EMD's Next Locomotive?

[carnej1]

Progress Rail has stated that they are going to enter the passenger locomotive market, in fact one of the reasons they gave for opening the new Indiana assembly plant is to meet the "Made in America" requirements for new Commuter engine contracts as well as Amtrak.

 It seems plausible that what they will market will be something based on one of the European/Canadian builders offerings with EMD components. EMd tried to parther with Vossloh to build new power for the MBTA but were sued for not meeting the "Buy American" requirement...

[HarveyK400]

An F69/70EVO's would be a logical step for commuter railroads; but this might change with 110 mph intercity trains.. 

From what other have posted, new trucks without nose-hung motors will be highly desirable for 110 mph.  I thought the unsprung mass of nose-hung motors was alleviated with smaller, lighter ac motors; but apparently not enough.  This might drive a new standard design with body-mounted motors compatible for both commuter and intercity needs. 

I think there is a future need for a lower profile, light axle load, high speed locomotive for speeds up to 150 mph.  Whether a 710-series diesel locomotive could be built within the necessary weight limit is the question.  EMD once offered the AMT-125 diesel to go with Amfleet; and MLW (later Bombardier) built the 3750 hp, 240,000 lb LRC for VIA Rail.

[carnej1]

Metro Red Line

carnej1:

 

 

 

It seems that the 70 series will be around for awhile, especially as right now EMD appears to be ahead of GE in Tier 4 development. An SD70AC"something" designation seems logical..

 Keep in mind that the 70 series was supposed to have been superceded in EMD's Catalog by the SD89MAC (SD90 development with a 4500 HP 12-265H engine) but the problems with the 265H scuttled that..

 

 

Can someone enlighten me on the criteria for a new locomotive model number? Does it depend strictly on the engine type? The SD70ACe and the original SD70 seem to be radically different locomotives in both appearance and features. The EMD model number designations make no sense to me, as there was already an SD90 (which is mostly off the rails today as I understand). Or are they supposed to make no sense?

 My understanding is that EMD's sticking with the "70" for their newer models has a lot to do with the marketing success of the earlier SD70M/SD70MAC....I agree it would make logical sense to identify these as SD75whatevers due to that models similiar horsepower rating...note that while the AC traction model is the SD70ACe  they decided to call it's DC traction equivalent the SD70M-2 rather than SD70DCe, which seems to be a nod to the popularity of the earlier GP/SD40 Dash 2 series..

 I guess that EMD isn't that worried about whether or not their model numbering confuses railfans....The only other people on the planet who pay attention to locomotive model nomenclature are Railroad Mechanical personnel and it doesn't seem to bother them.

Under GM ownership it was somewhat less confusing but you can find other examples that don't seem to follow the logic...

[Wdlgln005]

That Trains Jan article also indicates EMD/Cat may get back into the passenger business. There may be enough F40's at Metra & other commuters to get a foot in the door. They may have something else Amtrak can use. 

I'm waiting to see when the 4 new PR43C's fare on NS with the 2-3 already out on the road. The 4 are due for delivery 4Q2010. Need sharp eyes near Mayfield Ky.

 

[Metro Red Line]

carnej1

 

 

 

It seems that the 70 series will be around for awhile, especially as right now EMD appears to be ahead of GE in Tier 4 development. An SD70AC"something" designation seems logical..

 Keep in mind that the 70 series was supposed to have been superceded in EMD's Catalog by the SD89MAC (SD90 development with a 4500 HP 12-265H engine) but the problems with the 265H scuttled that..

 

Can someone enlighten me on the criteria for a new locomotive model number? Does it depend strictly on the engine type? The SD70ACe and the original SD70 seem to be radically different locomotives in both appearance and features. The EMD model number designations make no sense to me, as there was already an SD90 (which is mostly off the rails today as I understand). Or are they supposed to make no sense?

[creepycrank]

In about 20 years UP will have forgotten why a high horsepower locomotive didn't work the last time and try again. 

[carnej1]

Metro Red Line

I know EMD's corporate side is in transition, but does anyone know if they have been developing a new locomotive? What will it be called? Will it be the "SD100" or will they start a new model line? Or will they just tack on more letters of the alphabet to the SD70 model name? (SD70ACefghijklmnop?)

If you read the article in this month's TRAINS magazine, EMD is most focused on developing the 710 series engine to be Tier 4 compliant and that has not changed with the takeover by Cat/Progress Rail. It seems that the 70 series will be around for awhile, especially as right now EMD appears to be ahead of GE in Tier 4 development. An SD70AC"something" designation seems logical..

 Keep in mind that the 70 series was supposed to have been superceded in EMD's Catalog by the SD89MAC (SD90 development with a 4500 HP 12-265H engine) but the problems with the 265H scuttled that..

[creepycrank]

What EMD needs to do is develop a new alternator to use with the high speed CAT engines Progress Rail is using so that they don't have to buy from Kato. As far as a new designation is concerned with all the constantly changing government regulations they just add on to what you have now. 

[Metro Red Line]

I know EMD's corporate side is in transition, but does anyone know if they have been developing a new locomotive? What will it be called? Will it be the "SD100" or will they start a new model line? Or will they just tack on more letters of the alphabet to the SD70 model name? (SD70ACefghijklmnop?)