913 and 914 being on site suggests otherwise.  Anyone have input on this?

 

Really not looking good for an Amtrak order, the F40 successor sort of. I guess Siemens has this one in the bag. Though on another site,someone posted a month ago about GE lending some AC Tier 4 locomotives to test.  Rumor was they were heading for Autotrain.

  • Member since
    November, 2013
  • 192 posts
Posted by VOLKER LANDWEHR on Wednesday, July 26, 2017 2:31 PM

longhorn1969
Though on another site,someone posted a month ago about GE lending some AC Tier 4 locomotives to test. Rumor was they were heading for Autotrain.

The source for this rumor was a picture of an Amtrak News Release of June 26th, 2017 which was not approved for release. There was no link and it is still not on Amtrak's website.

The press release talks of installing HEP-power to Tier 4 compliant locomotives as test beds. But choosen locomotives are named as ES44ACH, at best Tier 3 compliant.

The ET44AC is about 16'' longer than its predecessors. Does it make sense to test in the shorter locomotive?

It is still a rumor and I don't know what to make of it.
Regards, Volker

  • Member since
    December, 2006
  • 1,282 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Wednesday, July 26, 2017 10:02 PM
Is there some actual data being provided that indicates the testing isn't going well. They are 1 month into a 3 month test window. Aside from some out of compliance grabs, what if anything has been reported wrong?
RME
  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 2,007 posts
Posted by RME on Thursday, July 27, 2017 12:09 AM

I am waiting patiently for precisely this.

Not to be perceived as a mere Cat detractor bigot, I'm also waiting patiently for word on the CECX 1919 testing, which should have thrown an enormous mass of data (and anecdotes!) by now.

  • Member since
    December, 2006
  • 1,282 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Friday, July 28, 2017 12:22 AM
By the same token, I'd hate to appear as an EMD Fanboy, but usually rumors about things going south have a little more meat on them.
  • Member since
    January, 2002
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by M636C on Friday, July 28, 2017 1:11 AM

There are a dozen or so locomotives of class 68 in the UK that use the C175.

Not exactly the same engine, (less powerful) but it is set up for the Euro equivalent of Tier 4...

The 68s seem to be running well from what is heard. Better than the GEs with their Polish diesel engines, in that none have unexpectedly burst into flames.

They have worked passenger charters without failing and also work regular passenger trains for Chiltern Railways.

They seem to have a better reputation, so far at least, than the Class 67 with a 12-710G3...

Peter

  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Cambridge, UK
  • 414 posts
Posted by owlsroost on Friday, July 28, 2017 3:23 AM

M636C

There are a dozen or so locomotives of class 68 in the UK that use the C175.

Not exactly the same engine, (less powerful) but it is set up for the Euro equivalent of Tier 4...

The Class 68 engine is Euro IIIa (which is the rough equivalent of Tier 3, AFAIK) - they don't have SCR etc.

There will be 34 of them in use once the final deliveries happen. Some of the early ones have been running passenger services since 2014, and as far as I know the only serious mechanical incident they have had was when one caught fire (but without serious damage - the fire was at roof level so may have been exhaust system/turbo related).

The Cat-powered, AC-drive 68s use less fuel and have better acceleration than the EMD-powered, DC-drive 67s. The electrical equipment in the 68s is European, from ABB (alternator, motors and per-axle traction inverters).

M636C
Better than the GEs with their Polish diesel engines, in that none have unexpectedly burst into flames.

Do you mean the UK Class 70 'Powerhaul' locos?

As far as I know, those diesel engines (PowerHaul P616) were/are designed and built by GE in the USA, based on a gas engine design from an Austrian subsidiary of GE (GE Jenbacher GmbH). And yes, the locos have been modified with extra cooling fans due to (I think) part of the engine overheating, but I don't know if this was related to the cause of the fire on one of them.

  • Member since
    November, 2013
  • 192 posts
Posted by VOLKER LANDWEHR on Friday, July 28, 2017 4:24 AM

owlsroost
The Class 68 engine is Euro IIIa (which is the rough equivalent of Tier 3, AFAIK) - they don't have SCR etc.

That is correct for the class 68. The Vossloh Eurolight, which class 68 was derived from, is offered with the same C-175 engine as EU stage IIIb compliant using SCR and DPF instead of the exhaust silencer.
Regards, Volker

  • Member since
    January, 2002
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by M636C on Friday, July 28, 2017 9:27 PM

owlsroost

 

 
M636C

There are a dozen or so locomotives of class 68 in the UK that use the C175.

Not exactly the same engine, (less powerful) but it is set up for the Euro equivalent of Tier 4...

 

 

The Class 68 engine is Euro IIIa (which is the rough equivalent of Tier 3, AFAIK) - they don't have SCR etc.

There will be 34 of them in use once the final deliveries happen. Some of the early ones have been running passenger services since 2014, and as far as I know the only serious mechanical incident they have had was when one caught fire (but without serious damage - the fire was at roof level so may have been exhaust system/turbo related).

The Cat-powered, AC-drive 68s use less fuel and have better acceleration than the EMD-powered, DC-drive 67s. The electrical equipment in the 68s is European, from ABB (alternator, motors and per-axle traction inverters).

 

 
M636C
Better than the GEs with their Polish diesel engines, in that none have unexpectedly burst into flames.

 

Do you mean the UK Class 70 'Powerhaul' locos?

As far as I know, those diesel engines (PowerHaul P616) were/are designed and built by GE in the USA, based on a gas engine design from an Austrian subsidiary of GE (GE Jenbacher GmbH). And yes, the locos have been modified with extra cooling fans due to (I think) part of the engine overheating, but I don't know if this was related to the cause of the fire on one of them.

 

 

I must apologise about the Powerhaul engine origin. I was having a bad day. I think I've actually been to Jenbach when visiting Austria. I had in my mind the Polish origin of GE supplied replacement EMD crankcases...

The class 70s have had at least two engine room fires, and from the photos I've seen it looked as if the turbocharger was involved in at least one. However I read that one class 68 has had a fire...

As to the emissions standards, the 25 class 68s now in service meet Euro IIIa standards. However, nine additional class 68 for Trans-Pennine to be built this year will need to meet Euro IIIb.

There are three Powerhaul locomotives in Australia, which use the engines, electrical system and even the hood structure of the class 70. These were built as demonstrators (for 3'6" gauge) but never ran. Eventually they were sold to Pacific National, but as far as I know they haven't left the factory. I think the sale only occurred to get them off the books of the builder, and they were incuded as part of a long term maintenance contract for other GE engined locomotives.

Peter

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Trains free email newsletter
NEWS » PHOTOS » VIDEOS » HOT TOPICS & MORE
GET OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Connect with us
ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER

Search the Community