My wording on that quoted post was rather unclear. Some were wondering why FEC went AC, and if you are going with another builder because you are dissatisfied by one, it makes sense to go for AC.
They went AC since that's all that's offered these days. DC units would be special orders and more expensive than the C4. GE hasn't outshopped a ES44DC in half a decade.
The C4 is claimed to be equal to or better performing than the ES44DC, is offered at a comparable cost, and offers significant maintenance savings with their four AC motors not possible with the DC counterpart. And for a larger line, it can do things that aren't possible with DC motors like pitch hit in the consist of a heavy coal train without special worries about its traction motors and also increases the commonality with the full 6 axle AC power on the roster.
FEC went into this wanting GE power. AC just happens to be what was offered. The ES44DC is effectively discontinued and unless someone comes knocking with a large order, they're going to pay for what amounts to a special order.
I'm sure if the C4 didn't exist that they'd be buying the ES44DC. The premium price of a 6 motor AC motor doesn't offer enough advantages to a line with minimum grades to justify the significant extra cost.
But with the C4, they get the benefits of both. A cost comparable to modern DC power yet the lower maintenance traction motors with longer mean times between failures of AC power. They're not doing this because they have great need for the extra adhesion AC offers or because they want to run heavy trains at 5mph over the crest of a mountain range without wrecking the traction motors.
The first GE's have been rolling for several days now.
The remainder will be arriving over the new few weeks.
Leo_Ames The first GE's have been rolling for several days now. The remainder will be arriving over the new few weeks.
Nice of the cop to stop for the crossing protection activation, and back up so as not to be hit by the descending gate. But - what was all the manuvering about after the train was alread well over the crossing????
Noticed the FEC Private Cars on the rear of the train.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Not my video, but I think he was parking rather than just waiting for the train. And then decided to try to get a little closer to the side of the street.
Do police cars have interior dome lights? I wonder if he was even inside the vehicle by the end of the video.
excellent thanks
I know that EMD is closed until 2017, but why the heck would the FEC jump from light EMD D.C. To heavy GE AC? I understand the run through power familiarity and higher power but there are no interchangeable parts for these engines.
In Cincinnati, sharonville specifically and Colorado Springs it is not uncommon to find a train limping across a crossing. Most of the time it is limping because one of NS' or BNSF - whatever's or cheap Gevo's blew a turbocharger.
Speaking clock I know that EMD is closed until 2017, but why the heck would the FEC jump from light EMD D.C. To heavy GE AC? I understand the run through power familiarity and higher power but there are no interchangeable parts for these engines.
There's not much that's interchangeable between a SD70M-2 and their GP38/GP40/SD40 fleet, either. So that's not an issue.
And SD70M-2's are state of the art 4,300 HP DC machines intended for duties like hauling heavy double stacks at mainline speeds. Nothing "light" about them in the slightest.
They're switching due to disatisfaction with the EMD product and due to their desire to grow their late model locomotive fleet to handle a greater percentage of their traffic along with projected growth. They will also be switching to burning LNG as part of this modernization of their road fleet.
Rather than add to a small fleet of leased power that they haven't been completely satisfied with, or maintain two different types of late model power from different manufacturers, they're just dropping the 8 SD70M-2's from the fleet.
Seems logical to me.
I didn't know about the lack of interchangeable parts, that makes more sense.
But l know that there is a history of GE'S not aging well. I have seen GE'S blow turbos and they do put on quite a show. Just look up videos on the internet.
I'm just saying that the great GE'S of today will probably be grand junk in 10 years. Remember the U25B?
I Know a guy who used to work for GE aviation. He was not surprised that GE used the FDL from 1959 to2005. In fact, he even said that it "sounds like something GE would do. Fire it up, we're going to see how hot this thing runs. Buy a chemical polymer division have them work with it."
The star child we call the ES44C4 may mature into an engine that actually performs like C4 (BOOM!)
CSX's original CW44AC's are 20 years old.
ML
Besides the locomotives, the very interesting thing about that train was the flatbed trailer TOFC loads.
You just don't see that anymore. One of the things I like about the FEC is that they'll do the unconventional. If a shipper will pay them good money to haul a flatbed trailer, they'll just take the money and haul the freight.
BaltACD CSX's original CW44AC's are 20 years old.
You should know better than to confront people with actual facts.
GDRMCoThe GE of yesteryear has nothing on the product of today, everything Dash-9 and newer (AC44, GEVO) is as good as anything EMD can put out (some cases better) and will last as long as any EMD built over the same time period. Thinking the C4s FEC has bought will be failling in a few years has clearly never taken notice of the reliability of current GEs. As for the 'well documented' turbo failures, they're not actually that frequent...
A lot of the reason why GEs die early is parts supply. GE is very protective and there are few who build their parts, and so when they end their parts support, the entire model line dies (for example, the last of the Dash-7s died rather suddenly about 2007.) EMD is not, and so you can find their parts from many suppliers.
I doubt Dash 8s and, especially, Dash 9s will dissappear from the rails anytime soon. NS is currently rebuilding it's spartan-cab 6-axle Dash 8s into C40-8.5W (or C40-8E) with a new wide-nose cab, which is similar to their admiral cab SD60E rebuilds. And there's even talk of NS upgrading their DC Dash 9s with AC traction motors. BNSF also rebuilt BNSF 616, a former ATSF C44-9w, into what is essentially an AC44C4.
GDRMCoI get your point Peter and respect your experience in the field, my post is more directed to the individual comparing a GEVO to a U25B and making the point that the GEs of today aren't the 'garbaGE' they once were (hell GE even admitted the early U boats werent that good).
Those are some good points. I've never heard of the ES44ACi, but I'm assuming it's an export variation. Since my last post, I have read about the BNSF -9 conversion in a magazine, and I have seen a NS dash8 rebuilt with the admiral cab. Those look promising.
These GE's probably will last a little bit longer, and I have noticed that some railroads take better care of their engines than others. NS is turning into the 1970's ATSF with all of their rebuilds. While CSX is a little less enthusiastic, I will take note that they take better care of their 1970's EMD's than GE's of the same time, if there are any -7's left on the roster...
I say that it's a little early to predict the future for aging GE's. From history EMD has better long term reliability and can take a little more abuse (remember the CSX8888 that ran in full throttle for two hours with only a melted parking brake to fix?) , but GE may be onto something with their new prime mover. However, I would not dive into a largely GE fleet after seeing how some engines age, and after hearing the words of a GE worker.
Quick question, how come EMD's get rebuilt into slugs while GE's aren't? The only GE slugs I've seen are the Sandersville set, which are powered By EMD mothers.
Speaking clock GDRMCo I get your point Peter and respect your experience in the field, my post is more directed to the individual comparing a GEVO to a U25B and making the point that the GEs of today aren't the 'garbaGE' they once were (hell GE even admitted the early U boats werent that good). Those are some good points. I've never heard of the ES44ACi, but I'm assuming it's an export variation. Since my last post, I have read about the BNSF -9 conversion in a magazine, and I have seen a NS dash8 rebuilt with the admiral cab. Those look promising. These GE's probably will last a little bit longer, and I have noticed that some railroads take better care of their engines than others. NS is turning into the 1970's ATSF with all of their rebuilds. While CSX is a little less enthusiastic, I will take note that they take better care of their 1970's EMD's than GE's of the same time, if there are any -7's left on the roster... I say that it's a little early to predict the future for aging GE's. From history EMD has better long term reliability and can take a little more abuse (remember the CSX8888 that ran in full throttle for two hours with only a melted parking brake to fix?) , but GE may be onto something with their new prime mover. However, I would not dive into a largely GE fleet after seeing how some engines age, and after hearing the words of a GE worker. Quick question, how come EMD's get rebuilt into slugs while GE's aren't? The only GE slugs I've seen are the Sandersville set, which are powered By EMD mothers.
GDRMCo I get your point Peter and respect your experience in the field, my post is more directed to the individual comparing a GEVO to a U25B and making the point that the GEs of today aren't the 'garbaGE' they once were (hell GE even admitted the early U boats werent that good).
I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I'm just wondering. GE has good traction motors ( which is probably one reason why ALCO's stuck around a bit longer than other builders, even when repowered)
I'm not trying to talk down GE, but according to the repowering table in the back of the "the Second Diesel Spotter's Guide" (by jerry a. Pinkepank copy wright 1973) a lot of roads went to the trouble to repower old ALCO's ( and the occasional Fairbanks Morse), like the ACL, ATSF, L&N, MKT, MP,NDEM,RI, SLSF, and United states steel.
wouldn't traction motors make for a good slug?
Speaking clock Those are some good points. I've never heard of the ES44ACi, but I'm assuming it's an export variation. Since my last post, I have read about the BNSF -9 conversion in a magazine, and I have seen a NS dash8 rebuilt with the admiral cab. Those look promising.
The ES44 DCi and ACi are built on the AC6000 frame and have AC6000 radiators with two cooling fans to suit the high temperatures in northern Western Australia. Rio Tinto resisted buying AC locomotives, and bought 100 ES44DCi units while their main competitor bought SD70ACe units.
The interesting thing was that the standard SD70ACe radiators were used quite successfully, with both types meeting Tier 3 emissions.
I can only assume that the GEVO engine was more sensitive to temperature variation. Rio Tinto GEVOs suffered a number of early turbocharger failures, hence the references to the improved turbo in the GE description of the ES44ACi...
M636C
i don't think so, but BNSf engieers don't like the C4's in mountainous territory, claim they stall with a heavy train. Thought the C4's were supposed to be used on high-speed trains, not heavy grain or coal. Also, I read that the SD70ACe-P4's were changed to SD70ACe-P6's
railfan9830i don't think so, but BNSF engineers don't like the C4's in mountainous territory, claim they stall with a heavy train.
Not sure where this came from, but I think it's in response to speaking clock's comment about the potential longevity of the GE C4 design. Some of the 'better' BNSF commentary on the C4 is in this Trainorders post, and I think that it is at least possible to extrapolate how some of the reported 'issues' might be observed ... or fixed ... as the locomotives "mature".
Considering the subject matter of the original thread, however, why would experience in 'mountainous territory' concern FEC? There are more significant issues in other aspects of performance -- and, I might add, it would be interesting to know what's been done since the time of the Trainorders 'review' (in April '13) to address the observed issues with the C4 design...
Having worked with computers for 45 years untill my retirement. many of which were as a programmer. I can say after carefully analyzing the computer problems stated by the engineers in the Train Orders thread that they can be easily fixed with updates. That thread is almost 2 years old and I am wondering if GE has fixed the problems. I would be interested in an update on the C4's from the BNSF engineers. I also wonder from a professional point of view what compute language(s) GE is using for their programming. I can think of a number of them that would be appropriate including Assembler, Java, C and C++, with Fortran for the number crunching.
M636C GDRMCo I get your point Peter and respect your experience in the field, my post is more directed to the individual comparing a GEVO to a U25B and making the point that the GEs of today aren't the 'garbaGE' they once were (hell GE even admitted the early U boats werent that good). But the short effective life of the FDL has been a limit on rebuilding of GE units compared to EMD. GE will sell EMD parts and would sell many more FDL spares if there was a demand. I think some replacement FDLs were built up using a new crankcase casting and the crank and power assemblies from a used engine. But in general, locomotive rebuilds are described as having new FDLs. M636C
" The railroad's rebuilding efforts evolved from the GE arrangement, says Graab. To ensure the Roanoke shop is optimally equipped for the program, NS last year installed a $1 million CNC line-boring machine that's designed to repair engine frames that typically had been scrapped.
NS now saves about $155,000 for each salvaged GE frame."
(From progressiverailroading.com)
If this works I can see NS doing FDL frames for 3rd parties.
Those Roanoke diesel guys must be descended from the Roanoke steam guys.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
When I heard about the ES44C4's having a problem on the BNSF, I assumed it was the trubocharger.
I'm sorry for making an assumption, but ( with all of the information from above posts ) I think that the ES44C4's would probably do better on the flatter FEC, instead of the mountainous BNSF. I was unaware the units were being used in mountainous territory, but I should have seen that coming. I thought they would be doing lighter but still important runs.
From what Overmod said before about the engines operating in mountainous territory, it sounds like the locomotives were misapplied.
I was born before this, but can anyone Remember what happened when the PRR tried to replace the A5s with the 44 tonner, or the GS4? Philidalphia docks are a far stretch from mountainous territory, but according to an old trains magazine article ( the diesel that could not replace steam) the GS4 class was purchased to try to save some money, yet they were a headache.
The GS4's were great engines, at least two are still operating today (stratsburg's and vulcan materials) they were just misapplied.
The ES44's will probably be right at home on the FEC, but to me it sounds like the BNSF is trying to get a bottle opener to open a tuna can.
You're being a little unfair. Santa Fe did fine running over the Transcon which is mountainous with 4 axle GE and EMD units. The problem seems to be some bad computer settings. otherwise, they way I read it is that they perform just as well as any 4 axle and perhaps close enough to a Dash-9/ES44DC to not care. And that's all that was required. BNSF uses them system wide...just like ATSF used to use 4 axle system wide. They don't swap units out for mountainous territory nor should they.
I'm going to let the engineers that run these things answer that.
However, the mainline trains have gotten bigger since the days of engines like b40-8's and GP60's.
I'm just a train watcher, and the first GE I ever saw was a small white center cab switcher in the railway museum of greater cincinnati. It is not the pink one that is here today.That was a good engine, but it was put in a museum because the trains Outgrew it.
That also explains why the four axle road units can be found switching.I know that BNSF has done a few gp rebuilds (remember this: BNSF rebuilding GP35s intoGP39-3s)Didn't atsf gp60's replace the gensets at the LAJ?
Again, not trying to sound sarcastic, just trying to get correct info.
my bad for bringing up the u25b, that was like comparing Disney's Donald Duck to Marvel's Howard the duck. He was marvel right?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.