When do you think we'll see 4,400+hp domestic engines again?

[Brickrail782]

(Description too short)

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

Research the web as to why SD90 and AC6000 etc failed and you'll learn some answers.

I suppose with current (and future increases in) environmental protection requirements, squeezing more h.p. out of existing prime mover designs will be even more difficult.

[BNSFdude]

There's no need for anything more than 4500 HP on freight trains.

[Brickrail782]

Yeah, that's kinds of what I thought too. All those GEVOs running around seem to be doing a pretty good job.

[JOHNtheREDNECK]

For the most part the ET44AC and other engines in the class have very comparable torque figures to the giants like the sd80/90mac, and the ac60cw's so they can handle the long mountain climbs. All in all it's really not necessary as those tier 4 GEVO's as much as people may hate to admit it they are top notch machines and GE did an amazing job designing them. There is a reason why the demand for those things is so high even with all of the other fuel efficient locomotives out there already.

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

You're right. That amount of horsepower is needed for high speed running with long and heavy trains. However, this is not current practice.

I wonder if there is a market for high power, high speed 4 axle units? Or are these obsolete now there are no fast intermodal freights like Santa Fe's Super C anymore?

[BNSFdude]

You're right. That amount of horsepower is needed for high speed running with long and heavy trains. However, this is not current practice.

I wonder if there is a market for high power, high speed 4 axle units? Or are these obsolete now there are no fast intermodal freights like Santa Fe's Super C anymore?

The problem with those is they can't hold the rail well at all. GP60s B39/40s, and GP50s all usually get derated because the high horsepower is more of a detriment than a benefit.

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

I wonder if there is a market for high power, high speed 4 axle units? Or are these obsolete now there are no fast intermodal freights like Santa Fe's Super C anymore?

The problem with those is they can't hold the rail well at all. GP60s B39/40s, and GP50s all usually get derated because the high horsepower is more of a detriment than a benefit.

You mean these units were slippery? Current electrics pack up to 2000 hp per axle, but these all have sophisticated 3 phase AC traction motors and lots of electronics.
Those units you mentioned were still had DC traction?

Are there any trains like Super C left at all? IIRC Santa Fe's Super C forwarded a lot of priority mail, and surface mail has largely vanished or has been transferred to air and trucks.

[GERUNIMO625]

Howdy

Don't forget more horsepower doesn't always mean faster trains. Things to be more concerned about include but are not limited to Tractive Effort, Tons per Opeartive Brake, (and what truly killed BIG power), reliability. If you have two BIG locomotives and one dies you just lost alot more power then if you just lost one smaller locomotive out of say three or four.

Of course the BIG buzz word these days is 'efficiency' and BIG power is a BIG gas guzzler.

Sorry Bud, I think big power is dead.

Take care.

P.S. Many moons ago 'Trains' Magazine did and article on BIG horse power steam and how the locomotive builders marketed them that way. Basically, the article tells how they shot themselves in the foot, and what killed steam was the builders themselves. Pretty ironic.

[BNSFdude]

You mean these units were slippery? Current electrics pack up to 2000 hp per axle, but these all have sophisticated 3 phase AC traction motors and lots of electronics.
Those units you mentioned were still had DC traction?

Are there any trains like Super C left at all? IIRC Santa Fe's Super C forwarded a lot of priority mail, and surface mail has largely vanished or has been transferred to air and trucks.

The B40s had the same wheel slip system as the other Dash 8s, DC or not, it's simply too much power for the amount of axle loading.
These high horsepower electrics you mention seldom are used on anything other than passenger. The European freight trains are passenger trains weight and length wise.

PL42ACs of NJT use are known for having the exact same problems of too much power for too little of a unit and those have the same IGBT AC traction systems as other high horsepower electric locomotives, and they're in passenger service!

The HSP46s that MPI and GE built for MBTA had some issues with this, but GE seems to have figured it out quickly with a software update within the testing period.

We won't see a new 4 axle locomotive from EMD or GE.

The equivalent of the Super C I guess would be our Z9 symboled trains. But they're more similar to BNs Expiditer, where the train will run sometimes with as few as 5 5-pack intermodal cars, more than that, or even less, but BNSF sticks like 4 or 5 units on it, all in Run so they accelerate like a rocket.

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

The equivalent of the Super C I guess would be our Z9 symboled trains. But they're more similar to BNs Expiditer, where the train will run sometimes with as few as 5 5-pack intermodal cars, more than that, or even less, but BNSF sticks like 4 or 5 units on it, all in Run so they accelerate like a rocket.

Thanks for the answer. Those Z9 rocket trains must be fun to drive. Max speed still 75 MpH or less, no hi-geared 100 MpH SD units on them? 79 is the FRA maximum without working ATC and ATC has mostly been abandoned on the transcontinentals?

[BNSFdude]

The equivalent of the Super C I guess would be our Z9 symboled trains. But they're more similar to BNs Expiditer, where the train will run sometimes with as few as 5 5-pack intermodal cars, more than that, or even less, but BNSF sticks like 4 or 5 units on it, all in Run so they accelerate like a rocket.

Thanks for the answer. Those Z9 rocket trains must be fun to drive. Max speed still 75 MpH or less, no hi-geared 100 MpH SD units on them? 79 is the FRA maximum without working ATC and ATC has mostly been abandoned on the transcontinentals?

PTC would technically circumvent the ruling, but they have to revise the rules to allow for signal indications given by PTC to govern our moves in the stead of wayside signals.

Max speed for basically every locomotive that isn't in passenger is 70, so that's the fastest you'll see any freight train go.

The Z9s would be fun to drive if you didn't have Trip Sodomizer running the train for you. Though around this time of year with Peak Season, they tend to lift the rule saying you gotta run with it.

[GERUNIMO625]

Trip Sodomizer

The things I see that stupid system do in the name of "good train handling", makes my head spin.

ATC has mostly been abandoned on the transcontinentals?

We still use ATC on the UP Geneva Sub out of Chicago (haven't turned on PTC yet). In Clinton IA. they shut if off and go to PTC. However, rumor has it since ATC is technically more restrictive, the FRA will make us keep it installed and on standby for the foreseeable future...So they say anyway.

[buzz456]

That's our guvmit at work. We have all these wonderful GPS guidance devices for aviation and yet the guvmit still has all these old VOR stations and ILS approaches costing a bloody fortune. When they finally get ADS-B up and running I'll bet you after I'm long gone they will still be maintaining radars and useless regional approaches all over the place.

I know, off topic.

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

That's our guvmit at work. We have all these wonderful GPS guidance devices for aviation and yet the guvmit still has all these old VOR stations and ILS approaches costing a bloody fortune. When they finally get ADS-B up and running I'll bet you after I'm long gone they will still be maintaining radars and useless regional approaches all over the place.

I know, off topic.

No need to be sorry because you address an important issue. Redundancy of critical components is important. W/o VOR and ILS no IFR flights since GPS can be switched off by the US military whenever they want. Russian and European GPS apparently do exist, but are these for consumer use or compatible with present devices?

There is always talk of driverless cars and trains, pilotless planes under the assumption there is no chance of human error anymore ...

During the Imra hurricane passage I heard in the US many stations still broadcast on AM. Overhere, our government decided that since nobody listens to AM anymore, it needs to be shut down. Likewise, FM will be shut down in favour of DAB, as terrestrial VHF/UHF TV from 10 nationwide high power towers was too expensive to maintain and has already been converted to DVB from 100 regional low power towers and "everybody is on cable, internet, mobile phones and social media anyways".
The crux is, AM equipment is so much simpler and more reliable at both the transmitter and receiver ends in cases of national emergency, when all this digital stuff fails, is disturbed or under hostile control.
Likewise with VOR and ILS, or classic ABS, CTC, etc.

Also off topic