Freight verse Passenger engines

[fulham]

In the latest issue of Trains, several articles discuss an interview conducted with Amtrak's new President Wick Moorman. Amongst the topics covered is one concerning the current diesel fleet. Mr. Moorman makes the comment (as I interpret it) that Amtrak can rebuild its current diesel fleet over a period of 10 years and does not need to go out and immediately purchase new power.

That got me thinking, what is the difference in lifespan between freight and passenger engines? Freight engines are hauling heaving, long trains at slow to medium speeds, while most Amtrak engines are handling light trains at relatively high speeds. I know Amtrak's maintenance issues are always a question, but PROPERLY MAINTAINED, what engine tends to have a longer life span? I, am not going to question at all Mr. Moorman's comments regarding engines. If he believes rebuilding is the answer, then that is the answer. I know Norfolk Southern has been successful in its rebuilding program, and I have no doubt that this same philosophy can be brought to Amtrak.

 

[west point]

There are 2 major items for locomotive wear and ear.

1. The number of HP hours on a passenger loco is probably spread out over a longer time due to most routes requiring on and offs.

2. Mileage on the trucks is much higher. Amtrak schedules truck replacements on a 10 year basis which as you noted is what Moorman stated for overhauls. Now what the overhaul will be could be interesting. With trucks being replaced it "may" be the overhauls would include changing loco to AC traction ? AC traction trucks may be different than the present DC traction trucks ? Anyone have an idea ?

 

[seat38a]

Is there anything that prevents Amtrak from buying freight loco that is modified for passenger service? Wouldn't that make it easier and more cost effective than buying a passenger loco's? Other than HEP and body shape, what else is there a difference.

 

[StriderGDM]

HEP is a big part, as is gearing and traction.

Basically Amtrak wants engines that can do up to 110 or even 125MPH and can accelerate rather quickly, and tonnage is a bit less important. The only train Amtrak really has to worry about tonnage on is the Autotrain and even that is low tonnage compared to many freight trains.

Freight railroads for the most part want slower top speeds, don't need to accelerate as quickly, but that can haul a LOT of tonnage.

That said, the manufacturers in the past have tried to create some locos to cover both, to varying degrees of success.

 

[PVD]

AC to DC traction is a major change requiring significant changes in the way power is handled after it is generated, as well as requiring a very different means of control. It can be done, the AEM-7 saw many of its original DC rebuilt into AC

 

[norfolkwesternhenry]

Maybe we could invite AC/DC to make a song about converting engines.

 

[PerRock]

Is there anything that prevents Amtrak from buying freight loco that is modified for passenger service? Wouldn't that make it easier and more cost effective than buying a passenger loco's? Other than HEP and body shape, what else is there a difference.

Amtrak has, the B32-8WH.

peter

 

[A Voice]

Is there anything that prevents Amtrak from buying freight loco that is modified for passenger service? Wouldn't that make it easier and more cost effective than buying a passenger loco's? Other than HEP and body shape, what else is there a difference.

It's been done before, with some success (P32-8) and some notable failures (SDP-40F).

Even the F40PH was basically a freight GP-40 with a cowl carbody. Body shape doesn't have to change (units from the P-32 to the pre-Amtrak SDP-45 are little different from the freight version). You do need HEP and gearing for a higher top speed. Ever since the SDP-40F debacle passenger carriers have largely had an aversion to six motor power, though.

There is no reason you couldn't still do, essentially, a four-motor variant of a modern freight unit, with a top speed of 110; That is completely adequate for long-distance service (Superliners were only designed for 100 mph anyway).

Both the Siemens Charger and EMD F125 require the use of urea to meet tier 4 restrictions. I'm wondering if Amtrak really wants to go down that road (certainly the major freight roads haven't); Rebuilding power would also avoid that issue.

 

[PVD]

The other intangible is fuel costs over the life of the unit. If fuel costs stay relatively low, the advantage of better fuel economy in a newer unit diminishes. If fuel costs rose significantly, freight railroads have a greater ability to pass on costs or acquire new equipment compared to Amtrak. It is always a great unknown.

 

[LookingGlassTie]

I have a related question: Does Amtrak use the same basic types of locomotives, regardless of whether a particular train has to climb steep grades?

In other words, would a loco suited for the Empire Builder, Southwest Chief or California Zephyr also be seen on the Crescent, Silver Star or Lake Shore Limited, for instance?

 

[keelhauled]

I have a related question: Does Amtrak use the same basic types of locomotives, regardless of whether a particular train has to climb steep grades?

In other words, would a loco suited for the Empire Builder, Southwest Chief or California Zephyr also be seen on the Crescent, Silver Star or Lake Shore Limited, for instance?

Yes. The General Electric P42 is almost universally used on Amtrak's network outside of the electric Northeast Corridor.

 

[A Voice]

I have a related question: Does Amtrak use the same basic types of locomotives, regardless of whether a particular train has to climb steep grades?

In other words, would a loco suited for the Empire Builder, Southwest Chief or California Zephyr also be seen on the Crescent, Silver Star or Lake Shore Limited, for instance?

Yes. Amtrak has only a few types of diesel locomotives intended for intercity use; The P40 or P42 (most common), the F59PHI (mostly in the Pacific Northwest and California), and the older P32-8 (which resembles a freight unit). Any of these can haul any train in the system.

There are exceptions, particularly in the Northeast, where electric locomotives are used under catenary. Also, trains Between New York and Albany utilize 'dual'mode' diesels which can operate short distances off third-rail electric. Otherwise, the four engine types mentioned above could, potentially, be found on any train in the system (though if you ever see an F59 on Auto Train - please get a picture!!!).

 

[cuppb001]

I am surprised Wick would suggest rebuilding GE DASH-8s. Norfolk Southern is actively retiring and scrapping 4 axle DASH-8s and their 6 axle DASH-8.5 program was met with failure and the sidelining of the rebuilt units and abandonment of the program. Only the more modern GE rebuilds and vintage EMD rebuilds have been considered successful. DC-AC

 

[Gemuser]

Even the F40PH was basically a freight GP-40 with a cowl carbody. Body shape doesn't have to change (units from the P-32 to the pre-Amtrak SDP-45 are little different from the freight version). You do need HEP and gearing for a higher top speed. Ever since the SDP-40F debacle passenger carriers have largely had an aversion to six motor power, though.

You know Amtrak does not HAVE to have HEP equipped locos. It COULD use a power van approach as has been used in most of the rest of the world for decades. This allows for the use of freight locos with perhaps just a gearing change. Given the shortness of Amtrak trains it would not require a big power van or it could probably fit in a baggage car.

Just throwing it out as thinking fodder.

 

[BCL]

I thought that the diesel powerplants from GE and Cummins are basically the same regardless of whether they go into freight or passenger locomotives.

I thought the GE V16 is the same in the P42DC as in GE's latest freight locomotives.

 

[PerRock]

I have a related question: Does Amtrak use the same basic types of locomotives, regardless of whether a particular train has to climb steep grades?

In other words, would a loco suited for the Empire Builder, Southwest Chief or California Zephyr also be seen on the Crescent, Silver Star or Lake Shore Limited, for instance?

Yes. Amtrak has only a few types of diesel locomotives intended for intercity use; The P40 or P42 (most common), the F59PHI (mostly in the Pacific Northwest and California), and the older P32-8 (which resembles a freight unit). Any of these can haul any train in the system.

There are exceptions, particularly in the Northeast, where electric locomotives are used under catenary. Also, trains Between New York and Albany utilize 'dual'mode' diesels which can operate short distances off third-rail electric. Otherwise, the four engine types mentioned above could, potentially, be found on any train in the system (though if you ever see an F59 on Auto Train - please get a picture!!!).

The other exception is the Michigan services, which can only use engines that have been set up with the correct, unique PTC system in them. There's only a handful that have the system. I don't think any F59PHIs, B32s or P32s have it; so we really only see P42s (and soon Chargers!)

peter

 

[keelhauled]

I thought that the diesel powerplants from GE and Cummins are basically the same regardless of whether they go into freight or passenger locomotives.

I thought the GE V16 is the same in the P42DC as in GE's latest freight locomotives.

No, the P42s use the older 7FDL engines and the current Evolution freight locomotives use the GEVO engine, which can meet Tier 4 emissions standards. I don't know if the GEVO was a derivative of the 7FDL or a clean sheet design.
Also the Cummins QSK95 in the Charger has never been used in a production freight locomotive; there is a repowered EMD with the engine testing on the Indiana Railroad, but EMD's production freight locomotives use their in house 1010 engine.

 

[Ziv]

norfolkwesternhenry, AC DC could definitely open with Rock N Roll Train and then segue into Highway to Hell as the loco is blasting down the track. The they could close with a scene of the loco approaching the station with Hell's Bells rocking away...

Or not...

 

[jis]

The other exception is the Michigan services, which can only use engines that have been set up with the correct, unique PTC system in them. There's only a handful that have the system. I don't think any F59PHIs, B32s or P32s have it; so we really only see P42s (and soon Chargers!)

peter

Similarly, NEC and associated lines (Keystone, Empire Corridor upto Schenectady (Hoffmans), Springfield Line) can use only engines equipped with PRR/Amtrak Cab Signal + ACSES II, unless of course it is operating in a position that is not at the head of the train.

 

[BCL]

I thought that the diesel powerplants from GE and Cummins are basically the same regardless of whether they go into freight or passenger locomotives.

I thought the GE V16 is the same in the P42DC as in GE's latest freight locomotives.

No, the P42s use the older 7FDL engines and the current Evolution freight locomotives use the GEVO engine, which can meet Tier 4 emissions standards. I don't know if the GEVO was a derivative of the 7FDL or a clean sheet design.
Also the Cummins QSK95 in the Charger has never been used in a production freight locomotive; there is a repowered EMD with the engine testing on the Indiana Railroad, but EMD's production freight locomotives use their in house 1010 engine.

OK, but the engine in the P42DC was the same as the freight locomotives of the time. It certainly doesn't sound as if there's anything preventing a particular diesel engine designed for locomotive use from being used in both freight and passenger locomotives. It's basically just used as part of a diesel generator.

 

[A Voice]

Also the Cummins QSK95 in the Charger has never been used in a production freight locomotive; there is a repowered EMD with the engine testing on the Indiana Railroad, but EMD's production freight locomotives use their in house 1010 engine.

The Cummins engine freight unit still requires urea after treatment, right? That'll never sell to the Class 1's.

I am surprised Wick would suggest rebuilding GE DASH-8s. Norfolk Southern is actively retiring and scrapping 4 axle DASH-8s and their 6 axle DASH-8.5 program was met with failure and the sidelining of the rebuilt units and abandonment of the program. Only the more modern GE rebuilds and vintage EMD rebuilds have been considered successful. DC-AC

Well, Amtrak doesn't really have much else to rebuild. Aside from 21 F59PHI units, its rebuild a mid-90's General Electric engine or nothing. Norfolk Southern has other options, its easier to buy secondhand power (the Union Pacific SD90MAC's), and the major builders have current production freight models already in service.

Amtrak actually has obtained secondhand freight locomotives before for road use - fifteen GP40's. But those options are rather limited, especially four-motor units, and are going to be as old or older than Amtrak's own Genesis engines.

OK, but the engine in the P42DC was the same as the freight locomotives of the time. It certainly doesn't sound as if there's anything preventing a particular diesel engine designed for locomotive use from being used in both freight and passenger locomotives. It's basically just used as part of a diesel generator.

Yes, potentially you could even re-engine the Genesis with a new prime mover. However, will a version of either the GEVO or 1010 engine fit the carbody (and weight, etc.) of a four-motor unit?

 

[keelhauled]

Also the Cummins QSK95 in the Charger has never been used in a production freight locomotive; there is a repowered EMD with the engine testing on the Indiana Railroad, but EMD's production freight locomotives use their in house 1010 engine.

The Cummins engine freight unit still requires urea after treatment, right? That'll never sell to the Class 1's.

Yes. They are probably tilting at windmills with that one. The Charger and F125 can get away with SCR since they return predictably and frequently to facilities to refill the urea tank. It will be interesting to see if Amtrak exercises their Charger options with the long haul modifications, since it will mean they have to deal with urea systemwide. Probably not as big as deal for them as the freight railroads since they contract out fueling as opposed to running their own pads, and they can presumably just pay to have urea delivered along with the diesel.

What I have wondered about is the advantage of running higher speed diesels in passenger locomotives, which seems to be where the trend is going these days. NOX emissions decrease as engine speed does, which is presumably why slower running GEVO and 1010 diesels are able to meet Tier 4 specs with EGR only. MPI put GEVO engines in the HSP46s for the MBTA, which were built to Tier 3 specs, but I don't see why you couldn't modify them for Tier 4 like GE has done for the ET44s.

Actually, now that I think about it, particulate matter increases on slower running diesels, which is killer politically when you're dealing with California urban areas, which is where both Chargers and F125s are going. So I guess it was more workable to reduce those emissions on the engine end of the system and suffer through urea. Apparently using a DPF didn't work out for whatever reason.

 

[BCL]

Well, Amtrak doesn't really have much else to rebuild. Aside from 21 F59PHI units, its rebuild a mid-90's General Electric engine or nothing. Norfolk Southern has other options, its easier to buy secondhand power (the Union Pacific SD90MAC's), and the major builders have current production freight models already in service.

Aren't those state-owned?

 

[west point]

The conversion of Amtrak's loco from DC to AC although somewhat speculative does have the following points.

1. Moorman does have knowledge of the problems of conversion and outside of NS's engineering forces knows more than any one else.

2. AC traction motors are much more reliable than DC with a much longer mean time before failure (MTBFs).

3. AC motors are more robust in adverse environments and will not flash over very often in snow, sand, or salt air for example. Very important such as what the Empire Builder is experiencing this winter.

4. AC motors have better acceleration for same power input and have less parasitic loss. Acceleration important with the speed up and slow down profiles of Amtrak trains. AC traction motors have a greater speed range of applying full power to the rails so high speed gearing does not prevent good acceleration at low speeds.

5. Present HEP inverters may be nearing the end of available replacement parts ? They also probably will be removed for rebuilding at same time loco is rebuilt ?

6. Present HEP inverters draw total power from generator no mater what the load robbing some power from traction motors.

7. Siemens new integrated inverters for the Chargers appear to be the same capability as the ACS-64s including using regeneration to power HEP -- saving fuel. As well Siemens charger inverters are equal rated HP input of P-40s and P-42s.

8. There might be some adjustment to weight and balance due to different component weights but that might also apply to replacement parts on overhaul.

9. being able to avoid having tier-IV a definite fuel saving.

10. Amtrak seems to favor 2 axle trucks ruling out any present freight loco's 3 axle trucks.

11. Auto train's trailing load appears to be capable behind the usual 2 P-40s. It may be the P-40 traction motor ratios are different ?

12. Finally Amtrak might be able to get NS at Juanita to do the conversions ?

 

[PerRock]

Well, Amtrak doesn't really have much else to rebuild. Aside from 21 F59PHI units, its rebuild a mid-90's General Electric engine or nothing. Norfolk Southern has other options, its easier to buy secondhand power (the Union Pacific SD90MAC's), and the major builders have current production freight models already in service.

Aren't those state-owned?

I believe the Cascades ones are owned by Amtrak, and possible the Surfliner ones.

peter