Why is it that GE has gotten the lion's share of the orders from most of the major North American roads, with the exception of KCS and CN, which have currently about the same number of EMDs and GEs? In this forum and others, I've heard that the GEs have absolutely no reliability and allways break down and conversely, nothing but praise for the EMDs. I'm sure GEs must be much cheaper if this is true. Eventually, GE has to correct this or else they won't sell locos for much longer no matter how cheap they are, because a train with bad power won't deliver its loads and the railroad will lose business to another road with more reliable power or to the trucks. I would LOVE to hear from the railroaders in this forum or loco maintainance people for their opinions, as they are the ones who work with the locos and what they say counts a lot more than what I as a fan can say. Thanks in advance for any info. P.S., I'd especially love to hear the opinions of CSX and NS people.
fecsd40-2 Why is it that GE has gotten the lion's share of the orders from most of the major North American roads, with the exception of KCS and CN, which have currently about the same number of EMDs and GEs? In this forum and others, I've heard that the GEs have absolutely no reliability and allways break down and conversely, nothing but praise for the EMDs. I'm sure GEs must be much cheaper if this is true. Eventually, GE has to correct this or else they won't sell locos for much longer no matter how cheap they are, because a train with bad power won't deliver its loads and the railroad will lose business to another road with more reliable power or to the trucks. I would LOVE to hear from the railroaders in this forum or loco maintainance people for their opinions, as they are the ones who work with the locos and what they say counts a lot more than what I as a fan can say. Thanks in advance for any info. P.S., I'd especially love to hear the opinions of CSX and NS people.
There is a bit of hyperbole going on in this posting, eh?
GE has been selling road locomotives in North America now for nearly 50 years and no railroad has gone out of business due to buying their products...IINM, the two builders current locomotives are priced about the same(AC to AC, and DC to DC). One advantage GE has had in recent years is in the financing packages they offer (which may be even more of a competitive edge since EMD was sold off by GM).
I too,have noted a preference among many railroaders for EMD products and have read good explanations as to why, I'm sure some of our forum members who work in engine service can explain in detail...
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
When I became a conductor for NS in the late 1990's I asked some of the old heads about this and was told that GE at that time was one of NS's larger customers and used this clout to force NS to buy their locomotives. I do not know this to be a fact, I am simply repeating what I was told. I can say that I never worked with an engineer that wanted a GE unit in the lead.
GE has been the leader for some time now. EMD, aside from all the financial troubles with one time parent GM, actually had a period when some of their products, particularly the 50 series, weren't up to standards and were apparently considered unreliable. I don't know if this is officially when their sales started to slip but I am sure it didn't help.
In this economy and with the storing of locomotives rather than purchases of new ones, I am sure there will be a challenge to both builders to offer what incentives they can to make sure any orders keep coming.
Or maybe a European builder will make a sale to a North American road like Krauss Maffei did in the 1960s with their diesel hydraulics for SP and Rio Grande. A lot of NJ Transits electrics were built in Germany, if I'm not mistaken, which I could be. The best thing would be for both builders to have the best product so no foreign builder will come and take EMD and GE business.
I'm a Locomotive shop manager, I consider myself quite familiar with both builders units and neither one should still be in business. EMD has had a real tough time with quality and relaibility since the SD40-2's. (tough to beat something that has nothing to go wrong with it) The SD70's have been a wonderful locomotive but still can't quite hold up to the SD40's reliability. The SD70ACE's are seeming to be a good relacement for the SD70s, but the 50's, 60's and 90 series EMD's were not a good thing for either the railroads or EMD. GE had a real good thing working with the C44AC's. as much as it hurts to say it these are really quite a good locomotive. These seem to be GE's SD40 but with computers. tough reliable but kind of finicky. The C45AC's are not a good thing for anyone. GE has MAJOR problems with these things and they are scrambeling to keep them running. We have put new head seals on these things at least once since they were new and they still crack heads and spew water as fast as we can put it in. they suffer from major electronic problems as well. These are GE's SD90's. Contractual obligations keep us buying them NOT because they are a good locomotive.
fecsd40-2 Or maybe a European builder will make a sale to a North American road like Krauss Maffei did in the 1960s with their diesel hydraulics for SP and Rio Grande. A lot of NJ Transits electrics were built in Germany, if I'm not mistaken, which I could be. The best thing would be for both builders to have the best product so no foreign builder will come and take EMD and GE business.
I can gave give you a 2 word answer on why Loco Reliablity is down and why EMD and GE are having Quality Control Problems. Those words are CARB and EMISSONS. Carb is that Wonderful board in California that banned BLACK CARS and let me see here is demanding retrofits on trailers that cost 5-10K to do yet will only save the trucking companies 2K in fuel OVER THE LIFE OF THEM. Also since most locomotives will run into CA they will have to meet CARB standards so that means that they have to be MAINTAINED to their EMMISSON Standards. The biggest reason that you are seeing engines fail is simple as of Jan 1 2009 High Sulfur Fuel was Banned in Off road use which means that even the RR's could not get it so their engines are having to run on ULSF and that stuff eats SEALS GASKETS FUEL LINES FOR A LIVING. Once you update them you will be fine however that takes 2 years for the engine Manufacturs to catch up to the Fuel Comapines in that time you will see the Injectors scoring the Heads cracking and blowing turbos blowing and other crap. Basically what you are seeing NOW. The OTR Truckers had to deal with this in 1995 then 2007 while the RR's got to keep HIGH sulphur fuel we did not so enjoy.
carnej1 fecsd40-2 Or maybe a European builder will make a sale to a North American road like Krauss Maffei did in the 1960s with their diesel hydraulics for SP and Rio Grande. A lot of NJ Transits electrics were built in Germany, if I'm not mistaken, which I could be. The best thing would be for both builders to have the best product so no foreign builder will come and take EMD and GE business. The most popular diesel electric mainline freight locomotives in Europe use EMD prime movers and components. The company that builds them (Vossloh) has most of the market share right now. The other European builders really don't offer anything that would work for North American service. Bombardier(a major player in Europe and based in Canada) could of course re-enter the market over here (possibly by purchasing EMD, they already tried to buy it from GM).
The new EU standards are tougher then tier 2 , things are going to get worse everywhere. No one takes into account points of emmissions .. 100,000 points of emmissions in motor vehicles or considerably less than half for rail vehicles .
Sulfer is an additive, so is phosphorous.. its combustion chamber lube.. no lube = higher friction= failures.
Correct and the EPA in their infinate WISDOM has removed IT from the Fuel that the both the OTR and RR's burn as FUEL. NExt on their Hitlist is the Ships that haul the Containers into ports. However they are being Smart about it they are using the UN to mandate a NEW fuel standard on that one that removes the Sulpher and other stuff from the Heavy Fuel oil. That would be fun to watch one time when one of those Engines bigger than my house decides to throw a connecting rod out the side of the BLOCK at max power. I asked a couple buddies of mine one works for a local Shortline one works for the NS both of which in the shops and 90% of the failures they are getting can be traced to one thing right now LACK OF LUBRICATION IN THE FUEL getting to the Injectors one of them asked me how we solved it in the OTR industry I told him either run Howes or Lucas in the tank however on 5K gallons that will be a HUGE expense even buying it in Bulk.
Slightly off topic but do not buy gasoline of more than 10% ethonol for your small engine machines; lawn mowers, chain saws, weed eaters, etc. even my back up car of 1993 vintage doesn't like 10% ethonol too well.
Thank you Ed! That was informative. I believe that the more you try to make anything more complex, it breaks down more easily. With this fact, and the reality that oil will increase in price again, that electrification will be much more probable. There is even a rumor that BNSF is looking at electrification. An electric loco has NO emissions and has NO seal and gasket problems and uses NO fuel. How about ACEs and GEVOs with pantographs? MMMMMM.
fecsd40-2 Thank you Ed! That was informative. I believe that the more you try to make anything more complex, it breaks down more easily. With this fact, and the reality that oil will increase in price again, that electrification will be much more probable. There is even a rumor that BNSF is looking at electrification. An electric loco has NO emissions and has NO seal and gasket problems and uses NO fuel. How about ACEs and GEVOs with pantographs? MMMMMM.
You'll see Class 1 RR's start electrifying just as soon as they can get the Federal government to subsidize it. We've had several good threads about this possibility and the consensus among some of the more informed members is that a major electrification project nowadays would be incredibly costly, so much so that none of the big railroads could finance it alone. That doesn't mean that it won't happen but it won't happen soon...
Your point about complexity is well taken but note that modern engines (by that I'm referring to automotive engines, diesels both on and offroad, even aircraft engines) are far more fuel efficient than the older ones largely due to the electronic systems. Computers may make everything harder to fix but they also allow much greater control over ignition settings, timing, ect..
Word to the wise IF you think the RR's are going to meet the Phase 3 and 4 Emissions by just getting rid of the Sulpher in the Fuel you are NUTS. I read the Proposed phase 4 and the Final regs on 3 and in order to meet those the Locobuilders Will have to for 3 bring in either Diesel Particulate Filters or EGR valves into the mix for 4 you are looking at Urea and DPF yep I said Hog urine to get the emissons down. BTW when they do bring in DPF look for a 20% Drop in fuel ECONOMY regardless of WHO MAKES the engine EMD or GE Also when that thing plugs up DEAD ENGINE on the line. When they do regen they will put an ALCO or GE with a blown turbo to shame also.
fecsd40-2Thank you Ed! That was informative. I believe that the more you try to make anything more complex, it breaks down more easily. With this fact, and the reality that oil will increase in price again, that electrification will be much more probable. There is even a rumor that BNSF is looking at electrification. An electric loco has NO emissions and has NO seal and gasket problems and uses NO fuel. How about ACEs and GEVOs with pantographs? MMMMMM.
edbenton Word to the wise IF you think the RR's are going to meet the Phase 3 and 4 Emissions by just getting rid of the Sulpher in the Fuel you are NUTS. I read the Proposed phase 4 and the Final regs on 3 and in order to meet those the Locobuilders Will have to for 3 bring in either Diesel Particulate Filters or EGR valves into the mix for 4 you are looking at Urea and DPF yep I said Hog urine to get the emissons down. BTW when they do bring in DPF look for a 20% Drop in fuel ECONOMY regardless of WHO MAKES the engine EMD or GE Also when that thing plugs up DEAD ENGINE on the line. When they do regen they will put an ALCO or GE with a blown turbo to shame also.
But Ed .. this is the will of the people ! When the cost of consumer goods is through the roof from the high cost of transportation we have no one to blame but ourselves. We'll all be walking again .. but we won't be walking to work because the jobs are going to be gone. My advice , buy farmland and do subsistance farming with horses and non farting cows.
I hear you there Randy. Here is HOW BAD it has gotten in the OTR industry. Detroit Diesel 60 series the Kings of MPG before the Emissions crap was RAMMED up the Tailpipes of the OTR Industry even a Rookie could take one and get 7 MPG with a 500HP running 65 MPH with a T-600 KW weighing 80K across Iowa. Now take that same Driver 10 years later give him the replacement T-660 which is 20% more Areodynamic give him the 500 horse D13 built By Detroit with the Current Emissions package on it. IF HE IS LUCKY HE MIGHT GET 5 MPG running 65 weighing 80 thousand lbs. You tell me how is burning 140% more Fuel to do the SAME AMOUNT OF work better for the ENVIROMENT. I was getting 8-9 Mpg across Utah and Wyoming running 75 MPH with a 525 HP Detroit maxed out in weight so these enviromental Wack JOBS can not tell me that these new engines are saving the planet when they are using MORE FUEL. They also have parts in them that can not be repaired only REPLACED with new and the old ones are HAZ MAT and can not be RECYLED have to go to specialized land fill also they break down more often and can cause more accidents when they do regen do to lower visabliaty. Try being a car following a steam engine running down the road. Now imagine 50 of them doing it at one time and they are all SANDING THEIR FLUES. That is what a regen looks like.
No question that GE will figure out a way to make money no matter how the regulatory climate effects the power industry (don't understand why some of you seem to want to condemn the company for that, though).
We are drifting O.T though...There's no question that the emission regs. are relevant to the problems with the GEVOS but that doesn't explain why EMD engines seem to have been preferred by crews going all the way back to the introduction of the GE U boats...
carnej1No question that GE will figure out a way to make money no matter how the regulatory climate effects the power industry (don't understand why some of you seem to want to condemn the company for that, though). We are drifting O.T though...There's no question that the emission regs. are relevant to the problems with the GEVOS but that doesn't explain why EMD engines seem to have been preferred by crews going all the way back to the introduction of the GE U boats...
I think it has a lot to do with the comfort factor. The EMD trucks seemed to give a smoother ride, and I understand the cabs were quieter and better built in the past. A drafty door is just not ideal when it is -30 outside! With 1st generation power some of the other builders were also more prone to have fumes seeping into the cab.
With regard to another post concerning Europe, I think the EMD prime movers were considerably more robust than most local designs. Europe thought it normal that locomotives needed frequent tender loving care, which is why they never made any significant exports to North America. In England, quite a few years ago now, a quarry operator was able to make an arrangement with British Rail to run its own trains (perhaps with BR drivers). BR insisted on a ridiculously high reliability standard (they thought), but Fosters Yeoman bought SD40-2s squeezed into a tiny carbody from GM/EMD and exceeded the standard very easily. That sale has now rewarded EMD with many more. Only now is GE starting to break into the mainline European market, and I assume that previously they rather ignored the area apart from low powered export designs.
John
In regards to Europe EMD has been a player there through the entire diesel era but historically some of the larger Eurpoean countries pretty much insisted on homegrown engine technology. This is particularly true of the UK where British Rail could have bought locomotives using EMD engines as far back as the sixties but chose not to..
As for GE they have sold some FDL-12 engined BLUE TIGER locomotives in Europe which were co-produced with Bombardier. They are currently building a new 4,000hp AC locomotive for a Freight operator in Britain that uses a completely different prime mover than the GEVO (due to loading gauge and weight restrictions)..
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.