E and F unit locomotives today

[Charles785]

Since many of us first became aware of trains in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s when most trains were using E and F unit locomotives, we obviously thought that was just how streamlined trains were supposed to look.

My, perhaps somewhat ignorant, question is why isn't it possible for locomotive manufacturers today that incorporate advances and technology that wasn't available 60-80 years ago, build modern locomotives today that LOOK like E and F units on the outside.

Full disclosure: Now at the age of 81 I grew up thinking that, indeed, those bull dog nose streamliners were simply supposed to look like that. I'm sure those that know more about locomotive manufacturing than I do could answer the question if could look like that again. For one example, those Santa Fe warbonnet F-units sure did look very attractive.

After all, for perhaps 30 years they did look like that. Could they look like that again?

 

[WWW]

The bull nose design was perhaps an improvement over the steam locomotives for wind resistance -
But was it enough to make a difference in speed ?
The high speed trains (locomotives) of today have a pointy nose - low slung profile that hugs the rails.

 

[jiml]

I imagine things like cost, construction methods and safety concerns factor into the process. It is certainly possible to update a vintage diesel - the VIA historical group is in the process of acquiring an FP9 that is essentially a GP38-2 inside, but whether building one from the ground up is possible is another matter.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

Modern crash standards would be a problem. Those “A” posts are made to survive and protect the crew. There are complaints about the post blocking your right side view from the engineers seat. Otherwise today locomotives have features that resemble the old F units.

“A” post in an automobile are the first post that holds your windshield. The “B” post is the structure that your door closes onto. If it’s a four door car then the “C” post is where your back window is. The post supports your roof and should keep the car from crushing you during a roll over collision.

In a railroad case the “A” post is designed to survive 800,000 lbs crush force. How or if the occupants will survive that is a different story.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

When restoring a locomotive it is usually grandfathered to rules that existed during initial construction.
A new locomotive is subject to rules at time of construction.
same with pollution standards a locomotive is subject to standards at time Engine(motor) was constructed.
So an upgraded F unit with say a Caterpillar engine is subject to date of Caterpillar not locomotive.

 

[TransitTyrant]

How is this not a streamlined locomotive? It may not be to your personal liking but it’s plenty streamlined.

 

[jiml]

View attachment 35163
How is this not a streamlined locomotive? It may not be to your personal liking but it’s plenty streamlined.

I actually think these look sharp - especially with a couple of the Amtrak and VIA paint jobs. Until you see them paired with a P42 you don't realize they're as tall and the nose is very E/F reminiscent when compared with the angular GE. The roof-mounted air deflector some have added to work with bi-levels blends right in too.

 

[jis]

I actually think these look sharp - especially with a couple of the Amtrak and VIA paint jobs. Until you see them paired with a P42 you don't realize they're as tall and the nose is very E/F reminiscent when compared with the angular GE. The roof-mounted air deflector some have added to work with bi-levels blends right in too.

I do like the VIA shape a little better than the Amtrak ones (Photo credit to Railway Age)

 

[GDRRiley]

you can take an old E/F unit and stick all new guts in them, rebuilt to a GP33ECO isn't hard. (E units have enough space for a V16 710 T3 instead of a V12)
Part of the issue is they like P40/42 have structural car bodies unlike FP45, F45, F40, F59

 

[frequentflyer]

Since many of us first became aware of trains in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s when most trains were using E and F unit locomotives, we obviously thought that was just how streamlined trains were supposed to look.

My, perhaps somewhat ignorant, question is why isn't it possible for locomotive manufacturers today that incorporate advances and technology that wasn't available 60-80 years ago, build modern locomotives today that LOOK like E and F units on the outside.

Full disclosure: Now at the age of 81 I grew up thinking that, indeed, those bull dog nose streamliners were simply supposed to look like that. I'm sure those that know more about locomotive manufacturing than I do could answer the question if could look like that again. For one example, those Santa Fe warbonnet F-units sure did look very attractive.

After all, for perhaps 30 years they did look like that. Could they look like that again?

Actually passenger locomotive design has come back full circle with aerodynamic noses similar to the E and Fs. And with Siemens making the locomotive and pax coaches, trains will have a unified look again, at least the corridor trains. Think about it GM/EMD was ahead of its time. Es looked fast 70 years ago and look fast today in the 21rst century.

Don't sell the blocky look short. A blocky F40 with low slung Amfleet trailing behind in a unifying Phase III livery was the look of Amtrak for decades, and looked doing it.

 

[Anderson]

When restoring a locomotive it is usually grandfathered to rules that existed during initial construction.
A new locomotive is subject to rules at time of construction.
same with pollution standards a locomotive is subject to standards at time Engine(motor) was constructed.
So an upgraded F unit with say a Caterpillar engine is subject to date of Caterpillar not locomotive.

And this is why you've had railroads rebuilding lots of locomotives rather than buying new units: If they can take advantage of the "old" standards, it is almost always cheaper to do so.

[It's also why you've had California trying to fight railroads on emissions standards, but it remains to be seen whether that dog will hunt since CA would need a federal waiver...I think the folks in DC are quite likely to just tell CA no.]

 

[Anderson]

I do like the VIA shape a little better than the Amtrak ones (Photo credit to Railway Age)

I really should dig out my photos, but when I did the "VIA Adirondack" (which NY by Rail had on a cover photo later) there was zero doubt in my mind that the old Budd streamliners looked a lot better with the Amtrak locomotive than the normal Amfleets did. The issue in this respect with Amtrak isn't the locomotives, it's what's behind the locomotives - the Amfleets (and Superliners, for that matter) just don't match the profile of the locomotives hauling them, and it negatively impacts how the train looks.

[That's not to say that the visuals should be the only thing determining what you buy, but people being able to see a sleek/fast/cool looking train is certainly its own advertisement.]

 

[railiner]

The reason for the original ‘E’ design was simple. They were built by GM, and they emulated automotive design, certain models especially so, with large front “grills”, “turret cabs”, and other automotive touches.
Railroads were considered “old-fashioned”, while cars and airplanes were considered “modern”.

 

[jiml]

I really should dig out my photos, but when I did the "VIA Adirondack" (which NY by Rail had on a cover photo later) there was zero doubt in my mind that the old Budd streamliners looked a lot better with the Amtrak locomotive than the normal Amfleets did. The issue in this respect with Amtrak isn't the locomotives, it's what's behind the locomotives - the Amfleets (and Superliners, for that matter) just don't match the profile of the locomotives hauling them, and it negatively impacts how the train looks.

[That's not to say that the visuals should be the only thing determining what you buy, but people being able to see a sleek/fast/cool looking train is certainly its own advertisement.]

 

[MARC Rider]

The bull nose design was perhaps an improvement over the steam locomotives for wind resistance -
But was it enough to make a difference in speed ?
The high speed trains (locomotives) of today have a pointy nose - low slung profile that hugs the rails.

The original streamliners of the 1930s (like the Pioneer Zephyr) had more of a shovel nose.



You may also notice fairings over the trucks and side skirts between the trucks. These are all designed to improve the aerodynamics of the train. Also, the rounded observation car at the end of the train also improves aerodynamics by reducing turbulent flow at the end of the unit. That doesn't necessarily control how fast the train can go, after all the AEM-7's, which have the aerodynamic properties of a brick, can pull trains at 130 mph, or they could when they were in service.

You may see similar features on 18-wheeler tractor-trailer trucks on the highway, at least the side skirts between the wheels and maybe even "boat tails" on the back.



Source: https://www.epa.gov/verified-diesel-tech/smartway-designated-tractors-and-trailers#tab-1

I spent the last part of my career at EPA testing these things, along with the low rolling resistance tires. The truckers use these to save fuel; I'm not sure how much fuel is saved on trains by suing these features, though it might have made a difference on the Pioneer Zephyr, allowing it to make a non-stop run from Denver to Chicago.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

streamlining is mainly aesthetics, the most drag is actually the space between cars where they are coupled.

 

[Eric in East County]

For one example, those Santa Fe warbonnet F-units sure did look very attractive.

The famous Santa Fe “war bonnet” design – crimson nose with its yellow insignia - was created in 1937 by Leland A. Knickerbocker, a book illustrator turned train-illustrator who worked for General Motors’ Industrial Design Department. It initially appeared on the diesel intended to haul the Super Chief-2: seven all new lightweight passenger cars. For many years, Knickerbocker’s work of a life was thought to be an anonymous piece of artwork. This was finally corrected in Stan Repp’s 1980 book “Super Chief – Train of the Stars” which identifies Knickerbocker as the man responsible for what went on to become one of the most recognizable images in railroad history.