F125 Possibility
In a Los Angeles, CA yard the new F125 locomotives for the commuter agency Metrolink sit idle. Reports are they don’t meet some Federal regulation(s). But the focus in this thread is the fleet numbers. Internet info indicates the first TEN units are Nos. 903 to 912. But, Nos. 913 and 914 are known to be in Los Angeles too! So, is the Nos. really 905-914 instead! No. 905 is serial numbered as unit three, which is consistent with 903-912, but 913 and 914 being on site suggests otherwise. Anyone have input on this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
A photo of that SCAX “913” …
http://railpictures.net/photo/616037/
… and “914”
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=4722671
I thought Metrolink was testing them, what happened?
K. P. Harrier F125 Possibility In a Los Angeles, CA yard the new F125 locomotives for the commuter agency Metrolink sit idle. Reports are they don’t meet some Federal regulation(s). But the focus in this thread is the fleet numbers. Internet info indicates the first TEN units are Nos. 903 to 912. But, Nos. 913 and 914 are known to be in Los Angeles too! So, is the Nos. really 905-914 instead! No. 905 is serial numbered as unit three, which is consistent with 903-912, but 913 and 914 being on site suggests otherwise. Anyone have input on this?
Really not looking good for an Amtrak order, the F40 successor sort of. I guess Siemens has this one in the bag. Though on another site,someone posted a month ago about GE lending some AC Tier 4 locomotives to test. Rumor was they were heading for Autotrain.
longhorn1969Though on another site,someone posted a month ago about GE lending some AC Tier 4 locomotives to test. Rumor was they were heading for Autotrain.
The source for this rumor was a picture of an Amtrak News Release of June 26th, 2017 which was not approved for release. There was no link and it is still not on Amtrak's website.
The press release talks of installing HEP-power to Tier 4 compliant locomotives as test beds. But choosen locomotives are named as ES44ACH, at best Tier 3 compliant.
The ET44AC is about 16'' longer than its predecessors. Does it make sense to test in the shorter locomotive?
It is still a rumor and I don't know what to make of it.Regards, Volker
I am waiting patiently for precisely this.
Not to be perceived as a mere Cat detractor bigot, I'm also waiting patiently for word on the CECX 1919 testing, which should have thrown an enormous mass of data (and anecdotes!) by now.
There are a dozen or so locomotives of class 68 in the UK that use the C175.
Not exactly the same engine, (less powerful) but it is set up for the Euro equivalent of Tier 4...
The 68s seem to be running well from what is heard. Better than the GEs with their Polish diesel engines, in that none have unexpectedly burst into flames.
They have worked passenger charters without failing and also work regular passenger trains for Chiltern Railways.
They seem to have a better reputation, so far at least, than the Class 67 with a 12-710G3...
Peter
M636C There are a dozen or so locomotives of class 68 in the UK that use the C175. Not exactly the same engine, (less powerful) but it is set up for the Euro equivalent of Tier 4...
The Class 68 engine is Euro IIIa (which is the rough equivalent of Tier 3, AFAIK) - they don't have SCR etc.
There will be 34 of them in use once the final deliveries happen. Some of the early ones have been running passenger services since 2014, and as far as I know the only serious mechanical incident they have had was when one caught fire (but without serious damage - the fire was at roof level so may have been exhaust system/turbo related).
The Cat-powered, AC-drive 68s use less fuel and have better acceleration than the EMD-powered, DC-drive 67s. The electrical equipment in the 68s is European, from ABB (alternator, motors and per-axle traction inverters).
M636CBetter than the GEs with their Polish diesel engines, in that none have unexpectedly burst into flames.
Do you mean the UK Class 70 'Powerhaul' locos?
As far as I know, those diesel engines (PowerHaul P616) were/are designed and built by GE in the USA, based on a gas engine design from an Austrian subsidiary of GE (GE Jenbacher GmbH). And yes, the locos have been modified with extra cooling fans due to (I think) part of the engine overheating, but I don't know if this was related to the cause of the fire on one of them.
owlsroostThe Class 68 engine is Euro IIIa (which is the rough equivalent of Tier 3, AFAIK) - they don't have SCR etc.
That is correct for the class 68. The Vossloh Eurolight, which class 68 was derived from, is offered with the same C-175 engine as EU stage IIIb compliant using SCR and DPF instead of the exhaust silencer.Regards, Volker
owlsroost M636C There are a dozen or so locomotives of class 68 in the UK that use the C175. Not exactly the same engine, (less powerful) but it is set up for the Euro equivalent of Tier 4... The Class 68 engine is Euro IIIa (which is the rough equivalent of Tier 3, AFAIK) - they don't have SCR etc. There will be 34 of them in use once the final deliveries happen. Some of the early ones have been running passenger services since 2014, and as far as I know the only serious mechanical incident they have had was when one caught fire (but without serious damage - the fire was at roof level so may have been exhaust system/turbo related). The Cat-powered, AC-drive 68s use less fuel and have better acceleration than the EMD-powered, DC-drive 67s. The electrical equipment in the 68s is European, from ABB (alternator, motors and per-axle traction inverters). M636C Better than the GEs with their Polish diesel engines, in that none have unexpectedly burst into flames. Do you mean the UK Class 70 'Powerhaul' locos? As far as I know, those diesel engines (PowerHaul P616) were/are designed and built by GE in the USA, based on a gas engine design from an Austrian subsidiary of GE (GE Jenbacher GmbH). And yes, the locos have been modified with extra cooling fans due to (I think) part of the engine overheating, but I don't know if this was related to the cause of the fire on one of them.
M636C Better than the GEs with their Polish diesel engines, in that none have unexpectedly burst into flames.
I must apologise about the Powerhaul engine origin. I was having a bad day. I think I've actually been to Jenbach when visiting Austria. I had in my mind the Polish origin of GE supplied replacement EMD crankcases...
The class 70s have had at least two engine room fires, and from the photos I've seen it looked as if the turbocharger was involved in at least one. However I read that one class 68 has had a fire...
As to the emissions standards, the 25 class 68s now in service meet Euro IIIa standards. However, nine additional class 68 for Trans-Pennine to be built this year will need to meet Euro IIIb.
There are three Powerhaul locomotives in Australia, which use the engines, electrical system and even the hood structure of the class 70. These were built as demonstrators (for 3'6" gauge) but never ran. Eventually they were sold to Pacific National, but as far as I know they haven't left the factory. I think the sale only occurred to get them off the books of the builder, and they were incuded as part of a long term maintenance contract for other GE engined locomotives.
The current August–September (2017) newsletter from Metrolink shows a photo of Engine No. 904. So, the F125 roster likely will be Nos. 903-942.
http://www.metrolinktrains.com/content/media/20/files/Metrolink_Matters_August_September_2017.pdf
The Nos. 913-914 that were seen in Los Angeles must be from the second group, and probably production stopped there until whatever problems there was got resolved.
Thread readers may be interested to know that last week K.P. received word that somewhere (where is not clear) that three units were spotted, two on a single car train with F125’s on each end, likely a familiarity run to make engineers comfortable with the units.
The website rrpicturearchives.net super recently has four photos of SCAX unit No. 925 in transit, so we should all know fairly soon now if Nos. 903-942 is indeed the number series.
http://rrpicturearchives.net/locoPicture.aspx?id=230596
Interestingly, Metrolink now appears to be having deliveries in common freights and NOT expensive special moves.
One ended up in the Dakotas after being misrouted. I think it ended up being routed through Pasco and down the Inside Gateway, but I'm not sure where it ended up going after it was discovered in the wrong train.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.