Demonstrator units on the Railroads

[Andrew Falconer]

When Demonstrator units are on the Railroad, who is evaluating the units?

How long do Demonstrator units stay on the Railroads?

Are the company representives always with the Demonstrators?

How careful are the railroads with the Demonstrators?

Who is allowed to operate them?

Who is allowed to examine them?

Andrew

[JayPotter]

I'm familiar only with procedures on CSXT.  Almost everything is situational.  In other words, the duration of the units' time on the railroad, the extent to which manufacturer representatives accompany the units, and so forth are all variable.  Raw performance data can be obtained directly from the units' event recorders or from instrumented test cars that sometimes accompany the units.  Sometimes the data produced during the evaluation period is more useful to the manufacturer than it is to the railroad; and other times it's more useful to the railroad.  The units are typically treated (i.e. operated, serviced, etc.) in the same way as the railroad's own units are treated.  However all locomotive characteristics are not evaluated under the same circumstances.  Units being evaluated are given specific assignments to evaluate specific characteristics.  For example, units would be assigned to one route to evaluate their high-speed riding characteristics and would be assigned to a different route to evaluate the levels of tractive effort that they produce.

 

 

[Andrew Falconer]

So they do run them in situations as tough as possible to see if any problems arise.

Andrew

[JayPotter]

That depends on what is meant by "problems".  Problems involving component failures oftentimes only occur after years of service.  The type of "problem" that a typical short-duration evaluation would disclose might include a situation in which the demonstrators, when operating in tonnage service under a given set of circumstances (i.e. powering a certain tonnage train across a given route with given rail conditions) produce lower levels of tractive effort than the railroad's existing locomotives typically produce.  So I wouldn't say that demonstrators necessarily tend to be operated in situations "as tough as possible".  I'd say that they tend to be operated in situations in which various measurements of their performance can be compared against standards that the railroad and the manufacturer expect the locomotives to meet.

[oltmannd]

The specifics kinda depend on the circumstances. 

When Conrail tested the SD60MACs, the main purpose of the test was to demonstrate the adhesion at low speeds, so a dyamometer car was required.  In this case, EMD supplied their car and test personnel.  Conrail crews operated with some advise from the EMD guys on board.  Conrail's Transportation and Mechanical depts designated the test routes and trains and reported the results.

When Conrail tested the SD70M demonstrators, the primary purpose was to measure the behavior of the radial truck.  In this case, EMD was along to watch over things, but Conrail did the track force measurement.

Conrail also tested the B40-8 and B40-8W demonstrators only for ride quality.  In this case Conrail did the intrumentation and testing w/o any GE personnel involved.

Sometimes "demonstrators" are borrowed units from foreign roads that placed early orders of new models.  This arrangment made it easier to do head to head fuel consumption testing w/o having to watch over the manufacturer's reps.  There was one incident I recall when a rep had to be tossed off the property for meddling in a fuel consumption test..... 

[Andrew Falconer]

Those were excellent tales of Conrail operations.

Thank you.

Andrew