1st Generation SD-series official thread (all variations)

Discussion of Electro-Motive locomotive products and technology, past and present. Official web site can be found here: http://www.emdiesels.com/.

Moderator: GOLDEN-ARM

Aji-tater
Posts: 697
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 10:06 am

Post by Aji-tater »

I'd say the title of this thread is misleading. The release says the newer locomotive "virtually matched the heavier conventional locomotive". Nowhere does it say it did better. In fact usually when someone says "virtually" it means "almost" or "really close but not exactly". Where do you get the info that it outperformed the SD18?

User avatar
MEC407
Posts: 10974
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Post by MEC407 »

Aji-tater wrote:I'd say the title of this thread is misleading. The release says the newer locomotive "virtually matched the heavier conventional locomotive". Nowhere does it say it did better.
Good point. I changed the title. Thanks for pointing that out.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives

User avatar
GOLDEN-ARM
Posts: 2774
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:53 pm
Location: " LVRR CRANFORD STATION, 1962"

Post by GOLDEN-ARM »

Fine. Take those unwanted, surplus SD-40's, and 45's, and de-turbo them. They will make excellent SD-38(m's) and with the ballasting of a high horsepower unit, will certainly outperform that "locomotive, gen-set". Railroads truly, honestly don't give a rats behind, about the enviroment, air pollution, etc. Any type of trials, or testing, is being done ONLY to appease the CARB, and to look like they are attempting to comply with future clean air standards. Look at the huge impact hybrid cars have had on our roads, and in cleaning up the air.(psyche :P) You really think the railroads care. COME ON............. :P

ExEMDLOCOTester

Post by ExEMDLOCOTester »

Hey Golden Arm... Don't hold back.... Tell us what you really think...

User avatar
MEC407
Posts: 10974
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Post by MEC407 »

Yes, most of them don't care about the environment... but pretending to care about it is great P.R., and the fuel savings is nothing to sneeze at.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives

U-Haul

Post by U-Haul »

Pacific Harbor Line rosters some SD18s so th test made sense. A locomotive in your current fleet and a could be replacement.

SOU2645

Post by SOU2645 »

U-Haul wrote:Pacific Harbor Line rosters some SD18s so th test made sense. A locomotive in your current fleet and a could be replacement.

They arent true SD18's - rather deturboed SD24's that former owner CNW classed as SD18R's.
Larry

User avatar
GOLDEN-ARM
Posts: 2774
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:53 pm
Location: " LVRR CRANFORD STATION, 1962"

Post by GOLDEN-ARM »

Hmmmmm. Gives me an idea. Why not de-turbo some SD-40/45's, and have a more "modern" loco, without the headache of the turbo? The money you save, not wasting it on a Gen-Set, easily pays for the extra fuel consumption........... I understand the MRL has dozens, and dozens, of locos sitting in their dead lines......... :wink:
One last comment, about the test. The railroad "boasted" that they didn't have to apply sand. In 2006, with a "ultra modern" loco, I would hope that no-one would have to apply sand. That's the job of the locos on board computers/sensors. Sounds like the guys at PHL were so "excited" that they might be getting some new power, that they just gushed on, about the most trivial of facts. Almost as good as means worse than, in plain english. (I almost won, is really losing.....) Regards :-D

jz441
Posts: 1124
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Behind the throttle!

Post by jz441 »

G-A,

The state of California is forcing these types of locomotives upon the railroads... De-turboed SD's are out of question doe to the new air quality laws. We were forced to buy the Green Goats. They are useless... I had to pair it up with 2 Geeps in order to do every day routine switching that we normally do with 2 GP's.

PHL runs a bunch of junk power... SD18, GP7,9,10, SW.... so anything will pull better than that. They have 1 or 2 leased SD50, and they also bought an old SP SD40T that they rebuilt.

Sir Ray
Posts: 2041
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: The Industrial Northeast

Post by Sir Ray »

jz441 wrote:G-A,
The state of California is forcing these types of locomotives upon the railroads... De-turboed SD's are out of question doe to the new air quality laws. We were forced to buy the Green Goats. They are useless... I had to pair it up with 2 Geeps in order to do every day routine switching that we normally do with 2 GP's..
So, if 1 Green Goat + 2 GPs == 2 GPs... where does the Green Goat fit in?
Seriously, what is it about the Green Goat that is worthless? I understand that testomonials on the manufacturer's website are usually worthless, but I have read other articles that the Goats work OK, if not spectacularly.
Can you fill us in a bit more?

crazy_nip

Post by crazy_nip »

MEC407 wrote:Yes, most of them don't care about the environment... but pretending to care about it is great P.R., and the fuel savings is nothing to sneeze at.
would you spend 3 million on a new locomotive to save a few thousand dollars in gas per month?

when the rubber meets the road, that is what this is about

the same thing applies to hybrids, they just dont make sense financially yet

you also have to figure in that there is NO WAY this thing will last 50 years like the SD18

I would venture to guess you will never even come close to breaking even

User avatar
MEC407
Posts: 10974
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Post by MEC407 »

crazy_nip wrote:would you spend 3 million on a new locomotive to save a few thousand dollars in gas per month?
The fuel savings would amount to more than a "few" thousand dollars per month, and I seriously doubt that these little twin-engine switchers from NRE cost $3M. Probably not even half of that. Remember, we're talking about a switcher that uses a pair of off-the-shelf truck engines... we're not talking about a hybrid.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives

pablo
Posts: 1477
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:58 am
Location: Warren, PA

Post by pablo »

Before everone gets cattywompass, does anyone have any numbers? Cost of new switchers, fuel costs, etc?

Dave Becker
~Dave Becker
Moderator: Fairbanks-Morse Forum

User avatar
MEC407
Posts: 10974
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Post by MEC407 »

crazy_nip wrote:you also have to figure in that there is NO WAY this thing will last 50 years like the SD18
Why not?

GE's 44-tonner is pretty much the same concept as the GS14B... a center-cab switcher with two small engines rather than one large engine. The GS14B has some fancy electronics to aid adhesion and optimize engine utilization and whatnot, but the concept really isn't new or exotic or radical. If a 44-tonner can last for 50 years, I can't see why one of these things wouldn't last that long.

Even if the GS14B only lasts 25 years, it probably will have paid for itself based on the fuel savings and maintenance savings compared to an SD18.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives

mxdata
Posts: 1648
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:30 pm

Post by mxdata »

I am having some problems following the discussion at this point, I was under the impression the NREC locomotive has three engines, not two:

http://www.uprr.com/newsinfo/releases/e ... tbuy.shtml

How about the long term maintenance and reliability aspects? Will these three high speed engines be able to endure 30,000 or so hours between overhauls like the EMD will? What effect is 3x the number of engines (high speed engines at that) going to do to the unit availability, for example are you going to be able to run effectively if one is out of service? And when you go to put them under the stovepipe to do the actual emissions check will the locomotive require three tests every time, or is the effort here to try to get the individual engine size down below some mandated test requirement threshold?
"We Repair No Locomotive Before Its Time"

Return to “EMD - Electro-Motive”