Now that the QSK95 thread has been bumped with CECX 1919 finally put into service, I'd like to ask for an update on the experience with Caterpillar's high-speed locomotive diesel engines.
I have in particular seen very little discussion about how the 3512s in the New Jersey and Montreal dual-modes have performed. Are there any prospective orders for dual-modes using the C175, perhaps with one prime mover instead of two 12-cylinder engines?
Now that an F125 prototype has been substantially built, what is the status of progress (no pun intended) with testing or any design refinement?
As far as I know, the only substantial fleet is DRS' Class 68 in UK.
It seems that they are happy with the performance and reliability, as they exercised an option for more locomotives of this type.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_68
N.F.
The ALP-45DPs have performed decently well and are largely reliable. They are getting due for a prime mover overhaul, which is expensive and there has been complaining about that.
I am surprised about the need to overhaul already the Bombardier dual power engines.
This reminds me the four-engined BR245 in Germany, with four Caterpillar engines, maybe our German friends will know better.
The problems with the Traxx DE ME are still somewhat in question due to the newness of the units, but it seems to revolve primarily around inadequate engine cooling. Two of the 42 units have already caught fire.
Not too surprised, it is VERY cramped inside the machine room
(and I think the damaged units had higher power than the original series?)
nfotis As far as I know, the only substantial fleet is DRS' Class 68 in UK. It seems that they are happy with the performance and reliability, as they exercised an option for more locomotives of this type. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_68 N.F.
The Progress rail PR43C locomotives built for Norfolk Southern also have a C175-12 engine (the larger of the 2 powerplants in the locomotive) but supposedly they are all stored currently which would indicate NS isn't satisfied with them..
CORRECTION: The larger engine is the 16 cylinder version of the C175, NOT the C175-16 as I originally stated..
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
carnej1The Progress rail PR43C locomotives built for Norfolk Southern also have a C175-12 engine (the larger of the 2 powerplants in the locomotive) but supposedly they are all stored currently which would indicate NS isn't satisfied with them..
In fairness to Cat, I think part of the problem was that the small engine (a C18) was too small for all the added work needed to provide it -- it was too big for a pony or APU, too small to provide useful work using a locomotive of that size for typical service justifying a locomotive of that cost, and posed too much coordinating complication to get power 'above that easily achieved by the larger engine alone' if they had the idea of modulating both engines for "best fuel savings" jointly as demanded power from the locomotive varied up and down. There might also have been issues with cooling (I believe both engines ran with a common coolant supply, but I assume they had separate water pumps and thermostatic circulation control and so would have neither 'hot spots' or either too much or too little circulation at the right temperature for good operation at any time of year).
If there were specific problems with the C175-12 in service, though, that's exactly the sort of thing I'd like to hear details of. Perhaps this is wrong, but I'd expect any wear or stress problem seen on a 12-cylinder locomotive engine to be magnified on a 20-cylinder engine frequently both accelerated and run at higher output power.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.