Why two locomotives on Amtrak derailment?

8310 views
49 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December, 2006
  • 1,452 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Tuesday, December 26, 2017 3:49 PM
What qualifies as Line haul? Begs the question why Oregon and Washington didn't rebuild these when they had a chance.
  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 2,999 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Tuesday, December 26, 2017 4:27 PM

Line haul means anything that is for service outside of yards. California paid for theirs using emissions reduction money that WA and OR did not have access to. The emissions reduction was the primary goal, but reliability improvements were a happy accident.

I'm pretty sure that you can still do ECO repowers, or otherwise NS has been in violation quite a bit for the last couple years. A company recently did a mostly Tier IV or close to it rebuild of a standard F59PH after tests done on SCAX 865, see:

http://railpropulsion.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/North-Carolina-Leads-The-Way-In-Emissions-Reduction.pdf

and http://www.ncampo.org/3-Locomotive%20Emissions%20Improvement.pdf

The F125s are supposed to replace all the SCAX F59s, and maybe the MPs as well.

  • Member since
    November, 2013
  • 736 posts
Posted by VOLKER LANDWEHR on Tuesday, December 26, 2017 5:35 PM

EPA has a simple definition: All locomotives with less than 2,300 hp has to cpmply with the switch cycle every locomotive above this horsepower level has to comply to line-haul cycle.

Locomotive don't have to comply to Tier 4 if they are remanufactured according to the following definition: (Sorry it is the Canadian definition)

remanufactured locomotive means a locomotive that was originally manufactured after December 31, 1972, that contains more than 25 percent previously used parts and that

  • (a) has had, whether during a single maintenance event or cumulatively within a five-year period, each power assembly

    • (i) replaced, or

    • (ii) inspected and qualified for use;

  • (b) has been converted to enable it to operate using a fuel other than a fuel it was originally manufactured to use;

  • (c) is a repowered locomotive; or

  • (d) is a previously used locomotive into which a remanufactured locomotive engine is installed. (locomotive reconstruite)

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2017-121/page-1.html?wbdisable=true
Regards, Volker

Edit: After trying to understand the above I realized that these seem to be Canadian regulations. Sorry for the misleading post. Posting late in the night doesn't seem a good idea. The EPA definition follows in a new post.

  • Member since
    December, 2006
  • 1,452 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Wednesday, December 27, 2017 12:05 AM
I like how a remanufactured locomotive MAY also be a repowered one. Presumably in that case the rules regarding repower supersede. Has NS done any true ECOs with the v12? Or are those all custom based on existing engine cores? Could not an ECO rebuild use a used v12 crankcase and then it would be a re-manufacture?
  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 2,999 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, December 27, 2017 12:21 AM

The GP33ECOs done from GP50s are true ECOs with 12-710 prime movers. The language of the law is pretty confusing, but they wouldn't be building them if they were illegal.

  • Member since
    November, 2013
  • 736 posts
Posted by VOLKER LANDWEHR on Wednesday, December 27, 2017 3:51 AM

Following the posting of the Canadion rules in my previous post I hopefully get it right this time.

The definitions are in 40 CFR 1033.901: 
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/1033.901

Freshly manufactured locomotive means a new locomotive that contains fewer than 25 percent previously used parts (weighted by the dollar value of the parts) as described in § 1033.640.

Refurbish has the meaning given in § 1033.640.

Remanufacture means one of the following:

(1)

(i) To replace, or inspect and qualify, each and every power assembly of a locomotive or locomotive engine, whether during a single maintenance event or cumulatively within a five-year period.

(ii) To upgrade a locomotive or locomotive engine.

(iii) To convert a locomotive or locomotive engine to enable it to operate using a fuel other than it was originally manufactured to use.

(iv) To install a remanufactured engine or a freshly manufactured engine into a previously used locomotive.

(v) To repair a locomotive engine that does not contain power assemblies to a condition that is equivalent to or better than its original condition with respect to reliability and fuel consumption.

(2) Remanufacture also means the act of remanufacturing

And 40 CFR 1033.640: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/1033.640

§ 1033.640 Provisions for repowered and refurbished locomotives.

(a) The provisions of this section apply for locomotives that are produced from an existing locomotive so that the new locomotive contains both previously used parts and parts that have never been used before.

(1) Repowered locomotives are used locomotives in which a freshly manufactured propulsion engine is installed. As described in this section, a repowered locomotive is deemed to be either remanufactured or freshly manufactured, depending on the total amount of unused parts on the locomotive. It may also be deemed to be a refurbished locomotive.

 

(2) Refurbished locomotives are locomotives that contain more unused parts than previously used parts. As described in this section, a locomotive containing more unused parts than previously used parts may be deemed to be either remanufactured or freshly manufactured, depending on the total amount of unused parts on the locomotive. Note that § 1033.901 defines refurbishment of a pre-1973 locomotive to be an upgrade of the locomotive.

 (d) If the weighted fraction of the locomotive that is comprised of previously used parts is greater than or equal to 25 percent, then the locomotive is considered to be a remanufactured locomotive and retains its original date of manufacture. Note, however, that if the weighted fraction of the locomotive that is comprised of previously used parts is less than 50 percent, then the locomotive is also considered to be a refurbished locomotive.

Regards, Volker 

Edit: I've tried to illustrate the definitions for my own understanding:

     Freshly        I---------Remanufactured-------------------I
     Manufact.    I---------------I Refurbished
 
   I-------------------I---------------I-----------------------------------I
   0  (Tier 4)      25   (Tier 4) 50   (  Tier according     )   100 [%]
                                                    ( original build date)

  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 2,999 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, December 27, 2017 11:52 AM

Ok. I think I understand it now. Thanks for finding and posting that!

  • Member since
    December, 2006
  • 1,452 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Wednesday, December 27, 2017 3:19 PM
The examples here are helpful
If you produce a new locomotive by replacing the engine in a 1990 locomotive with a freshly manufactured engine, but all other parts are used, then the locomotive would likely be considered to be a remanufactured locomotive and its date of original manufacture is the date on which assembly was completed in 1990. (Note: such a locomotive would also be considered to be a repowered locomotive.)
In the Case of an ECO unit. It's probably on the hairy edge given that it's likely that it's the prime mover assembly and possibly the Radiator, One also wonders how updated electronics would count here. In particular for an F59PHI which is new enough to have engine computers on board. Assuming an ECO package still keeps the unit as a remanufactured loco. The initial production date would hold and it would only need to meet Tier1 and so an ECO would be an upgrade. Alternatively, if you minimized the rebuild work ala some of NS's creations, you could likely get the used parts count higher. Actually, are all the parts on an ECO skid considered new? is the Alternator Refurbished for example?
  • Member since
    November, 2015
  • 1,038 posts
Posted by ATSFGuy on Monday, January 01, 2018 1:50 AM

The talgo trains have always been run with two locomotives, one at each end. This is so the train does not have to be turned around after each trip.

  • Member since
    November, 2013
  • 736 posts
Posted by VOLKER LANDWEHR on Monday, January 01, 2018 10:32 AM

ATSFGuy
The talgo trains have always been run with two locomotives, one at each end. This is so the train does not have to be turned around after each trip.

I don't think so. Early Cascade Talgo trains ran with a cabcar: 
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/122/286603565_34ce0ce818_b.jpg

Later they ran with a non-powered control unit (NPCU), a rebuilt F40 locomotive with all drive components removed and a baggage compartment installed:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/Cascadeswithcabbage.jpg/1024px-Cascadeswithcabbage.jpg

The Wisconsin built Talgos have a special cabcar: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mspdude/11813596785/sizes/l/
Regards, Volker

  • Member since
    June, 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 2,994 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Monday, January 01, 2018 11:44 AM

CShaveRR
Locomotves on both ends will be found on most, if not all, of the trains that operate at 110 m.p.h.  Apparently one unit and a cab car can't make it work.  I was under the impression that the Milwaukee trains were using Cabbages at one end.

They use two locomotives on the Chicago to Milwaukee trains when they are unsure of the reliability of the other locomotive.    Such is the case with the new Siemens Charger locomotives, they have no clue how they will perform in harsh winter conditions so on the Chicago to Milwaukee runs they have been assigning two operating locomotives during harsh weather and running the cabbage cabs during moderate weather.

December 30th the Milwaukee to Chicago run I rode had a Cabbage Cab, Amtrak GE Frieght Style unit, and the Siemens Charger loco.    It was minus 5 to minus 10 which is a Temperature unique to CONUS vs. Europe.    Hence the caution on the new Siemens design.     I expect once the Siemens Chargers experience a few winters they will trust them to run solo in harsh conditions.

  • Member since
    June, 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 2,994 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Monday, January 01, 2018 11:51 AM

Lab
When I rode the wolverine from Jackson mi to Chicago and return a few months ago there only the engine pulling the train. No engine or cab car on the Rear. When boarding in Chicago we walked past the engine which had pulled the train into the depot. The rest of the train was seperate by about one car length with a different engine at the other end to pull us out.

I used to work long ago at the GM HQ building on West Grand Blvd with excellent views of the GT and Detroit trackage.    They have several handy wyes in Detroit area and Northern Burbs such that the Chicago to Detroit trains can be easily turned at several points from near Detroit's Amtrak station onwards....North.    I am not entirely sure of Pontiac but there is another Wye somewhere up the line North of Detroit.    Also remember from the old Bluewater Michigan trips the GT had a proliferation of WYE trackage in eastern Michigan.

  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 10,516 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, January 02, 2018 7:12 AM

The existence of these wyes doesn't necessarily mean that they can be used easily.  The wyes may be beyond yard limits which would translate into paying for a road crew to turn the train. 

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • 1,230 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Tuesday, January 02, 2018 4:16 PM

There is a Wye about 5 miles NW of the station. 

  • Member since
    September, 2011
  • 3,564 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Tuesday, January 02, 2018 6:59 PM

Amtrak seems to prefer bi-directional operation on its corridor trains, even when a wye is available.

  • Member since
    January, 2008
  • 625 posts
Posted by Sunnyland on Thursday, January 04, 2018 5:47 PM

I had wondered about this too, on MO River Runner or IL service, there is never a rear engine, train is short.  But they do have to carry some extra cars now in MO, UP wants extra axles, something to do with crossings so the train is longer, but not a push pull operation.  

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 13,719 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, January 04, 2018 7:22 PM

Sunnyland
I had wondered about this too, on MO River Runner or IL service, there is never a rear engine, train is short.  But they do have to carry some extra cars now in MO, UP wants extra axles, something to do with crossings so the train is longer, but not a push pull operation.  

Back in the day, my carrier restricted single locomotives or single Budd car trains to 30 MPH.  The limited number of axles did not guarantee the proper operation of the signal system at the time (relay based signals).  The single moving piece of equipment could go through 'detector' circuits faster than the relays could detect the equipments presence and do their job properly.

I don't know how big the Missouri River Runner's are, no do I know what types of issues UP is seeing with their operation.

CSX still maintains the 30 MPH restriction on the operation of a single locomotive.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    December, 2017
  • 402 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Thursday, January 04, 2018 9:37 PM

BaltACD
Sunnyland
I had wondered about this too, on MO River Runner or IL service, there is never a rear engine, train is short.  But they do have to carry some extra cars now in MO, UP wants extra axles, something to do with crossings so the train is longer, but not a push pull operation.  

Back in the day, my carrier restricted single locomotives or single Budd car trains to 30 MPH.  The limited number of axles did not guarantee the proper operation of the signal system at the time (relay based signals).  The single moving piece of equipment could go through 'detector' circuits faster than the relays could detect the equipments presence and do their job properly.

I don't know how big the Missouri River Runner's are, no do I know what types of issues UP is seeing with their operation.

CSX still maintains the 30 MPH restriction on the operation of a single locomotive.

CN's restrictions are similar:

One locomotive - 30 mph

Two locomotives, or one locomotive pulling one car - 50 mph

Anything more than that is allowed track speed.  These rules were introduced in years past after Dispatchers began noticing that small consists (caboose hops, single RDCs etc) would intermittently disappear from their CTC display panel.  

The most recent instance of this becoming an issue was when VIA Rail was testing a 3 car Danish ABB Flexliner in Ontario and Quebec, operating it at the permitted track speeds of over 90 mph.  Being articulated, the Flexliner had only 8 axles and did not properly activate track circuits or crossing warning devices at the higher speeds.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 5,602 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, January 05, 2018 9:20 AM

SD70Dude
BaltACD
 
Back in the day, my carrier restricted single locomotives or single Budd car trains to 30 MPH ...CSX still maintains the 30 MPH restriction on the operation of a single locomotive. 

CN's restrictions are similar: One locomotive - 30 mph

This is interesting because the fastest I ever saw an early Geep run was on the Northeast Corridor, just west/south of the Trenton bridge, in 2001: light engine and, to my eyes, considerably faster than 85mph (I was extremely surprised that the engine could run that fast, let alone be sanctioned to run that fast -- I suspect some shop personnel had 'breathed' on it a bit).  This was one of the Amtrak 'orange' units; perhaps someone knows what modifications these may have had.

Is there some aspect of ACSES or other systems that make signaling more reliable for light engines on the high-speed parts of the NEC?

  • Member since
    December, 2006
  • 1,452 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Monday, January 08, 2018 3:00 PM
Just a quick comment back on reusing of the Cascades F59PHIs, Metra's RFP Could result in interest in these units.

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