Why didnt Emd make units for Metra

[metra 613]

its funny how come i saw 614 comeing into elgin 8 minutes early about two weeks ago

it that why everone i know that work for metra hates them then all there do is brake down and how come ween i watch them u can see a f40ph move fater then them just becasue there have 3600 hp doesnt mean anything too me and any time i ride a train with one it late

An engineer friend of mine, who I just talked to within the last 5 minutes of my posting this, said:

"The F40PH's are faster starting out, but the MP36's are faster once you get 'em moving. Its just getting 'em moving that is slow." And for you guys who think they're slow in general, I saw engine 416 pull a westbound into National Street 5 minutes early tonight. This train odviously did not leave Chicago 5 minutes early; and from what I hear they're on a tight schedule; so it would take a fast engine to be able to get upto 5 minutes early at National Street.

[498]

Regarding the comments on unit performance and reliability: Every morning I get to review a stack of reports on the performance of a large fleet of passenger locomotives of several models which have a variety of engines, control system technologies, brake systems, and HEP systems. Over the course of many years you recognize that certain components and systems figure quite often in road failures and maintenance problems. They are not always the oldest technology, sometimes they are the modern developments. The Metra units unfortunately have several features that I believe may not provide the most reliable performance of the various options that are available for that function, but Metra asked for those features and the units were built as required by the specification. Organizations have their own reasons for requesting particular equipment on their locomotives, I am sure Metra had reasons for the choices they made. Unfortunately sometimes it seems like the desire to save money on fuel or maintenance obscures the primary objective which is to get the train from point "A" to point "B" successfully and arrive at the destination with everything still working properly.

[byte]

Regarding the comments on unit performance and reliability: Every morning I get to review a stack of reports on the performance of a large fleet of passenger locomotives of several models which have a variety of engines, control system technologies, brake systems, and HEP systems. Over the course of many years you recognize that certain components and systems figure quite often in road failures and maintenance problems. They are not always the oldest technology, sometimes they are the modern developments. The Metra units unfortunately have several features that I believe may not provide the most reliable performance of the various options that are available for that function, but Metra asked for those features and the units were built as required by the specification. Organizations have their own reasons for requesting particular equipment on their locomotives, I am sure Metra had reasons for the choices they made. Unfortunately sometimes it seems like the desire to save money on fuel or maintenance obscures the primary objective which is to get the train from point "A" to point "B" successfully and arrive at the destination with everything still working properly.

Exactly. If Metra had solicited bids for a locomotive that had current technology, then most of the problems (at least mechanically) would be non-existant, or if there were any, the manufacturer would be more prone to help fixing them because that's the newest technology, and if it's not working for Metra then others might not buy. Rather than buying engines with the GEVO or 710 prime movers w/ AC traction, they got 645-equipped locomotives with DC traction. They did this mainly for parts standardization among their loco fleet, and they might think it's a good idea now but we'll see how it is in the future when no one will build them a 645-engined loco and they have to upgrade their parts inventory from very old to very new. It's insane to think that they bought new passenger engines that are essentially GP50s on the inside (not including the HEP) in the year 2003.