IDOT Spearheads HrSR Diesel Procurement (Amtrak LD Options)

Reposting from the Gen-discussion forum because I believe this is sufficiently in the range of Amtrak related discussion:

In August of 2013, the Illinois DOT, in conjunction with Amtrak and other state DOTs, released a joint procurement RFP for 32 high-speed (125 mph), PRIIA spec'd, diesel-electric locomotives for intra-state commuter services. Of the 32 base locomotives, 21 would be allocated for Illinois and Michigan service, 6 would be for Amtrak California service, with the remaining 5 for use on the Cascades service in Washington. The contract includes options for up to 75 additional commuter spec'd locomotives, and up to 150 long distance interstate locomotives (presumably for Amtrak) for a total of 257 locomotives. The long distance locomotives would differ mainly from the commuter locomotives in the following ways: larger fuel tank (2,200 gallons vs. 1800 gallons) and higher HEP capacity (1000 kW vs. 800 kW).
http://www.dot.il.gov/procurement/NGECl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... oject.html

I find it interesting that they are only specifying 150 LD locomotives at this point, when there are approximately 220 LD locomotives to replace.

Here's a link to the original thread, started by kaitoku: http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 7&t=150901" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And here is a complete link to the RFP: http://www.dot.il.gov/procurement/NGECl ... oject.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seems tailor-made for the EMD F125. That's got a max HEP output of 1050 kW and 125 MPH top speed. The only thing the base specs currently lack are the 2200 gallon fuel tank (currently is 1800), but that doesn't sound like a showstopper for customization.

http://www.emdiesels.com/emdweb/product ... v5RevE.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Are the P42's really ready for replacement already?

To Matt's point, aren't the first AEM-103 models 20 years old, which now that Amtrak isn't as broke as it was means they would be lookng at replacing the oldest P42s? I mean the older F40PHs have been replaced in large numbers with F59PHIs, so I could see Amtrack wanting to replace their oldest models with something meant for steady higher speed operation than the 110MPH limited P42s (or can they do 125, I don't think so but I could be wrong!)

There are 3 possibiltys from GE,1 New build,2 Remanufacture of the P-32,40,42, with a "kit" from GE,
3 A "joint" build with MPI(or another builder)with the GE "kit",as the current MBTA HSP-46 order is being done.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:Seems tailor-made for the EMD F125. That's got a max HEP output of 1050 kW and 125 MPH top speed. The only thing the base specs currently lack are the 2200 gallon fuel tank (currently is 1800), but that doesn't sound like a showstopper for customization.

http://www.emdiesels.com/emdweb/product ... v5RevE.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The spec sheet says "1800 + Gallon tank," which I believe is meant to be interpreted as 1800 gallon standard tank, optional larger tanks available.

Ryand-Smith wrote:To Matt's point, aren't the first AEM-103 models 20 years old, which now that Amtrak isn't as broke as it was means they would be lookng at replacing the oldest P42s? I mean the older F40PHs have been replaced in large numbers with F59PHIs, so I could see Amtrack wanting to replace their oldest models with something meant for steady higher speed operation than the 110MPH limited P42s (or can they do 125, I don't think so but I could be wrong!)

P42's are limited to 110. The F125, as of yet, is the only diesel entering the U.S. market capable of doing 125. But the bigger reason for preferring a new purchase in high-speed territory is acceleration. The P42's are 4250 horsepower, the F125 4700 HP. That's going to get up to track speed much faster from a station stop. Plus handle long/heavy consists better.


The P40's and P42's also still use DC traction motors, whereas everything new these days is AC. AC's a lot easier to maintain, and going forward is going to be a lot easier to get parts for. The P32AC-DM's do use AC motors, so if anything gets rebuilt it might be those.

They've also still got to replace all of the remaining Dash 8-32BWH's that are still seeing revenue duty out west. Those things are much too wimpy to still be used for any passenger trains.

I would not call the P-32 BWH's wimpy,they worked the western LD routes,#3+#4 SWC,#5+#6 CZ,and #7+#8 EB and needed to cross the
mountain passes enroute,they WERE a "stopgap" till the P-40's went on line,but did the job well.
They still do some LD train work from time to time.

Let's review the numbers of diesel locomotives too.

Potentially from the new proposed orders: 257 in total if they order all of them
In Amtrak's active road locomotive roster today:
P32-8WH = 20
P40DC = 15 (44 were ordered originally)
P42DC = 196 (207 were ordered originally)
F59PHI = 21
P32AC-DM = 18
Total = 270

257 is just 13 less road diesel locomotives than what Amtrak is using today.
If all the P32AC-DM remains in service for Empire services, they'll have 5 more than what they are using today.

I would agree with Backshopboss, the P32BW has 200 hp over the F40, which was the standard for decades. That's not exactly wimpy.

As far as DC vs. AC, EMD and GE still catalog DC models and some railroads still order quite a few DC models. CN comes to mind.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote: P42's are limited to 110. The F125, as of yet, is the only diesel entering the U.S. market capable of doing 125. But the bigger reason for preferring a new purchase in high-speed territory is acceleration. The P42's are 4250 horsepower, the F125 4700 HP. That's going to get up to track speed much faster from a station stop. Plus handle long/heavy consists better.

The hp rating alone doesn't tell one everything about acceleration. The 3200hp F40's could out accelerate a P40/42 due to the faster loading EMD engine. Also the lower your gearing the faster your acceleration for a given power. What I would be most worried about is the use of a CAT stationary/marine diesel in a rail vehicle. When this has been tried in the past it has almost universally not ended well. The MK5000, RL-1 and a whole host of other one off CAT conversions have not gotten high marks in the reliability and longevity department. I might not like GE's 4-cycles over EMD's 2-cycles, but I won't deny that GE doesn't have good experience with building rail use diesels and fewer high displacement cylinders reduces the chance something can go wrong (those unexplained fires are a matter for the courts). The F125 is going to be using a V-20 as opposed to the V-12 in the MPI HSP46 because we all remember how railroads loved the SD45 and SD80 models. Also if you go by photos on the CAT website this thing might have 4 turbos ! That's the same number of Turbos as a Bugatti Veyron. Smaller displacement diesels also have to rev faster to get the same amount of power and this is no different as the CAT C175 has a Max RPM of 1800 compared to an EMD 710's 900. I'm not one of those failure analysis engineers, but 8 extra cylinders plus 3 additional turbos running at double the RPM can't be good for one's MTBF.

I'm sure the performance will be great, but when ordering new equipment one must remember that the way our transportation policy works there is never money maintenance and moreover vendors *cough*Bombardier*cough* love to bend you over a barrel on the back end when their products are off warranty.

Tadman wrote:I would agree with Backshopboss, the P32BW has 200 hp over the F40, which was the standard for decades. That's not exactly wimpy.

All Amtrak F40PH locomotives were upgraded to the 3200hp standard used by METRA on later orders.

Contenders?

Some names of likely bidders were mentioned in
a Bloomberg News article from almost a year ago:

GE Engines to Lose Steam If
High-Speed Rail Judged Too Slow
By Angela Greiling Keane, Bloomberg News
September 19, 2012

...

A committee with representatives from states,
U.S. regulators and Amtrak ... is developing
specifications for train engines to be bought
with high-speed rail money from Obama’s 2009
stimulus bill. About $1 billion awarded to states
in August 2011 for locomotive purchases has been
held up until those standards are issued.

The group, called the Next Generation Equipment
Committee, must decide whether to require
equipment to run at top speeds of 110 miles
per hour (177 kilometers per hour), the standard
for the Federal Railroad Administration’s work
with Illinois on the Union Pacific tracks, or at
125 mph. It also could allow either standard
or permit states to choose.

...

The higher standard could cost sales for GE,
the biggest seller of freight locomotives in
the U.S. market, because its engine produced
now only reaches 110 mph.

...

Without naming GE, Caterpillar’s Progress Rail
Services unit, in a May 8 letter to U.S. Congress
members, said a 110-mph standard would
exclusively benefit one company. Executives
from Siemens and Tognum AG (TGM), both
German rail-equipment manufacturers, also
signed the letter.

“A diesel-electric locomotive built to a state-of-
the-art, 125-mph design delivers benefits even
in advance of track upgrades that will let it travel
faster than 110 mph,” wrote William Ainsworth,
chief executive officer of the Caterpillar unit;
Thomas Koenig, president of Tognum America;
and Michael Cahill, president of Siemens Industry
rail systems.

Caterpillar has designed a locomotive that can
go up to 125 mph and is ready to sell it when
there’s demand, Rusty Dunn, a spokesman, said.
...

#####

125mph is a meaningless "standard" unless you also have some sort of acceleration figure in there. EMD geared some of its western road E-Units for 120mph in the 1950's. Probably took a while to get up to speed, but when stops were hundreds of miles apart across flat prairie who is going to care?

EMD's last passenger units were flops: DE/DM30s.

Wonder what passenger units Alco would offer today.