JT22CW:
You have the F40PHM-2 @3200 Horsepower with a 16-645E3. It has a Full-cowl carbody, steamlined cab, built-out windshield sloping back from tip of nose. If the horsepower was an issue they should kept this one.
Another good unit is the new Motivepower MP40PH-3C. It's basically a copy of EMD stretched F40 with seperate-end power generator. We an engine of 710 can reproduce 4,000 HP. I don't know why Amtrak doesn't take a bite.
Interested information!
How could they "stay with" a locomotive they never owned (and was an experimental design, to boot), of which were a mere two examples?The newest (and last) EMD that Amtrak operates in passenger service is the F59PHI. These are too tall (at 15' 11") to operate in the Northeast. These have the 12-cylinder 710E3, also rated at (what is now a rather low) 3,000 horsepower; from anecdotes I received from hoggers that operate them, their acceleration is anemic.Amtrak helped develop the Genesis type with GE, IINM. EMD could not meet the set of specifications they put out. (This is why the P40DC was originally called the "AMD-103".)
Frankly, the design of the F69PHAC's nose is the more homely, when put next to the design of the Genesis. However, if you're really that much of a fan, you can always visit the lookalikes that operate in Chicago, which are the F40PHM-2 "Winnebagos"...have fun.
For the record, Amtrak's Genesis II dual-mode has AC traction motors (hence the designation P32AC-DM; the same type of engine is used by Metro-North Railroad). A number of other passenger diesels have AC traction, like the LIRR's DM/DE30AC and NJ Transit's PL42AC. Motive Power's MP36PH-3C/3S use DC traction, as does GO Transit's new MP40PH-3C. (And of course, Metro-North had a number of FL9s rebuilt as the FL9AC.)
chefjavier wrote: CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:The F69's were test beds for AC traction that were leased to Amtrak for operations. They rarely operated without the EMD test car while in Amtrak service.Do you know why Amtrak decide not to use AC?
CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:The F69's were test beds for AC traction that were leased to Amtrak for operations. They rarely operated without the EMD test car while in Amtrak service.
Do you know why Amtrak decide not to use AC?
Economics. AC has two main benefits and you need to take advatage of both to "win". The first is increased tractive effort at low speeds. If you can take advantage of this and reduce the number of locomotives on a train, you can earn back part of the increased capital cost for the AC locomotives. Even with high speed gearing, a P42 still makes more than enough tractive effort at min cont. speed to get any Amtrak over the ruling grade on any route (except maybe the SW Chief over Raton), so two units is the rule on most LD trains and one on most short haul trains. There is not much room for reducing the number of locomotives.
The second main benefit is reduced traction motor maintenance. This is a big deal for the frt roads since a third to half of the total maintenance cost of a DC locomotive in mainline service is traction motors. While sustained passenger train speeds can be hard on the commutator, it's the high current, low speed operation that's really tough on the motor's windings and insulation. So, I suspect that Amtrak doesn't spend nearly the % of total maintenance on traction motors as the frt roads do.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
SSW9389 wrote:The last time I saw them they were at NRE in Mount Vernon, Illinois for disposition. They may be gone by now.
Yup. Stopped by Mount Vernon in mid-July and I did not see them there.
Does Amtrak still operate this locomotives? Why they decide to discard them?
http://www.hebners.net/amtrak/amtF69PHAC.html
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.