Trains.com

New Cummings Locomotive Diesel, Tier 4 Compliant

20134 views
63 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Saturday, November 12, 2011 8:22 AM

That entire Raditor over the middle of the unit is there for one reason to provide cooling for the EGR system.  You tell me do you want 3-4 of these locomotives in a line with EGR pulling Sherman hill when 2 of them happen to lose the EGR system and in OTR circles that is a SHUTDOWN failure.  You want that on trains that might only have 3 engines total and 2/3rd just went down. 

 

Cummins thought EGR was the way to go 7 YEARS ago and now is getting the ISX its main OTR engine away from it as fast as possible.  I saw a new 2012 KW that my neighbor drives for a smaller company yesterday.  They are using up the old 2011 Blocks and fitting a metal plate over the EGR mount to use them up.  But still meeting the EPA emmisions with what they are doing with room to spare if the EPA tightens up.  So the RR's have have another item to check in the Diesel Exhaust Fluid and system.  However EMD and GE if they go with EGR both of them are going to regret it BIGTIME.  When the Largest OTR Diesel Company breaks into your Market with an idea for NO EGR y using SCR the Engineeers at BOTH companies need to listen.  Also EMD needs to listen to the people at CAT for what happened to them trying to meet the EPA regs Tier 4 is a WHole new workld than Tier 3.  Tier 3 is like skiing the bunny hill.  Tier 4 is going to be like trying to ski down Mount Everest in a Frfeaking Blizzard in the middle of a Battle.

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Sunday, November 13, 2011 9:02 AM

The only description I would hang on that thing is that it is a

                         Humped Back BRUTE.

 

The only question I have, judging by the short snout;

Is there enough room for a stool ,and an over-sized crewman in there?

 

 


 

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Sunday, November 13, 2011 9:39 AM

Isn't that a standard SD60M cab? I think it's just an optical illusion.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: NW Wisconsin
  • 3,857 posts
Posted by beaulieu on Sunday, November 13, 2011 9:52 AM

Yes it is a normal SD60M cab.

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 429 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Sunday, November 13, 2011 10:00 AM

Its one of the SD60's rebuilt with a 12 ECCO engine by EMD. What the excrescence over the engine is probably UP's idea. Where did this notion about an EMD T4 demonstrator come from?

Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Sunday, November 13, 2011 10:20 AM

The tier 4 Demostrator had to be to show that the 710 can make it with Minumal Mods and be Tier 4 Complaiant.  I do not call having to add another Radiator over the Engine room a Minimal MOD to a Prime mover. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: NW Wisconsin
  • 3,857 posts
Posted by beaulieu on Sunday, November 13, 2011 3:33 PM

GE's test locomotive has a more compact packaging job.

 

GE ES44DC Tier 4 test locomotive

 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Monday, November 14, 2011 4:37 AM

beaulieu

GE's test locomotive has a more compact packaging job.

 

GE ES44DC Tier 4 test locomotive

 

Of course, GE are using urea injection, while EMD are using exhaust gas recirculation, so the "neatness" of the installation is not really comparable. I'm surprised that there is any external indication on the GE units.

While the EMD solution is more complex and more expensive in first cost, avoiding the need to carry and replenish the urea tanks will save money in the long run.

I understand that exhaust gas recirculation is not an option with the GE four stroke engine anyway, so urea injection is the only option for them. I'd guess that EMD are very keen for EGR to be a success since it would give them a technical and cost advantage, something they haven't had for some time.

M636C

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Monday, November 14, 2011 6:43 AM

On a Volvo D16 the Primary OTR motor used in Volvo heavy trucks there are 2 EGR valves in the moto.  Each one costs WHOLESALE 1500 bucks each and the metal piping they are attached to is another 400 bucks each x2 and it takes 9 hours of labor to replace eache one.  Labor rate at most shops is billed out now at 150 bucks an hour.  These have to be replaced every year or you risk a major engine failure that if your under warrenty or have an extended warrenty they do not cover if it is NOT done.  This would be roughly the EMD system.

 

Here is the GE system fill up an extra tank with DEF at the cost of 2 bucks a gallon and refill it at a fuel stop.  BTW the rr's are already USING DEF with their Diesel powered service trucks so they are used to getting it.  They will know in 3 years how to handle it and what the price point will be.  So decision time something that will point locomotives in the shop for expensive repairs or fill an extra tank on the unit to keep it on the road.  Which way if your a Roundhouse worker are you going to want to go 2 days in the shop or hook a line up at the pump fill the DEF and release. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Monday, November 14, 2011 10:16 AM

$1500, even $3000 on a $2million dollar locomotive is peanuts. And EMD has extended maintenance contracts with most of the railroads.

 

Also, consider that the EMD demonstrator is an older shorter SD60M as well and it kind of makes sense that the unit doesn't exactly look integrated.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: NW Wisconsin
  • 3,857 posts
Posted by beaulieu on Monday, November 14, 2011 10:24 AM

edbenton

 

Here is the GE system fill up an extra tank with DEF at the cost of 2 bucks a gallon and refill it at a fuel stop.  BTW the rr's are already USING DEF with their Diesel powered service trucks so they are used to getting it.  They will know in 3 years how to handle it and what the price point will be.  So decision time something that will point locomotives in the shop for expensive repairs or fill an extra tank on the unit to keep it on the road.  Which way if your a Roundhouse worker are you going to want to go 2 days in the shop or hook a line up at the pump fill the DEF and release. 

Would I be correct in thinking that if you run out of DEF the diesel shuts down?

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Monday, November 14, 2011 11:17 AM

What happens is the Engine Derates to lower HP for a certain length of time then Shuts down.  Only after 12 hours of being out of DEF will it shut off.  Compare that to having EGR failure where your having Coolant turning your oil into mayo for 12 hours which one would you rather have a Blown motor or one where your still able ot move for 12 hours. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Monday, November 14, 2011 11:32 AM

beaulieu

 edbenton:

 

Here is the GE system fill up an extra tank with DEF at the cost of 2 bucks a gallon and refill it at a fuel stop.  BTW the rr's are already USING DEF with their Diesel powered service trucks so they are used to getting it.  They will know in 3 years how to handle it and what the price point will be.  So decision time something that will point locomotives in the shop for expensive repairs or fill an extra tank on the unit to keep it on the road.  Which way if your a Roundhouse worker are you going to want to go 2 days in the shop or hook a line up at the pump fill the DEF and release. 

 

Would I be correct in thinking that if you run out of DEF the diesel shuts down?

 

The part your talking about is the size of a popcan X2 and there is 2 required on a motor the size of one Cylinder of a 710 motor.  On a 710 Series motor your looking at a part roughtly that is going to cost around 30-40 Grand EACH there will be one per bank of Cylinders at least more than likely 2 per bank so figure 4 EGR valves plus the piping needed for it.  So every year your looking at replacing at least 240-320 Grand in parts alone plus the labor needed to replace them and then the Downtime on the units that have them.  BTW they have found out EGRs in OTR trucks have to be replaced on a 6 month Schedule to be effective so double that source The Maintance Council.  Also you are going to have Unschedualed failures with EGR and not with DEF SCR units.  Worstcase with SCR you might get an unscheduled Regenaration compared to a EGR failure which can lead to a Catastophic Engine Failure.  Yep you heard me right in 2005 right after the EPA mandated this crap on the OTR Cummins had a HUGE problem in the ISX with them scattering heads why EGR failure would case them to scatter apart.  Best one I saw was here in my town.  Driver for a small fleet put his crank on the ground his head thru the hood and 2 pistons well lets just say they tried to be satalites.

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Monday, November 14, 2011 12:19 PM

And how much if any of this OTR diesel experience, actually, applies to a medium speed 2 cycle gigantic Railroad Diesel? 

 

From the sizing of the EGR system to the expected lifecycle. The odds that the OTR experience has statistically significant meaning is questionable. 

 

Ed, I understand you have real life experience with these technologies in OTR trucking. I understood that the first time you wrote it. I don't need it repeated. And continuing to repeat it doesn't make it any more applicable.

You may be 100% right. EMD may fail, but I trust them and there 70+ years of experience with 2-cycle medium speed diesel engines in Railroad service. I trust Argonne to know what they're doing. I know engineers at Argonne. They aren't dumb. 

And they may fail, the 645F block proves that. Though, I'd argue that was as much about rush to market as it was about Engineering failure. 

 

Speaking of Argonne, Are we sure this is EGR? Did Argonne have any success with their Oxygen enrichment technology? Supposedly they retroed a 567B engine with it back in the 90s. 

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:27 AM

I have a buddy at Argonne labs he is helping design this system.  EMD is trying EGR and what your seeing is the COOLER needed for the EGR system alone.  He told me the EGR valves and they are having to run a total of 4 of them each one is the size of a 5 gallon Bucket and the max life they have gotten out of one in the TEST cell was 3 months.  Most of them are lasting Less than 2 months in the TEST CELL.  EMD guessed wrong on this one BIG time he is saying why they are the EPA cerification center for all Large Diesels and GE's SCR tier 4 model has run for 9 Months of Simulated Powder River Coal Service with NO Problems.  EMD they can barely get 2 months before there is a Failure.  That give you a clue on what he is seeing in the cells. 

 

How do I know this guy I went to HS with him til he was accepted in IMSA and then he went to the University of Illinois on a Full Engineering Scholarship.  He to this day has maintained that I should have gone to IMSA instead of him.  I did not submit my app that year so he could go. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Sunday, December 4, 2011 4:01 PM

YoHo1975
Also, remember that the F59s have 12-710s not 16-710s. The odds that they would be replaced with a V16 4000HP unit are slim. If they get refurbed with Cummins it would probably be a V12.

From the December 2011 IRJ: "The first rail customer for the QSK95 will be Toronto commuter rail operator Go Transit, which announced last month it would replace the 16-cylinder EMD 710GB series engines in 11 of its MP40PH-3C locomotives in 2014. These locomotives are likely to comply with Tier 4. Go Transit is still receiving batches of MP40s from Wabtec subsidiary MotivePower and if all options are exercised, the fleet will eventually total 77 locomotives, although it is unclear at present how many more will be equipped QSK95s."

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. Sacrificing the tried and true EMD plant on the environmental altar is a waste of the taxpayers' dollar.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Sunday, December 4, 2011 4:44 PM

Mr Carleton here are some Great Motors in the OTR side that were Killed off to Comply with the EPA MANDATES just in the LAST 6 YEARS.  The Detroit 60 Series the Best MPG motor ever to come out of Detroit Diesel and the Most RELIABLE ever made.  Here are the Fleets that ran teh HEll out of them Wal-Mart Scheinder Celeadon and Covanet and a whole Crapload of OTHERS out there.  Then we have the 3400 Series of CAT Motors along with the C13 C10 lines since Cat LEFT the OTR industry.  The only company not to kill off its design and make and IMPROVE it all the time was Cummins ISX and their ISM motor lines. 

 

Cummins the ONLY thing they do is Diesel motors and they do them WELL close to 100 years so they are older than EMD and their PT injection system is older than the Winton 201 Model Diesel and without major changes except getting Electronic Controls. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Sunday, December 4, 2011 5:53 PM

Mr. Benton, I know you are right and I bear no ill will toward the trucking industry OTR or otherwise. But there are something like 600 million internal combustion engines in use around the world. Of that number less than 100,000 are in railroad use. Going after railroad engines is quite literally chasing sparrow flatulence in a windstorm. Is this the wisest use of taxpayer dollars? I highly doubt it.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 803 posts
Posted by GP40-2 on Sunday, December 4, 2011 9:47 PM

D.Carleton

... Is this the wisest use of taxpayer dollars? I highly doubt it.

The "Government" and "wise use of taxpayer dollars" is an oxymoron. Laugh

It will be very interesting to see what happens after the 2012 elections with all these current EPA mandates...

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Sunday, December 4, 2011 10:02 PM

Just remember this about the OTR industry for the RR's also.  It was the Clinton ERA EPA that started the OTR side Emission reductions that happened to US back in 1998.  Then throw in the CARB board in California and about anything is Possible if they decree it it WILL HAPPEN.  Those WACKO's sorry they are WACKO's can cause more issues than the EPA.  CARB isthe group that gives a DOG in a truck more rights to stay cool in 100 Degree heat than a man trying to sleep that has to DRIVE it.  They also want bigger reductions in Emissions than the EPA going so far as to decree that APU's must have AFTERTREATMENS on them on the OTR side.  Yep you heard me right a Diesel engine that burns less than a gallon of fuel in 8 hours they want a DPF and SCR and you can not hook it into your trucks exhaust system. 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Hope, AR
  • 2,061 posts
Posted by narig01 on Sunday, December 4, 2011 11:17 PM

Ed the first truck I had was a 96 freightliner with a little 3176 cat. Company liked cause it was outstanding on fuel mileage. 6.3 mpg on a heavy load in thr mountains with a head wind.Nice thing used to bobtailj from Atlanta to Augusta. At 56mph bobtail 14mpg.  Truck is owned now by a guy pulling wood chips in SC. He still gets 6+mpg out of it. Truck was closing in on 2 million mileswhen i saw it last spring.

      As to CARB I never had any complaints about idling my 08 Frtlnr. Had a 60 series Detroit.(I also have a clean idle certificate) . I found out this summer that all the states with anti pollution no idle  restrictions are recognizing the CARB certification. Biggest problem I've run into is the EGR valve is only good for about 150,000 miles.So far Detroit has been replacing on the engine warranty. I'm trying not to think about the next time it needs replacing(at 600k) as the truck will be mine (I'm getting truck on an LP contract)and the engine warranty will have run out.

Thx IGN

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: NW Wisconsin
  • 3,857 posts
Posted by beaulieu on Sunday, December 4, 2011 11:30 PM

Of course this is Canada, and the US EPA is irrelevant. Also Environment Canada has no laws governing emissions of locomotives.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, December 5, 2011 6:57 AM

GP40-2

It will be very interesting to see what happens after the 2012 elections with all these current EPA mandates...

If you grew up in an industrial area like I did (mill dust everywhere, Superfund sites, etc.), you might have a greater appreciation for wanting to breathe clean air.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 429 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Monday, December 5, 2011 9:31 AM

GP40-2

 

 D.Carleton:

 

... Is this the wisest use of taxpayer dollars? I highly doubt it.

 

 

The "Government" and "wise use of taxpayer dollars" is an oxymoron. Laugh

It will be very interesting to see what happens after the 2012 elections with all these current EPA mandates...

after reading about Cummins' presentation at the Workboat Show I suspect That Cummins may be paying for this just to get their foot in the door.

Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Monday, December 5, 2011 9:54 AM

Cummins does have a History of being in the RR industry already.  Remember that Cummins was the Normal HEP gensets used by VIA and most other RR's on the F40PH-2 where they had a Seperate Motor Generator Set used in them.  Also they are also used by NRE in the G21 series of Genset Locomotives now so they are out there and more on the way.

 

  What is said about the old Small and Big cam and the Mechanical N14's was you could rebuild them in the Truckstop Parking lots if you had to.  I know a few guys that did that.  I had a 290 in one truck snap a rod off at TDC during Harvest season in 95.  We ran it on 5 Clyinders for about a month since allt trucks that COULD run WERE RUNNING all the time.  After harvest was over Jacked the cab up pulled #2 head off Pulleed #4 piston and replaced the rod ONLY on the motor then put it back together took 2 days that we could not afford during the harvest.  I have a couple contacts at Cummins and got ahold of them why they got the Contract for GO Transit was simple.  Cummins was offering a Tier 4 engine that DOES NOT NEED EGR to meet Tier 4 unlike EMD.  See GO Transit has a Fleet of Busses with EGR on them and is already REPLACING THEM why the EGR VALVES ON THEM is the only reason.  DPF's you can deal with with Regenarations they clean themselves out pretty much.  Give DPF SCR and they are almost fool proof as they are finding out now in OTR circles. 

 

BTW what setup do they run on the OTR trucks in EUROPE where their Emissions standards on trucks make ours look like a Alco with the Amount of Emmisions they allow out compared to THEIRS.  Over in Europe they run SCR mated with DPF and have for over 20 YEARS. 

 

 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Monday, December 5, 2011 1:16 PM

Right, Canada has no Tiered Emissions requirements, so there really is no reason for GO to go with Cummins for the Tier 4 features. It seems more likely that as was said, someone is paying for this.

 

I also wouldn't count any EPA chickens before their hatched regardless of who wins next year

 

And finally, I've also seen my share of superfund cleanup sites and quite frankly wish the EPA could do more. Having unfettered Capitalism is less important to me than being able to breath comfortably and drink the water without health concerns.

 

And that's my soap box statement for the day. 

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Monday, December 5, 2011 4:06 PM

YoHo remember this what the EPA has Proposed as the New Arsenic Level for Water is LESS than what is found in a freaking Rainwater.  Also what the EPA wants to do with CO2 will DESTROY all remaining industry and raise costs so high to do anything here in the states it is not FUNNY.  The EPA on their OWN decreed that they can REGULATE CO2 Gas EMISSIONS a naturally Occuring GAS.  BTW the Eruption of Mt St Helens in 1980 still put more Greenhouse Gasses in the air than all the Manmade stuff in the last 30 YEARS.  So is the Goverment going to send a bill to Mother Nature next. 

 

Also the EPA wants to regulate Dust from Farmers Fields if this is not a Agency that is getting out of control I do not know what one is Except maybe the TSA any Agency that will make a 95 year old woman with a Walker do a Strip Search beacuse she has a Defibulator in her chest is way OUT OF CONTROL.  Or forces a girl to miss her flight because her Purse has an EMBOSSED picture of a gun on it. 

 

 

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Tuesday, December 6, 2011 11:03 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH
If you grew up in an industrial area like I did (mill dust everywhere, Superfund sites, etc.), you might have a greater appreciation for wanting to breathe clean air.

Do we as a nation need to clean up our collective act? Of course the answer is "yes." But instead of following the railroad's lead they are being penalized. The railroads have cleaned up their act through the tried and true practice of increasing efficiency. At the height of the steam era there were over 60,000 locomotives in the United States. Today there are around 20,000 diesel locomotives... and they are moving more freight than in the steam era.

To add to the irony Canada, which is a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol, does not have intrusive regulations on locomotives. The USA, a non-Kyoto participant, wastes precious resources penalizing the railroads and their suppliers. This single microcosm explains the problems inside the myopic beltway.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Tuesday, December 6, 2011 11:11 AM

D.Carleton

 CSSHEGEWISCH:
If you grew up in an industrial area like I did (mill dust everywhere, Superfund sites, etc.), you might have a greater appreciation for wanting to breathe clean air.

Do we as a nation need to clean up our collective act? Of course the answer is "yes." But instead of following the railroad's lead they are being penalized. The railroads have cleaned up their act through the tried and true practice of increasing efficiency. At the height of the steam era there were over 60,000 locomotives in the United States. Today there are around 20,000 diesel locomotives... and they are moving more freight than in the steam era.

To add to the irony Canada, which is a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol, does not have intrusive regulations on locomotives. The USA, a non-Kyoto participant, wastes precious resources penalizing the railroads and their suppliers. This single microcosm explains the problems inside the myopic beltway.

While this thread is getting very O.T (and into "soon to be locked" territory, I fear) I would point out that the Kyoto Protocols deal strictly with Carbon emissions while the EPA "Tier1/2/3/4" regs do not cover C02 at all but are concerned with Diesel Particulates, NOx, SOx and other pollutants..

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

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Tuesday, December 6, 2011 5:43 PM

Also, I'd argue that the new regulations aren't harming railroad suppliers at all. I mean come on, that doesn't even make a lick of sense. This is a thread after all about a new engine supplier getting into the market.

EMD and GE are perfectly happy to have a good excuse to increase their sales and all the new upstarts prove this. 

MAYBE the railroads are hurting from this. MAYBE, but of course the railroads are made up of people, both employees and stockholders who have an interest in air quality independent of the railroad. 

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