Thanks to all for your answers.
EMD could have done it the other way around, but there's only so much room for stuff on each end of the engine. The blowers, cam drive gears, PTO for TM blower and main generator are one end and the lube oil and water pumps and aircompressor drive are on the other.
If you put the turbo on the other end, then you'd have a more complicated gear drive, plus have to shoe-horn in all the air intake, filters and aftercoolers around the cooling system expansion tank and plumbing on that end. There's lots of room above the main generator for all that stuff, so why not?
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Also remember for years EMD was a 2 stroke design with a combo turbosupercharger that only became a turbo above notch 6 if I am reading my manuals correct on the 645 engine. So the drive was at the front of it where the gears were and the intake and exhaust would have been there also so the exhaust was there. GE being a 4 stroke could put the exhaust at the other end away from the genarator/alternator and also further away from the cab.
NorthWestProbably just how it developed. The first EMD turbochargered locomotives were upgraded UP GP9s, so it was probably a matter of where they could fit it in. After that, it was tradition. GE just designed theirs to be the opposite.
GE just designed theirs to be the opposite.
The packaging of the diesel engine and the accessories that are required for it's operation are a matter of form following function and being stuffed within the allowable footprint of the carbody. Engineers do what they believe to be most effective and economical to solve whatever problem they face as a result, what happens, happens and if you aske the engineers involved they can give you a reason the specific decision was made.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Probably just how it developed. The first EMD turbochargered locomotives were upgraded UP GP9s, so it was probably a matter of where they could fit it in. After that, it was tradition.
I apologize if this question has been asked before.
Why are the exhaust stacks on EMD and GE locomotives in the opposite locations? EMD stacks closer to the cab and GE stacks closer to the rear of the locomotive.
Is there an engineering reason for this or is it just a case of how that's how it happened when the first models were developed?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.