Trains.com

Can we get a new design for Amtrak Long Distance Locos ? The Slice of Cheese Gen Sets are gettint moldy

5279 views
33 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Can we get a new design for Amtrak Long Distance Locos ? The Slice of Cheese Gen Sets are gettint moldy
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 2:49 PM

We have exciting new designs for Accla and Electric can the rest of us get out of boring.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 3:26 PM

No! No trains for you!

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 5:59 PM

When you come down to it it wouldn't take much effort for GE to build passenger diesels that were ALCO PA or FA lookalikes, but the thing is most Amtrak passengers could care less what the locomotives look like, as long as they get the job done.

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 8:07 PM

Expect either a rebuild of the P42DCs or a LD SC-44 order with large fuel tanks.

In order to meet emissions and crash specs, they're all going to be low-profile Vergara-esque creations from here on out...sadly.

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 10:54 PM

NorthWest

Expect either a rebuild of the P42DCs or a LD SC-44 order with large fuel tanks.

In order to meet emissions and crash specs, they're all going to be low-profile Vergara-esque creations from here on out...sadly.

 

 

Amtrak does have an option for some SC-44s with large fuel tanks.

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:33 PM

Yup. The number is 225. I wonder if the states will wish they had bought the larger fuel tanks if the LD ones are built.

  • Member since
    March 2013
  • 297 posts
Posted by CJtrainguy on Thursday, September 1, 2016 7:57 PM

Of the Amtrak option, 75 are corridor version and 150 are the LD version with larger fuel tanks. Of course, it's an option, so anything can happen.

  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Posted by aegrotatio on Thursday, September 1, 2016 10:45 PM

Looks kinda nice, and for you video fans it looks like the LED lamps are compatible with digital video now.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ipu4cTNdqLo

 

  • Member since
    November 2014
  • 250 posts
Posted by ORNHOO on Thursday, September 1, 2016 11:59 PM

Considering the recent Amtrak decision to run many trains that were formerly pulled by two locomotives with only one, and the spate of engine failure related delays that resulted, I wonder if Locomotives with two diesel engines would be in order? MPExpress54 anyone?

  • Member since
    May 2007
  • 194 posts
Posted by nyc#25 on Friday, September 2, 2016 8:54 AM

You are so right.  There must be redundancy as when E8s pulled most

of our passenger trains.  E8s had TWO prime movers and TWO steam

generators.

Tags: EMD E8
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, September 2, 2016 9:56 AM

Redundancy was a fringe benefit in the E-unit arrangement.  E's had two V-12's because EMD was avoiding using turbochargers on their prime movers and did not have a single engine that could produce 2000-2250 HP like the 244 in the PA's.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    January 2016
  • 48 posts
Posted by peharri on Friday, September 2, 2016 8:01 PM

Anything wrong with the Siemen's Intercity 125 inspired trainsets for this, that they're doing for All Aboard Florida? I recall seeing a recent report with Joe Boardman explicitly stating he'd like to buy more locomotives like those being used for that project after visiting the Siemens factory.

It'd be nice to see Amtrak transition out of the first half of the 20th Century and start running modern diesel systems. They're probably not going to use DMUs for LDs, but there's no reason why they can't use push-pull bi-directional trainsets, and they look sleek and modern too.

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, September 3, 2016 9:28 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH

Redundancy was a fringe benefit in the E-unit arrangement.  E's had two V-12's because EMD was avoiding using turbochargers on their prime movers and did not have a single engine that could produce 2000-2250 HP like the 244 in the PA's.

 

In the long run EMD was right.  In the rush to get into the post-war passenger diesel market ALCO didn't "torture-test" the 2,000HP 244 engine as well as they should have, and we all know what happened afterward.

Got that from a "Classic Trains" article on ALCO PA's that came out several years ago. 

As a matter of fact I've got a book written by a former Erie engineer who HATED the PA's.  He said the most important accessory you could have on a PA was a fire extinguisher.

  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Posted by aegrotatio on Friday, September 9, 2016 10:16 PM

peharri
It'd be nice to see Amtrak transition out of the first half of the 20th Century and start running modern diesel systems.

 

So what is it about the Genesis locomotive, the first generation of which came out in 1992, that makes it part of the "first half of the 20th Century?"

 

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Friday, September 9, 2016 10:51 PM

aegrotatio
peharri
It'd be nice to see Amtrak transition out of the first half of the 20th Century and start running modern diesel systems.

So what is it about the Genesis locomotive, the first generation of which came out in 1992, that makes it part of the "first half of the 20th Century?"

I believe the reference is to the classic locomotive hauled trains that we've had for almost 200 years and still make up the vast majority of passenger trains worldwide versus the intergrated trainsets that have found niche assignments in some markets.

As for the P42, it does have more in common with an E8 than with what's coming out of Siemens or Progress Rail today.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    September 2016
  • 2 posts
Posted by lcar4000 on Wednesday, September 14, 2016 4:56 PM

[quote user="Firelock76"]

When you come down to it it wouldn't take much effort for GE to build passenger diesels that were ALCO PA or FA lookalikes, but the thing is most Amtrak passengers could care less what the locomotives look like, as long as they get the job done.

 

I was looking at a photo of a PA the other day and wondered if the "slice of cheese" provides better wind tunnel results than the PA or,  for that matter,  an E7.   

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Thursday, September 15, 2016 4:38 PM

Bringing new people to rails is impaortant and sexy hot looking locos is the start. That is what the auto industry has done with brands like Mustang and Pontiac

  • Member since
    January 2016
  • 48 posts
Posted by peharri on Monday, September 26, 2016 2:50 PM

aegrotatio

 

 
peharri
It'd be nice to see Amtrak transition out of the first half of the 20th Century and start running modern diesel systems.

 

 

So what is it about the Genesis locomotive, the first generation of which came out in 1992, that makes it part of the "first half of the 20th Century?"

 

 

Well, one might start with the fact it's a locomotive...

Since the 1950s, in areas where passenger trains are taken seriously, *MUs (DMUs/DEMUs/EMUs) have become fairly dominant. They're cheaper to maintain, and more fuel efficient.

But that said, my comment wasn't ruling out locomotives like the Genesis altogether. Like I said, bi-directional push-pull sets like the Intercity 125 are a reasonable choice especially for longer distance journeys. I'm a little surprised that given the obvious advantages, Amtrak doesn't modernize its fleet, or at least modernize how it uses what it has.

 

 

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Monday, September 26, 2016 4:54 PM

NorthWest
Yup. The number is 225. I wonder if the states will wish they had bought the larger fuel tanks if the LD ones are built.

One aspect of these Tier IV compatible designs that I haven't come across - will the LD version have a large enough pee, er urea tank?  Also, what does the LD version give up in order to squeeze in a larger fuel tank?

Back to topic, the EMD Spirit looks better to me but doesn't have an LD version yet AFAIK.  Both it and the Siemens Charger are unproven in north American service, so I care much more that both locos will be reliable and maintainable.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, September 27, 2016 6:45 AM

Well, one might start with the fact it's a locomotive...

Since the 1950s, in areas where passenger trains are taken seriously, *MUs (DMUs/DEMUs/EMUs) have become fairly dominant. They're cheaper to maintain, and more fuel efficient.

 quote above

Less expensive to maintain only with short trainis.

Otherwise more expebsuve, because each mu motor czr is essentially a locomotive.  Can be lots more expensive. 

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Tuesday, September 27, 2016 12:11 PM

CandOforprogress2

Bringing new people to rails is impaortant and sexy hot looking locos is the start. That is what the auto industry has done with brands like Mustang and Pontiac

If you think that the modern traveler gives two hoots in a windstorm about the exterior appearance of his common-carrier conveyance, you're hallucinating.  The same is true of present-day rubber-wheelers,  For every Mustang or Pontiac on the road there are a dozen RVs and pickups, most of which range from homely to butt-ugly.

In order to produce transportation at minimum cost, locomotive designers have to concentate on things that advance that requirement.  "Pretty," isn't even on their priority list.  Since aerodynamics is, they might produce, "Pretty," by accident.  Or they might not...

Chuck (Who drives ugly vehicles with lots of interior space)

  • Member since
    February 2012
  • 67 posts
Posted by JimJCMO on Tuesday, September 27, 2016 4:30 PM

The GE Genesis locomotives were beasts of their time, the 1980's and 90's. In my opinion the shape of the locomotive is not as important as the paint scheme which decorates it. The "modern" schemes like those on the Brightline locos and the Rocky Mountaineer look more like motorhomes than locomotives. I recall that the original GE P32 locomotives where pretty much like and other hood unit, but in the "Pepsi Can" scheme they looked great!  http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/news/brightline-plan-for-miami-to-orlando-train-is-terrible-critics-say-7384403  http://www.rockymountaineer.com/en_CA_BC/routes_and_packages/canadian_rocky/first_passage_to_the_west

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, September 27, 2016 7:13 PM

Pimp my P-42?  Big SmileDevil

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Wednesday, September 28, 2016 6:58 AM

Bring back EMD's E-series body! Nothing since has looked as streamlined and "American."

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, September 28, 2016 9:16 AM

Hand-crafter compound-curved nose expensive to build.

Otherwise, you are right.

The Alco FA and PA nose is less complex.  Would that be OK?

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:43 AM

dakotafred

Bring back EMD's E-series body! Nothing since has looked as streamlined and "American."

 

Could they still meet FRA's new crash worthyness standards?

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Wednesday, September 28, 2016 11:20 AM

What Gensets are you referring to? The Genesis is not a Genset locomotive..

 

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

RME
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 2,073 posts
Posted by RME on Wednesday, September 28, 2016 2:16 PM

carnej1
What Gensets are you referring to? The Genesis is not a Genset locomotive..

Let's be charitable and say he was posting from a phone that didn't correct texting quite right...

No, on second thought, that wouldn't explain "gettint".  Maybe he was posting from a mindset that didn't correct texting quite right?

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, September 28, 2016 3:12 PM

Buslist
 
dakotafred

Bring back EMD's E-series body! Nothing since has looked as streamlined and "American."

 

 

 

Could they still meet FRA's new crash worthyness standards?

 

Personally I can't see why not, there's a heckuva lot more "nose" on an E unit, or a PA for that matter, than a Genesis locomotive.  Reenforcing it to modern crash standards should be easy, at least in my uneducated opinion.

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Wednesday, September 28, 2016 3:24 PM

carnej1

What Gensets are you referring to? The Genesis is not a Genset locomotive..

 

 

i was waiting to see how long it took for that question to be asked. I refrained just to see, took a lot longer than I thought it would.

 

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy