EMD and its associates built hundreds of locomotives with 12-645E engines and six motors for export customers, in Argentina and in Australia among others.
The Queensland Railways had more than one hundred in the 1550 and 2400 series.
These were required for lighter main lines that required a locomotive weight of less than 90 tons with an axle load of 15 tons. Of course, in Queensland really light lines had limits of 62 tons and 10.25 tons axle load.
Many of the twelve cylinder units were subsequently turbocharged, becoming the equivalent of SD39 or SD39-2 depending on their electrical system.
In Argentina they had both G22C and GT22C on both broad and metre gauges but no blower units were subsequently turbocharged.
Progress are currently rebuilding one of the converted Queensland GT-22Cs with an 8-710ECO, and one of the G-26Cs is also undergoing the same conversion.
Peter
CSSHEGEWISCHAnother factor is that a fair number of SD40's and SD40-2's have been de-rated to 2000HP for hump and transfer service. UP has been rebuilding a fair number of SD40-2's into slug sets for hump and yard service and BRC's hump pushers are de-rated SD40-2's. I'm sure that there are others.
The question being how many of these were bought from EMD as rebuilds, or converted using 'packages' from them.
And the other-shoe question being what the demand for such rebuilds or packages is in the future when a railroad needs or wants derated SD40s (or slugs/road slugs built on their frames) for these kinds of service.
Don't think Progress will be showing much contribution to profitability from these sources in the annual reports!
Another factor is that a fair number of SD40's and SD40-2's have been de-rated to 2000HP for hump and transfer service. UP has been rebuilding a fair number of SD40-2's into slug sets for hump and yard service and BRC's hump pushers are de-rated SD40-2's. I'm sure that there are others.
Unlike as recently as when EMD's GP15-1 was on the market, relatively heavy six axle power like SD40-2's can now do many of the remaining switching and local jobs that once were the domain of 4 axle units, opening the door for EMD's ECO program and other rebuild programs such as Union Pacific's SD40N.
Back during the 1970's, seemingly everyone was performing major capital rebuild programs on their Geep fleets to rebuild them for another 15-20 years of service at a fraction of the cost of a new GP38-2 or U23B. This was cutting into EMD's sales of their very popular GP38-2 and I'm sure killed more than a few potential sales of MP15's as well.
La Grange wanted a slice of this pie from customers that wanted a lower cost option than EMD's GP38-2, thus their own unique take on it by mandating a GP7/9/18 trade-in along with the usual recycling of useful components like the truck frames into what's otherwise a new locomotive.
But relatively little was happening in the 6 axle range in this area at that time (With Southern Pacific the most notable exception with their SD7/9 rebuild programs). And EMD's closest offering with the SD38-2 was viewed by customers as a specialized locomotive best suited to jobs like hump power, so it wasn't exactly a runaway sales success for EMD or encouragement to offer an even lower 1,500 hp choice.
The potential for new or like new low-horsepower SD's for the domestic market just was too low for EMD to bother courting during a time period when over 1,000 SD40-2's alone were built during 1979/1980. But I'm sure had a customer came knocking on the door and asked to order a large number of SD15-1's, EMD would've happily obliged.
EMD SD22ECO locomotives seem to be all right but when the GP15 locomotives and the proposed GP2000 locomotives were for sale there was no SD15 locomotives or any proposed SD2000 locomotives. What was the reason for this gap. Gary
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.