RFP released for 35 Next Gen Locomotives

[neroden]

You did notice an amusing little something: As shown, the Midwest and Caltrans locomotives are different in details beyond the paint jobs. The doors, the window shapes and placement, and even the undercar treatments are all a bit different. I hope those assorted differences didn't drive up the cost too much.

Oh, that's just weird. I hope those differences aren't real and come from different dates of modeling. Doors, windows, and vents are wildly different on the two images; I'm hoping one is from an outdated design and the other is from a more recent design. With any luck the fairing on the top in the back is basically modular and removable.

 

[afigg]

Friday, October 02, 2015

Cummins completes first QSK95 rail engine

Written by Keith Barrow

CUMMINS has dispatched its first production QSK95 diesel engine for the rail market to Siemens' plant in Sacramento, California, where it will be fitted into a 200km/h Charger diesel locomotive.

Update from the International Railway Journal. Pretty routine, I guess, but always good not to hear that something failed a crash test or whatever.

Would have thought that Siemens would have been further along in the first article build and test process for the Chargers than this. There is a lot of testing ahead. On the other hand, the article states the QSK95 is the first production engine, so Cummins may have previously shipped a pre-production prototype engine to Siemens.

 

[jis]

I hope they remembered to remove the Volkswagen Emission Control software module, before they started testing for Tier IV emission control.

 

[George K]

I hope they remembered to remove the Volkswagen Emission Control software module, before they started testing for Tier IV emission control.

's okay. I'm sure that the results will be just fine at the time of testing.

 

[neroden]

Would have thought that Siemens would have been further along in the first article build and test process for the Chargers than this. There is a lot of testing ahead. On the other hand, the article states the QSK95 is the first production engine, so Cummins may have previously shipped a pre-production prototype engine to Siemens.

All Siemens really needs is to make sure that

(a) the engine fits in the hole they've left for it,

(b) the frame as designed carries the weight of the engine,

(c ) the engine has the power specified, specified emissions, and specified ability to control it

If Cummins left some room for design changes in its preproduction specifications -- telling Siemens the engine would take up more space than it actually does and weigh more than it actually does -- then it would be very easy for them to be shipping the production engine quite late, without necessitating redesign of the rest of the locomotive. And if it's lighter and smaller than the preproduction specs, Siemens gives a thumbs up and uses it.

 

[Andrew]

Since Amtrak will be using the new Charger Locomotives, and has options for several more, does this make it more likely for Metra and Metro North/LIRR to purchase future Charger Locomotives as well?

 

[keelhauled]

Since Amtrak will be using the new Charger Locomotives, and has options for several more, does this make it more likely for Metra and Metro North/LIRR to purchase future Charger Locomotives as well?

As well as the Charger, EMD, MPI, and Brookville all offer diesel passenger locomotives. I am sure they will all bid on any potential order. It is far to early to speculate on any results of a hypothetical order.

 

[jis]

Since Amtrak will be using the new Charger Locomotives, and has options for several more, does this make it more likely for Metra and Metro North/LIRR to purchase future Charger Locomotives as well?

There is a possibility that Amtrak may be using the Chargers at some point for their LD fleet. That in and of itself has very little effect on the Commuter railroads. Given their past history beyond F40s, the answer would appear to be an emphatic "NO", specially for Metra, NJT, VRE etc. Only MARC, which is partially operated by Amtrak appears to be going for the Charger so far.

Until a contract on a dual mode comes to pass and a selection is made for that, it is quite hard to tell what MNRR or LIRR might or might not do.

 

[MetraUPWest]

Metra has NO interest in purchasing new locomotives.

They are currently undergoing rebuild programs for the F40PHM-2s, MP36s, and some of the F40PH-2s. They also purchased 3 ex-AMT F59PHs.

I don't see them buying any brand new locomotives any time soon. They're taking the wait and see approach, which I think is a very good decision.

 

[Andrew]

It will be interesting to see if Amtrak orders more Charger locomotives for Corridor and Long Distance Services--but then chooses a completely different locomotive for Dual-Mode runs.

 

[keelhauled]

/me bangs head against table.

Amtrak hasn't ordered any Charger locomotives, they are bought and paid for by states. The same will most likely be true of New Tork's dual modes. It will be a seperate procurement process by different parties.

 

[PVD]

To add to that, MNRR has been overhauling their dual modes (along with the rest of their power). That diminishes the likelihood of them doing anything in the near term.

 

[afigg]

The Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee webpage has posted a September update to their activities report which has nuggets of info on the status of the Siemens contract as well as the specifications for the Dual-Mode locomotive that NY state is planning to put out for bid.

Looks like the Charger first unit build is on schedule (with enough acronyms to meet your daily acronym quota):

Diesel-Electric Locomotive Procurement update as of September 24, 2015:
“a) The invoices for milestone C (Invoice #7 & #8, associated with 12 ea. IDOT Option Locomotives) are being processed by IDOT
b) FDR follow-up action items continue for closure. One item remains and we anticipate closure by next week, pending receipt of the balance of submittal drawings, which are expected next week, as well.
c) The FAI for the diesel engine was held on 9/22 and went well. The FAI for the Prime Mover (Engine and alternator together) is planned for October in Sacramento.
d) Manufacturing for the first locomotive carbody continues. The integral fuel tank and the underframe has been completed and welding of the truck frames continues. The truck frame FAI is planned for October 8.
e) The follow-up weld process review was held on September 15-16.
f) One more draft DCR has been processed by the JPEs. Now we have fifteen draft (DCRs) are being prepared and Rich Stegner has contacted Tammy Krause, to send a list re-capping the DCRs and will begin drafting DCRs asap.
g) Follow up Technical Advisory Groups (TAG) continue working on an on-going basis for the action items from the AAR Standard vehicle qualification testing and acceptance. AAR’s David Cackovic is the facilitator.
h) The Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) planning team is reviewing logistics for fueling locations.
i) The locomotive weight is 272,000 lbs (+/-) and the calculated P2 force is still within specified limits. Weight is being closely monitored.”

FAI = First Article Inspection, DCR = Document Revision Changes.

The Dual Mode locomotive specification is almost complete, but has to be approved by the Executive Board before it is official. It should be noted in the text below that 4 manufacturers have provided input for the DM specification, so the NY state RFP will be subject to an open bid. Siemens may not get the contract. In the November, 2014 notes for the development of the Dual-Mode locomotive specification, there this response to why was the maximum specified speed for the Dual-Mode was lowered from 125 to 110 mph:

Technical Explanation: The Locomotive Working Group met by conference call on Thursday 11/13 and discussed the request made by the FRA. The four major locomotive manufacturers went back to their technical people to address the consequences of the addition of the 3rd Rail gear and electronics as well as the on-board energy storage capability, to the Diesel-Electric locomotive platform. Siemens has already responded; Bombardier will meet with NYSDOT, CTDOT and MNR in NYC tomorrow morning; and MPI/GE and EMD/Progress Rail are working on their responses.

Siemens advises that, using the 272,000 pound PRIIA Charger D-E locomotive as a base platform, the addition of the 3rd Rail DC gear and associated electronics will add weight as well as 3 feet of length to the locomotive. The resulting DM locomotive would weight approximately 291,500 pounds, which is a little over our 286,000 pound target for the NYC legacy infrastructure; at 291,500 pounds, the locomotive would be below the PRIIA P2 force limit at 110 MPH, however, it would exceed the PRIIA P2 force limit at 125 MPH. The addition of the on-board energy storage system will add about 15,000 pounds, and would require either more locomotive length and weight or a reduction in other items such as fuel tank size or a smaller engine. (This is how GE modified the Genesis P40/P42 to develop the P32AC-DM, reducing the fuel tank from 2,200 to 1,800 gallons and reducing the engine size from 4,000/4,200 HP to 3,200 HP.)

 

[PVD]

Is that NY buying for Empire service, LIRR, future MNRR, or TBD?

 

[jis]

TBD

 

[PVD]

Even without MN it would still be in the range of 40+ units, not a bad sized order. LIRR currently specs higher electric running speeds than Amtrak, and Amtrak has a higher diesel running speed, HEP load on the LSL would probably somewhat higher than LIRR, but I'm sure it will "all come out in the wash"

 

[neroden]

Bleah, third rail again? Maybe it is a Metro-North or LIRR order. Were it intended only for Amtrak, I'd have hoped for catenary & pantographs.

 

[PVD]

If NY buys the power, it is doubtful that they would pay to extend the cat a little further on the Empire Connection, and if they want to preserve LIRR electric running from Jamaica to NYP, 750 VDC over-running third rail isn't going anywhere. I share your preference for cat, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[MattW]

Energy storage? As in batteries? They want this thing to be able to operate electrically off-source? Am I getting this right?

 

[PVD]

More likely limited added storage to deal with gapping scenarios, and/or comtribution of energy captured in regen braking towards HEP load, but I'm only guessing.

 

[Andrew]

What does LSL stand for?

I just wonder how much longer it will be until new dual-mode locomotives are ordered.

Don't locomotives have a 25 year useful life?

 

[PerRock]

LSL = Lake Shore Limited

When whoever needs them decides to get some.

Life span for a locomotive depends on the locomotive. But 25 years, is about average yes.

 

[PVD]

Sorry about the mnemonic. Anyway, I memtioned that train specifically, because it can be a long one, right now when there is no joined Boston section, it pulls baggage, 3 sleepers,cafe,diner and usually 4 coaches up from NY.

 

[A Voice]

What does LSL stand for?

I just wonder how much longer it will be until new dual-mode locomotives are ordered.

Don't locomotives have a 25 year useful life?

The predecessor to the P32AC-DM, the FL-9, were all at least 35 years old when replaced. Right now, those P32's are just 17 to 20 years old.

Average life for a locomotive can be misleading anyway. While the HHP-8 was retired at around fifteen years, Amtrak still has a solitary SW-1 which has passed its 65th birthday.

 

[afigg]

More likely limited added storage to deal with gapping scenarios, and/or contribution of energy captured in regen braking towards HEP load, but I'm only guessing.

Yes, the energy storage is to deal with gaps in the 3rd rail. The specification documents are available on the website, including the draft spec for the Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) locomotive, for those interested. In the Dual Mode spec, it states:

Manufacturer shall propose, as an option, provision for on-board energy storage with sufficient power to move the locomotive and attached cars when the locomotive has been stopped on a gap in the 3rd rail traction power at a speed not to exceed 5 mph (8.05 km/hr) for up to 250 ft (76.25 m) until the locomotive 3rd rail shoes can once again draw power from the 3rd rail traction system. HEP does not have to be provided during the period of operation under on-board energy storage procedures.