It appears that the last 7 EMD JT42CWRs (Class 66) are on their way to the UK. EMD is ceasing production, as they do not meet the European Stage IIIb emissions specifications. In total, 676 units were built. We'll see where EMD goes now.
I don't think the GE Powerhaul series meets the standards either, but GE has announced that they will use EGR and DPF. I'm not sure how they will fit that into the UK loading gauge.
In other news, Vossloh, a European locomotive builder that built diesels with EMD prime movers (first the 710 and now the C175) has announced that they are selling their transportation division, probably by 2017.
NorthWest It appears that the last 7 EMD JT42CWRs (Class 66) are on their way to the UK. EMD is ceasing production, as they do not meet the European Stage IIIb emissions specifications. In total, 676 units were built. We'll see where EMD goes now. I don't think the GE Powerhaul series meets the standards either, but GE has announced that they will use EGR and DPF. I'm not sure how they will fit that into the UK loading gauge. In other news, Vossloh, a European locomotive builder that built diesels with EMD prime movers (first the 710 and now the C175) has announced that they are selling their transportation division, probably by 2017.
I know that the UK loading gauge is restrictive but I doubt an exhaust gas recirculation system would radically alter the envelope of the locomotive.
Roof mounted Exhaust Particle filters might be a height issue however..
I am fairly certainthat the new EMD 12 cylinder 265-H derived EGR Tier IV engine under development would not fit into a UK clearance sized locomotive but the Cat C175 series engine is in the new Class 68 locomotives, so maybe the bigger 20 cylinder version is an option. It will have to use SCR rather than EGR (at least for the forseable future) however, which some potential operators may not want.
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
I suspect that the issues American railroads have with SGR aren't as big of factors in Europe since operating conditions are different. They are not running as many heavy trains into sparsely populated areas, and so resupplying the locomotive may not be as difficult. Also, the average trip is much shorter.
The EGR system on the Tier IV ES44AC added a couple feet to the height of the long hood. If this is typical, (I think the Class 70s have the engine similarly at the top of the hood) I think that any EGR duct would have to be run along the side of the prime mover. I'm not sure what modifications this would require, but any locomotives would presumably be cowl units like the Turkish ones.
NorthWest The EGR system on the Tier IV ES44AC added a couple feet to the height of the long hood. If this is typical, (I think the Class 70s have the engine similarly at the top of the hood) I think that any EGR duct would have to be run along the side of the prime mover. I'm not sure what modifications this would require, but any locomotives would presumably be cowl units like the Turkish ones.
Thanks, I am not familiar with these things. I'd love to see official internal diagrams, but for obvious reasons they are hidden.
The EuroLght for the UK (officially UKLight) is the Class 68 that was mentioned above, but you probably knew that.
Hello,
The C175 will probably be the prime mover in any new EMD locomotive for the European market, if they are going to continue to participate in it. However, they cannot just pull out the 710 and put in the C175, a new locomotive design is needed. That is why the JT42CWR production run is over. Radiator capacity, need for a SGR tank, and other design details are different. As M636C noted above, the Class 66 lacks space for a cab air conditioner (and has been noted to have rather loud cabs) hence further things that could use a redesign.
I think the Class 66 has been fitted with cab HVAC
http://www.coolair-rail.com/
No plans for c175 on the SD70? the railroads will not like to find themselves on a single supplier market..
Plenty of room for air conditioning in a Class 66 ... just not a roof air system as is found on many American locomotives and RVs.
IIRC the system on the Class 66 has the compressor and condenser back in the carbody, on the locomotive deck. I don't recall whether this runs the refrigerant circuit to an evaporator located where the original cab heater was placed, or acts as a small chilled-water plant (which would allow both heating and cooling through a single core). It's possible to build this as a heat-pump system with reversing valves, but I'd think it would be cheaper and simpler to tap off coolant from the engine when heat (or blended temperature control via vanes and duct motors as in an automobile) is desired.
[/quote]
SR_LOPES I think the Class 66 has been fitted with cab HVAC http://www.coolair-rail.com/ No plans for c175 on the SD70? the railroads will not like to find themselves on a single supplier market..
The major North American railroad freight railroads have told the locomotive builders that they consider SCR based emissions controls a headache they do not need.
GE has developed an exhaust gas recirculation based solution that does not require urea, they will be delivering production locomotives equipped with it in 2015.
The only way EMD can compete in that market is to offer a similiar product, thus they are developing a new 12 cylinder engine with an EGR system based on the 265H engine used in the SD90MAC.
EMD will be building passenger locomotives that use the C175....
EMD hopes to have their TIER IV locomotive ready in 2017.
(What will it be called? I suggest SD85ACe, since it is a 12 cylinder based on the 265H and the testbed is the SD89MAC, intended to have a 12-265H and 4500 HP. Still calling it an SD70 seems wrong somehow.)
ACe seems rather unnecessary at this point when there almost certainly won't be a DC version of this new model nor is there an older "SD85AC" that requires differentiating the new model's designation by tacking an e at the end of it.
I wonder if they will keep it? While I suspect that AC will be incorporated no matter how superfluous it may now be, I bet at the very least that the new model won't include the e tagged on the end of it.
ML
NorthWest EMD hopes to have their TIER IV locomotive ready in 2017. (What will it be called? I suggest SD85ACe, since it is a 12 cylinder based on the 265H and the testbed is the SD89MAC, intended to have a 12-265H and 4500 HP. Still calling it an SD70 seems wrong somehow.)
While the new engine is based on the 265H, it is significantly modified and will almost certainly not be called a 265H. EMD have followed a practice that a locomotive with a 16 cylinder engine will have a number divisible by 10, one with a twenty cylinder engine will have a number 5 higher than the sixteen cylinder and a twelve cylinder will have a number one less than the sixteen cylinder.
(I know this was not used at the end of the 710 series, where 70 was used for the 16, 75 was used for a higher rotational speed 16, 80 was used for the 20 cylinder and 69 was used for a prototype AC traction passenger locomotive).
However the first C175 locomotive, a 20 cylinder, has been given the model F125. That allows 120 for a sixteen cylinder C175 locomotive.
Since 90 (and 89) were used for 265H locomotives, we have 100 and 110 free for the new locomotive...
Assuming 100 is chosen, the new 12 cylinder would be an SD99....
To return to the export locomotive which is the subject of this thread...
The JT42CWR used in Continental Europe had cab air conditioner evaporator unit mounted on the cab roof. This exceeded the available clearances in the United Kingdom. Although you would think that there were plenty of other locations, EMD do not offer cab airconditioning on the JT42CWR in the UK.
Assuming that the next UK unit will have a C175, and the 50 series (52 = no of cylinders (12) plus 40) was used for the 265H (the JT56C in China) so 60 is the next available series. It might use a 16, so JT66CW sounds likely....
M636C
I have it on good authority that the new EMD Tier IV freight locomotive will be marketed as the SD7089ACeIEGR-4... the North American railroad industry will have to upgrade their computer systems to accommodate the longer model number..
GDRMCoF125 as in 125mph, not 120 +5 for a 20 cylinder. F69PH-AC was also a 12-710 so fit the numbering convention.
If the F125 locomotive had the description AMT-125 or similar (that model was applied in the 1970s to a low profile F40PH intended to match then new Amfleet cars) I'd agree that the speed was the only consideration but using the code F for a full body four axle unit and a number that actually fits with the preceding convention of numbering, it doesn't matter how it originated.
I'm one of the people who believe that "F" originally stood for "fourteen hundred" (since "T" was already taken for "twelve hundred") and coudn't be used for "thirteen". It later was taken to mean Freight later just as "SW" came to mean Switcher rather than "six hundred horsepower welded frame" as it literally meant when new.
As I said, the number range next available is "100" so F125 fits the system whether it was originally meant to or not.
My concern about F69 was not that the engine didn't fit but the only difference from an F59 was the AC traction, which didn't fit the system.
To return to the thread topic, British operator GBRf recently took delivery of a third batch of seven new JT42CWR locomotives for a total of 21 new units this year. Apparently EU authorities would allow 26 locomotives to be obtained by GBRf prior to the introduction of the Euro IIIb standards. Since EMD couldn't build the remaining five units in time, GBRf have purchased five 12-710G3 engines which will be delivered to the UK. It is reported that next year, EMD will build seven new JT42CWR locomotives without engines and these will be fitted with the five new engines and two engines removed from older class 66 units damaged in accidents.
YoHo1975Is there any other example besides the SD80 and the SD45/45-2/F45 from which to build a standard definitions for divisible by 10+5? I do not believe there is.
Again, this is just my view which I'm not trying to impose on anyone...
But the other main example is the SD70 and SD75 pair.
While they both had the same number of cylinders, the SD75 was significantly more powerful (300 HP and for a few units as a test, 500HP) obtained by running the engine at 950 rpm rather than 904 rpm.
Although this distinction became blurred by late SD70MAC and later SD70ACe and SD70M-2 units running at 950 rpm and rated at 4300 HP, when first introduced the use of "+5" to indicate a more powerful engine (and locomotive) was exactly the same as for the SD40 and SD45 pair.
By 2017 and perhaps earlier we will know what the next model number will be for the EMD four stroke freight locomotive, but I would be very surprised if the number is not higher than 90 simply because the numbers have increased on every new model since 1937 or so.
If this happens the F125, regardless of the origin of the number, may become just another number in the series of EMD model numbers, just above the contemporary freight units.
Way back in 1949 or so, GP did mean General Purpose and SD was Special Duty, which reflected the perceived roles of 4-motor and 6-motor diesel locomotives at that time. These roles began to change at the beginning of the horsepower race in 1960 but the model designations continued with GP for four motors and SD for six motors, more for the sake of convenience than anything else.
M636C YoHo1975 Is there any other example besides the SD80 and the SD45/45-2/F45 from which to build a standard definitions for divisible by 10+5? I do not believe there is. Again, this is just my view which I'm not trying to impose on anyone... But the other main example is the SD70 and SD75 pair. While they both had the same number of cylinders, the SD75 was significantly more powerful (300 HP and for a few units as a test, 500HP) obtained by running the engine at 950 rpm rather than 904 rpm. Although this distinction became blurred by late SD70MAC and later SD70ACe and SD70M-2 units running at 950 rpm and rated at 4300 HP, when first introduced the use of "+5" to indicate a more powerful engine (and locomotive) was exactly the same as for the SD40 and SD45 pair. By 2017 and perhaps earlier we will know what the next model number will be for the EMD four stroke freight locomotive, but I would be very surprised if the number is not higher than 90 simply because the numbers have increased on every new model since 1937 or so. If this happens the F125, regardless of the origin of the number, may become just another number in the series of EMD model numbers, just above the contemporary freight units. M636C
YoHo1975 Is there any other example besides the SD80 and the SD45/45-2/F45 from which to build a standard definitions for divisible by 10+5? I do not believe there is.
The GP/SD35 similarly represented a more powerful 16 cylinder version of the GP30/SD24. So, if that's the logic. Upgraded (in terms of horsepower) but same engine series, then I'll by that, but even that's not hard an fast. for 645, you had the 40 series, the 45 series and then the 50 series. For 710, 60 series, 70 series and 75.
In fact, I'd argue that the 70ACe actually breaks the pattern, mainly, because they already had an 80 and a 90.
But even that only accounts for RPMs, there are a lot of versions of the 710 out there with incremental upgrades. It probably should be the SD75ACe, but even that doesn't quite cover it.
since the next gen is supposed to be derived from the 265H, perhaps they will take a page from GE and not make it an SD. Since it will be a V-12 Maybe it is simply xx89ACe. Or, SD99ACe. I don't think a 3 digit number will "work" from a marketing standpoint.
YoHo1975 The GP/SD35 similarly represented a more powerful 16 cylinder version of the GP30/SD24. So, if that's the logic. Upgraded (in terms of horsepower) but same engine series, then I'll by that, but even that's not hard an fast. for 645, you had the 40 series, the 45 series and then the 50 series. For 710, 60 series, 70 series and 75. In fact, I'd argue that the 70ACe actually breaks the pattern, mainly, because they already had an 80 and a 90. But even that only accounts for RPMs, there are a lot of versions of the 710 out there with incremental upgrades. It probably should be the SD75ACe, but even that doesn't quite cover it. since the next gen is supposed to be derived from the 265H, perhaps they will take a page from GE and not make it an SD. Since it will be a V-12 Maybe it is simply xx89ACe. Or, SD99ACe. I don't think a 3 digit number will "work" from a marketing standpoint.
Marketing has always been important.
It is generally known that the GP30 was first known as the GP22, but EMD Marketing insisted on a higher model number than the competing U25, even though "22" correctly represented the horsepower.
Shortly after I posted I realised that GP35 was another example of "5" representing a power increase from the same basic equipment, although that was probably due to 40 having already been allocated to the 645 engine and alternator development that had been presumably under way for some time.
The 50 series was thought of as a major step forward at the time, with an rpm increase to 950 rpm. Unfortunately the engine crankcase was not up to the increased speed and power, so the 710 was introduced with the speed dropped back to 904 rpm in basically the same locomotives at only slightly increased power. The failure of the 645F probably contributed to the SD70 remaining at 4000 HP while the competition went higher. Of course the reliability convinced UP to buy around 1500 of them so it wasn't all bad.
The SD70ACe did break the pattern, and that was marketing too... The SD70M had such a good reputation compared to the later designs that they wanted people to think of it as a developed SD70 rather than a slightly shorter SD90/43 MAC.
90 and 89 are numbers associated with the 265H, so those numbers won't be used again. The next available number is 100 (for a 16), or 99 for a twelve cylinder.
It would be nice to use horsepower numbers again for the first time since 1962...
But the Marketing guys will need to agree..
As mentioned, GB Railfreight will be getting an additional seven new Class 66 locomotives next year, 66773-66779, five of which will have new 12-710G3 engines supplied by EMD to the UK prior to 31 December. The remaining two will be reconditioned units, one from GBRf 66734 which was wrecked in Scotland and the other from a wrecked "Euro 66". It appears the locomotives will be shipped without engines which will be installed here in the UK.
As to the Caterpillar C175 engines fitted to the new Vossloh "UK Light" model, Class 68, for Direct Rail Services. This does not meet Euro IIIb standards in its present form. Caterpillar exhibited a compliant version at Innotrans but the size of the exhaust unit will preclude its use in UK locomotives unless further, expensive, development work is done. Caterpillar apparently take the view that they will not do that unless orders are forthcoming and the operators will not place orders if the product is not available - the classic "chicken and egg" scenario!
The Power Haul engine in the GE Class 70 is also non-compliant with Euro IIIb but a Class 70 style demonstrator is about to be off-loaded into Germany which might be but whether or not this would fit the tight UK loading-gauge isn't known.
For the foreseeable future, the UK operators appear to have no new locomotives available to them with the result that many vintage BR-era locos are being resurrected from scrap lines or preservation. As someone said to me the other day: "Every time I see a hard working Class 56 coming towards me with its vee-shaped black exhausts going skywards, I see a salute to the EU!"
The stupidity of the "emission controls" is best illustrated by another EU ruling which is going to restrict the power ratings of various domestic items including kettles. Tests have shown that boiling a EU-compliant kettle uses more electricity and therefore creates more pollution in generation than the old high power ones.
Friend, the lunatics really have been allowed to take over the asylum!
By the way, several of the UK Class 66 operators (DB Schenker) the notable exception) have air conditioned the cabs retrospectively following crew complaints particularly at the radiator end in summer. The cabs are also extremely noisy and again much retropsective work has been done in this area. It is fair to say that among British crews, the Class 66 is not the all-time favourite.
mapman As to the Caterpillar C175 engines fitted to the new Vossloh "UK Light" model, Class 68, for Direct Rail Services. This does not meet Euro IIIb standards in its present form. Caterpillar exhibited a compliant version at Innotrans but the size of the exhaust unit will preclude its use in UK locomotives unless further, expensive, development work is done. Caterpillar apparently take the view that they will not do that unless orders are forthcoming and the operators will not place orders if the product is not available - the classic "chicken and egg" scenario! The Power Haul engine in the GE Class 70 is also non-compliant with Euro IIIb but a Class 70 style demonstrator is about to be off-loaded into Germany which might be but whether or not this would fit the tight UK loading-gauge isn't known. By the way, several of the UK Class 66 operators (DB Schenker the notable exception) have air conditioned the cabs retrospectively following crew complaints particularly at the radiator end in summer. The cabs are also extremely noisy and again much retrospective work has been done in this area. It is fair to say that among British crews, the Class 66 is not the all-time favourite.
By the way, several of the UK Class 66 operators (DB Schenker the notable exception) have air conditioned the cabs retrospectively following crew complaints particularly at the radiator end in summer. The cabs are also extremely noisy and again much retrospective work has been done in this area. It is fair to say that among British crews, the Class 66 is not the all-time favourite.
If EMD can certify the new engine based on the 265H using exhaust gas recirculation, timed injection and a diesel particulate filter, they should be able to do the same for the C175. The SCR solution suits many of Cat's non rail customers, and if they can sell a few to rail customers, that's OK. But EMD might be able to leverage their work onto the C175.
If Vossloh were happy to build a C175 engined six axle unit, the exhaust unit including the SCR might fit alongside the engine in a longer body just as the muffler does in a JT42CWR.
GE's present Tier 4 solution appears to use exhaust gas recirculation and timed injection and a diesel particulate filter. I can say this because they published a photo of the marine version.
Today the GE salesman spoke to my organisation's Principal Mechanical Engineer about the new engine and I'd primed him to ask details of the EGR. The GE man said he couldn't discuss the technologies because they were confidential (and this to a very big customer). If you don't want people to know what you are doing, don't publish clear photographs of the equipment... (I posted more about this in the new EMD engine thread)
But the same gear on the GEVO should work on the P616. You need somewhere to put the diesel particulate filter which might be hard in the UK clearance diagram. Just look at the hood above the engine in the GE US Domestic Tier 4 demonstrators.
I don't think EMD took air conditioning of UK JT42CWRs seriuosly...
NorthWest It appears that the last 7 EMD JT42CWRs (Class 66) are on their way to the UK. EMD is ceasing production, as they do not meet the European Stage IIIb emissions specifications. In total, 676 units were built. We'll see where EMD goes now.
According to the latest edition (1/15) of Rail Express magazine there will be an additional 7 class 66s built for GBRf. They state that only the Diesel engines need to be on hand in the UK at the end of this year to beat the emission change rules, and GBRf has 7 on hand including one from the scrapped 66764. The locomotives can be assembled later. According to the article it is still to be determined if the body shells will be sent to the UK for assembly (Stoke) or if the engines will be shipped to Muncie for assembly. The "inside info" is on the latter.
Buslist According to the latest edition (1/15) of Rail Express magazine there will be an additional 7 class 66s built for GBRf. They state that only the Diesel engines need to be on hand in the UK at the end of this year to beat the emission change rules, and GBRf has 7 on hand including one from the scrapped 66764. The locomotives can be assembled later. According to the article it is still to be determined if the body shells will be sent to the UK for assembly (Stoke) or if the engines will be shipped to Muncie for assembly. The "inside info" is on the latter.
What does "G" stand for in the GM-EMD export line, I.e., G12, G16, etc.? Global? General?
LOREN AANDAHL What does "G" stand for in the GM-EMD export line, I.e., G12, G16, etc.? Global? General?
I guess I'm confused. Production of the Class 66 ends as its 710 engine can't meet the European standards that went into effect at the beginning of the year. Yet Vossloh announces sale of 710 equipped Eoro 4000s for use in France. What am I missing?
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/locomotives/vossloh-secures-euro-4000-orders.html
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.