Trains.com

Why are 4-axle locomotives more suitable for Passenger service?

7264 views
14 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Why are 4-axle locomotives more suitable for Passenger service?
Posted by aegrotatio on Sunday, November 27, 2011 8:48 PM

I'm reading the Amtrak pictorial "Amtrak: An American Story" and one of the essays states that in the early years Amtrak endeavored to quickly replace the hand-me-down six-axle passenger locomotives with four-axle locomotives that were more suitable for passenger service.  The author doesn't provide any more explanation.

Why are 4-axle locomotives more suitable for passenger service than six-axle locomotives?

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:00 PM

First, this is referring to B-B vs C-C and not B-B vs A-1-A designations.  Mostly, passenger trains don't need the power or adhesion that freight diesels do, under most operating conditions.  Weight, track dynamics, power at start, etc., B-B is quite sufficient in most all passenger services in the U.S. today.

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Posted by aegrotatio on Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:01 PM

Very interesting, Henry.  What I'm also curious about is why the private railroads were using six-axle locomotives for passenger service?  Was it for dual-use as passenger/freight?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central New York
  • 335 posts
Posted by MJChittick on Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:36 PM

aegrotatio

Very interesting, Henry.  What I'm also curious about is why the private railroads were using six-axle locomotives for passenger service?  Was it for dual-use as passenger/freight?

The private railroads were not using C-C six-axle locomotives as are being built today.  They were using A-1-A six-axle locomotives in the form of EMD E units which only had four powered axles.  The center axle of both trucks was unpowered.  Most first generation passenger diesels road on A-1-A trucks for improved ride at 100 mph speeds.  Remember, there were also many B-B locomotives geared for and operated in passenger service.

As an aside, Santa Fe and Burlington Northern ordered FP-45 passenger locomotives from EMD in the late 60's as replacement power for their first generation passenger units.  These were C-C cowled versions of the 20-cylinder, 3600 hp SD-45s.  None of these units were ever conveyed to Amtrak.

Mike

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:51 PM

MJChittick

 aegrotatio:

Very interesting, Henry.  What I'm also curious about is why the private railroads were using six-axle locomotives for passenger service?  Was it for dual-use as passenger/freight?

 

The private railroads were not using C-C six-axle locomotives as are being built today.  They were using A-1-A six-axle locomotives in the form of EMD E units which only had four powered axles.  The center axle of both trucks was unpowered.  Most first generation passenger diesels road on A-1-A trucks for improved ride at 100 mph speeds.  Remember, there were also many B-B locomotives geared for and operated in passenger service.

As an aside, Santa Fe and Burlington Northern ordered FP-45 passenger locomotives from EMD in the late 60's as replacement power for their first generation passenger units.  These were C-C cowled versions of the 20-cylinder, 3600 hp SD-45s.  None of these units were ever conveyed to Amtrak.

Don't forget the Alco passenger locomotives, which also had A-1-A trucks. I am not familar with the Baldwin (except the centipedes) or Fairbanks-Morse, but I believe that they also had A-1-A trucks.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central New York
  • 335 posts
Posted by MJChittick on Sunday, November 27, 2011 10:08 PM

Deleted

Mike

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central New York
  • 335 posts
Posted by MJChittick on Sunday, November 27, 2011 10:14 PM

Deggesty

Don't forget the Alco passenger locomotives, which also had A-1-A trucks. I am not familar with the Baldwin (except the centipedes) or Fairbanks-Morse, but I believe that they also had A-1-A trucks.

The OP was referencing the locomotives conveyed to Amtrak in 1971, and I was attempting to keep my response focused.  These included no Alco, F-M or Baldwin units; only EMD.

Mike

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, November 28, 2011 5:00 AM

Generally, six-motored locomotives, requiring six axles, can start a heavier train without overloading the traction motors, than four-motored locomotives.   The added tractive effort, related to the locomotive's horsepower, is usually needed more in freight service than in passenger service.   But there were and are six-wheel truck locomotives that do work well in passenger service, with or without a motor for the center axle.  The Amtrak 6-axle early diesels and E60 locomotives simply had six-wheel trucks that were not really designed for high-speed passneger service, except possibly on well-maintained very heavy duty track.  They could have been replaced by six-axle locomotives with six-wheel trucks, but that was not what EMD came up with and would have been more expensive.  The New Haven EP-5, the Jets, were good passenger locomotives with six axles, and if GE had used that truck, possibly the E60 would have been a successful electric in passenger service.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Monday, November 28, 2011 5:12 PM

Aeg...

The short, direct answer to your question is that passenger trains need horsepower not tractive effort. The lighter B-B units are better suited to the service than would be heavier C-C units.

Mac

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, November 29, 2011 11:06 AM

MJChittick

 

 aegrotatio:

 

Very interesting, Henry.  What I'm also curious about is why the private railroads were using six-axle locomotives for passenger service?  Was it for dual-use as passenger/freight?

 

 

The private railroads were not using C-C six-axle locomotives as are being built today.  They were using A-1-A six-axle locomotives in the form of EMD E units which only had four powered axles.  The center axle of both trucks was unpowered.  Most first generation passenger diesels road on A-1-A trucks for improved ride at 100 mph speeds.  Remember, there were also many B-B locomotives geared for and operated in passenger service.

As an aside, Santa Fe and Burlington Northern ordered FP-45 passenger locomotives from EMD in the late 60's as replacement power for their first generation passenger units.  These were C-C cowled versions of the 20-cylinder, 3600 hp SD-45s.  None of these units were ever conveyed to Amtrak.

The E units rode on A-1-A trucks because they were too heavy for four axle trucks, although the longer truck spacing did help the high speed ride.  Four powered axles were enough to get over the ruling grade on most routes.  It's a neat trick to pack all the equipment and supplies into a four axle and make a reasonable weight.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Tuesday, November 29, 2011 2:14 PM

A minor correction to MJChittic's post.

The "BN" FP 45 units were ordered by and delivered to the Great Northern prior to the merger. Shortly before that the GN bought either SDP 40 or SDP 45 units to replace aging F units two for one.  GN management could obviously see the end of passenger trains so they bought units that could be instantly diverted to freight service when the opportunity presented itself, as it did.

Mac McCulloch

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, November 29, 2011 2:20 PM

The weight of the E units was occaisioned by their use of two prime movers in one carbody.  The thinking of the time being, that if there were two prime movers in one carbody - if one prime mover failed the passenger train could still continue to destination on the remaining prime mover that continued to operate.  Two prime movers plus a steam boiler and the water supply for the boiler all generated additional weight - weight that exeeeded axle loading for a 4 axle locomotive.

oltmannd

 MJChittick:

 

 aegrotatio:

 

Very interesting, Henry.  What I'm also curious about is why the private railroads were using six-axle locomotives for passenger service?  Was it for dual-use as passenger/freight?

 

 

The private railroads were not using C-C six-axle locomotives as are being built today.  They were using A-1-A six-axle locomotives in the form of EMD E units which only had four powered axles.  The center axle of both trucks was unpowered.  Most first generation passenger diesels road on A-1-A trucks for improved ride at 100 mph speeds.  Remember, there were also many B-B locomotives geared for and operated in passenger service.

As an aside, Santa Fe and Burlington Northern ordered FP-45 passenger locomotives from EMD in the late 60's as replacement power for their first generation passenger units.  These were C-C cowled versions of the 20-cylinder, 3600 hp SD-45s.  None of these units were ever conveyed to Amtrak.

 

The E units rode on A-1-A trucks because they were too heavy for four axle trucks, although the longer truck spacing did help the high speed ride.  Four powered axles were enough to get over the ruling grade on most routes.  It's a neat trick to pack all the equipment and supplies into a four axle and make a reasonable weight.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Tuesday, November 29, 2011 11:01 PM

I also assumed the double engine units had A1A trucks for weight reasons.  However, when I checked the Second Diesel Spotters Guide I saw that the early EMD 1800 hp double engine units were originally built with 4 axles (B-B), including B&O #50 and ATSF #1 & 1A.  The ATSF #1 was rebuilt with a 1B-B1 wheel arrangement.  Latter, EMD 1800 hp models EA, E1 & E2 ( using the same 201-A  engine pairs) were built as A1A-A1A.  The Guide does not explain the reason for the change.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Tuesday, November 29, 2011 11:59 PM

You may want to check out the first of the three part articles on E units that appeared in Railfan & Railroad a couple of years back. The first boxcabs just barely met loading limits with two axle trucks, later units had more weight in part due to steam generators.

- Erik

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, November 30, 2011 7:00 AM

Alco managed to squeeze 2000 HP out of their 16-244 and built PAs with a single engine, but still needed A-1-A trucks to handle the weight.

You could get all the equipment and supplies jammed into a four axle, but you had to sacrifice HP and/or range -   F units and Alco FAs for example.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

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