If i went to EMD and wanted SW600 with 6-645 750 hp engine for tight curved trackage. Would EMD sell this locomotive or would sell SW600 with no engine and tell me to import the engines.Gary
They'd ignore you or tell you to go to GE and bother them. A custom locomotive for only one sale isn't profitable.
Out of curiosity -- what is the intended service you need a locomotive of this kind to perform? Curves too sharp for an 'ordinary' SW are getting into Trackmobile territory...
IA and easternIf i went to EMD and wanted SW600 with 6-645 750 hp engine for tight curved trackage.
In fact what you want might better be answered by someone like Dave Goding, who has in fact commented already on EMD's attempt to build a switcher with special trucks to accommodate very sharp radii (it was not of interest to any railroad and I believe he said it was 'not proceeded with' accordingly, but the design was an interesting one while it lasted). If I remember correctly there actually were some 6-645s produced (for use in export equipment) but certainly nothing more recent -- and in any case no locomotive of that horsepower would be built today with that size frame and power assemblies; you'd use a Cummins, Cat or MTU high-speed diesel, or in fact a prime mover derived from OTR truck practice, instead, and benefit from all the parts and service and repair know-how costed down in 'other markets'.
The 'correct' answer is that you'd go to LTE, or perhaps the fire sale at NRE as they close Silvis and Dixmoor, and buy the parts of some old SW you want for a pittance, then find and integrate whatever truck designs you need to get around curves and the prime mover and generator of your choice.
I would hope that whoever you talked to would not tell you to pound sand or ignore you.
But I think they would tell you nicely the same things mentioned in the previous posts.
I've run into some very nice corporate folks who didn't HAVE to be nice but were anyway. Kaiser, for one, once sent me a pound of 256A aluminum alloy, just to play with.
Ed
7j43kI would hope that whoever you talked to would not tell you to pound sand or ignore you
On the other hand, if you had plenty of money in your checkbook or account, they might tell you about practical alternatives to what is a relatively nonsensical railfan idea as expressed. I'm still trying to figure out why a derated prime mover is supposed to help with getting a double-truck switcher around tight curves... and not succeeding in the effort. The cause of patience would likely be better served by stating the desired operating characteristics up front, and not prescribing locomotive parts that won't go well together even if directed by James Whale on a dark and stormy night.
Overmod 7j43k I would hope that whoever you talked to would not tell you to pound sand or ignore you Progress is not run by particularly nice people. On the other hand, if you had plenty of money in your checkbook or account, they might tell you about practical alternatives to what is a relatively nonsensical railfan idea as expressed. I'm still trying to figure out why a derated prime mover is supposed to help with getting a double-truck switcher around tight curves... and not succeeding in the effort. The cause of patience would likely be better served by stating the desired operating characteristics up front, and not prescribing locomotive parts that won't go well together even if directed by James Whale on a dark and stormy night.
7j43k I would hope that whoever you talked to would not tell you to pound sand or ignore you
Progress is not run by particularly nice people.
That is too bad. I have worked for people like that, and it is disappointing, to say the least.
I will point out that an EMD GP20D has a minimum radius of 150'.
And that a UP SW10 had a minimum radius of 104' (unit only).
And that a Baldwin 660 HP switcher had/has a minimum radius of 50' (locomotive alone) or 120' (with train).
Leaving out management attitudes, it would seem that the used locomotive market would supply many opportunities.
I look forward to the OP responding on this matter. And perhaps explaining the needs for his project.
7j43kI look forward to the OP responding on this matter. And perhaps explaining the needs for his project.
You would remember: wasn't there a SW that was modified (longer truck cables?) to operate on the Baltimore street trackage that the famous 'Dockside' 0-4-0s were built to serve? That would be a useful example for him.
What trucks did that Baldwin 660 have? I dimly remember the Reading having a couple with really short minimum radius listed...
There was a refinery that leased a switcher from the Santa Fe which was the last EMD switcher on the roster because the curves were too sharp for bigger locomotives. The industry shut down and the switcher was cut up. Gary
I should have said the time frame was 1970 to 1980.Gary
IA and easternI should have said the time frame was 1970 to 1980.
So, as though analyzing this as a problem presented to EMD:
(1) what is the specific need for negotiating tight curvature, and what is the state of track structure, permissible weight loading, or other considerations involved?
(2) Why should the engine be derated below 'normal' for this application -- or why use a 645 instead of 567 for this small application if derating it? (Keep in mind that using 645 power assemblies on a 567 and rebalancing things in the engine to suit is not done to increase power to "645 levels", only to allow standardization of components when road locomotives largely use 645s...)
(3) does the budget permit designing or using trucks or suspensions with extremely short effective rigid wheelbase?
Personally, I'd think that in order to justify the costs of a custom design like this, you'd want additional horsepower to do 'more' work in a given time and thereby increase marginal revenue per crew or locomotive hour. Probably with some kind of good controlled-creep adhesion system on all wheels, if those were marketed in your period.
I believe that the OP is missing a very important point. He seems to be looking for a second generation SW1. What many don't realize, is that although the SW1 looks small, short and cute, it's actually the same length as all the other EMD switcher models. It's right around 44' OAL. The shorter hood with the bench seat below the radiator makes it look shorter, but it's not.
Overmod What trucks did that Baldwin 660 have? I dimly remember the Reading having a couple with really short minimum radius listed...
I don't know, but here's a teeny picture:
built 4/1937. Apparently sold to Santa Fe. And resold......
Overmod Progress is not run by particularly nice people.
Not sure who that is directed at, but I'd love to hear.
Regardless, PR/EMD sales folks would tell you politely that one new switcher is not something they would build for a number of reasons. If you wanted 50, they would be glad to help, but it would get a CAT C175 or smaller CAT engine due to the Tier 4 requirement. If you want other than a CAT or EMD engine, then they wouldn't be polite.
To build one of anything makes no sense for EMD for a number of reasons:
- Engineering expense - a complete set of drawings for every single part is required. Today, they only work with 3D CAD models so every piece that isn't in the system already needs modeling, then new drawings. Then routings to make or buy each part. To design a new model takes a lot of engineering - I know the SD70ACe development was over 500,000 engineering hours. Once the first design of a model exists, they budget 10K-20K hours just for design of customer specific requirements, like cab seats, refrigerator, electronic devices, wiring and piping diagrams and drawings, horn, bell, painting and styling, etc., but most orders have more customization where it's typical to spend 50K or more hours.
- Tooling expense - to build the structures, especially the underframe, requires major expense to make or modify existing fixtures. If there are castings required, that's vendor tooling. If you have to make new truck castings, you're looking at $500K and up for patterns, flasks, and coreboxes. I doubt the switcher truck patterns exist today, so you'd have to accept rebuilt parts.
- Service expense - anything new requires new service manuals and parts catalogs plus service coverage after delivery. Training on repair and operating is part of the sale as is warranty coverage. No new model has ever worked perfectly out of the box so there is the cost of engineering to fix it once it's in service.
- The learning curve - manufacturing hours to build the first loco of a new model takes 3-5 times more than the 20th one so you have to factor that into the production cost.
Any new order is judged on "opportunity cost". Those direct hours cost in the neighborhood of $100/hour or more but an order is judged for profitability on a rate of $300/hour (that was twenty years ago, likely much more today). Opportunity cost simply considers what you give up doing to fit this work in that could earn more money; there are only so many engineering hours per year available so you have to pick and choose the wisest way to spend them.
Dave
bogie_engineerNot sure who that is directed at, but I'd love to hear.
Thanks for providing him the definitive version he needed to hear. But you might recap the story about those special 'flexible' truck frames for the single-truck project you described a few months ago -- those might be interesting as an alternative to bogie trucks in his use...
Would EMD sell a locomotive such as G6B in the America.Gary
IA and easternWould EMD sell a locomotive such as G6B
As Mr. Goding indicated, any such locomotive built today would have a high-speed engine, likely a Cat C175 or Cummins QSK. (There are small-locomotive builders that will sell you a MTU prime mover, too, but I think the American motors are fine.) Unless you have other locomotives with 645 power assemblies, or you have special access to parts (e.g. through arrangements with a museum or shortline) there is little point in dealing with importing a 6-645 or fabricating a block and other parts for one. None of these engines were turbo'ed, and would have the relative problems that a Roots engine has.
Back in the 1950s EMD was willing to sell export model locomotives in North America, and also build customized units.
Some G8 and G12 units were sold to Canadian National and Ontario shortline/interurban London & Port Stanley. Some of CN's were Cape Gauge, as were the unique NF110 and NF210 units that worked alongside them in Newfoundland. And don't forget the GMD1, most of which rode on export A1A trucks.
All of these used a lot of standard EMD parts, the GMD1 for example can be thought of mechanically as a SW1200 on a longer frame, and the NF units were a six motor version of the same.
Why does the OP's imaginary unit need a V6 engine? Could it make do with a 8-645, blower or turbocharged? On that note, the GP15T is yet another example of a custom EMD unit, built with the lighter turbocharged engine to achieve the same power as a GP15-1 but also be able to run on the light industrial spurs found in its original home territory.
It should be noted that none of these were 'one off' units, they all had production runs. And I'll bet EMD baked in the customization costs into the selling price.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70DudeCould it make do with a 8-645, blower or turbocharged?
As I recall there are balance issues with the 8-645, one reason there were relatively few of them built. Thing is, he was talking about derating the six-cylinder engine; why would he need more cylinders and a complex, fragile turbocharger?
Overmod SD70Dude Could it make do with a 8-645, blower or turbocharged? The reason for the 6-645 was that the 'customer' specified it. As I recall there are balance issues with the 8-645, one reason there were relatively few of them built. Thing is, he was talking about derating the six-cylinder engine; why would he need more cylinders and a complex, fragile turbocharger?
SD70Dude Could it make do with a 8-645, blower or turbocharged?
The reason for the 6-645 was that the 'customer' specified it.
Fair enough.
Where did Clyde get their EMD engines from? Were they manufactured down under, or imported from La Grange?
It would be an additional cost, but not impossible to import a 6-645 from Australia if it turned out to be the only source.
Perhaps the OP should consider a Plymouth or Brookville industrial design. It might be a better fit.
Contact this company.
Custom Locomotives - Greenville, South Carolina - Republic Locomotive
I don't think the OP actually has a need for a switcher. It sounds like a "what if" that was just very poorly worded.
Clyde and all the other EMD associates got their engines from LaGrange. AFAIK, EMD did not allow anyone to build their engines locally until the Indian Railways contract in the 90's. But EMD did not do a lot protect their drawings so unauthorized builders started making copies, when the first one was I don't know.
You are right about what if locomotive.What i was looking at was something like street car trackage with that kind of curves and buying 10 locomotives to replace GE 44 ton locomotives. Gary
I have been distracted by a number of other things and have missed much of this discussion. However It seems to me that a GA8 or GA18 would be more suitable than a G6B if light weight and sharp curves are a problem...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_GA8
The diagram shows the concept most clearly
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S300%E6%8E%92%E5%88%97%E5%9C%96.jpg
Interestingly, Taiwan had both the GA8 and the related GL8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_GL8
The Australian G6B was a derivative of the EMD GL8 tailored to Victorian Railways requirements.
https://www.victorianrailways.net/motive%20power/ydie/ydie.html
The diagram is most useful in explaining this locomotive.
https://www.victorianrailways.net/motive%20power/diagrams/ydia01.html
The VR was operated by the Victorian State Government, and despite the perception that governments spend money without consideration, the VR was remarkably thrifty with its expenditure and the G6B (Y class) was a truly amazing example of this.
Way back in 1910, the VR decided to electrify its suburban rail network in Melbourne. I posted a documentary video "On Time" that showed these trains in another thread in these forums.
They ordered the equipment from GE but actual construction was delayed until 1919 by the First World War.
The powered EMU cars used riveted plate frame power trucks (as might be expected in 1919 or earlier) but after 30 to 35 years of service these trucks began to fail. Although new steel trains with cast trucks were being obtained, the VR had to replace the riveted plate frame trucks with one piece cast steel truck frames cast by the GSI licensee Bradford Kendall. Hundreds of these frames were required.
However only a few years later these elderly wooden cars needed replacement and as the steel commuter cars entered service these relatively new trucks becamre surplus.
Ever looking for a saving, The VR requested that locomotive builders offer diesel switchers designed around these surplus trucks, most less than ten years old (although the actual traction motors dated back to 1914 or so.)
Clyde Engineering built the G6B using the trucks as supplied (as seen in the links above).
As well as the 75 for VR (only the last 25 using 8-645E engines) five were built for Westrail using standard EMD export Flexicoil trucks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAGR_J_class_(diesel)
Interestingly, the VR found that some of their G8B locomotives (the later ones using GL8 radiators)
https://www.victorianrailways.net/motive%20power/t357_366.html
were actually lighter than the G6Bs and these were allowed on lighter lines in place of the G6Bs... This may have been due to the relatively heavy trucks and traction motors on the G6Bs, since the G8Bs used metre gauge D29 motors.
I hope this was entertaining...
Peter
IA and eastern If i went to EMD and wanted SW600 with 6-645 750 hp engine for tight curved trackage. Would EMD sell this locomotive or would sell SW600 with no engine and tell me to import the engines.Gary
If you're just switching an industry, you'd go get yourself a Trackmobile. If you were a running locomotive on the national network, you'd go get yourself a used SW-anything and have it rebuild/upgraded. I'd shoot for something with a 567C engine (SW-900, SW-1200) and Flexicoil trucks for reliability's sake, easy of maintenance.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I worked for companies and seen other companies that had in house rail networks. They used sw1200 on the straighter tracks and GE 44 ton on very curved track. One used fireless locomotive but had give it up because the maker went out business. Some of these were looking for a little bigger than GE 44 ton for the curved track. Gary
I can't help but wonder if we're trying to answer this question backward. What does the OP actually need the locomotive to do, in terms of number of loads and service, and how sharp are the horizontal and vertical curves, and what is the state of track construction?
And now that it's been mentioned, what is the specific timeframe of this effort?
I still don't quite understand the tiny downsized engine requirement. Making a locomotive capable of negotiating very sharp curves is done in the truck design, and how the bolsters, traction-motor cables and cooling, and air lines are rigged. A smaller engine would only be a matter of fuel economy or marginal weight reduction, and if either of those is a concern I think re-engining with something other than a GM locomotive two-stroke would be a wise idea.
The switchers used by many interurbans were designed for the curves found in streetcar trackage. OTOH, I'm not sure if the coupler mountings would be kosher for a locomotive subject to FRA regulation.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.