Metrolink To Purchase New EMD Locomotives

[amtrakowitz]

Interesting that it's powered by a CAT diesel rather than 710.

No Tier 4-compliant 710s exist, do they? Do any two-stroke Tier 4 prime movers exist, for that matter?

They're working on it. AFAIK they're also pretty close to achieving Tier 4 compliance with the 710.

Who is working on it? CAT seems pretty determined to put its own motors into EMD locomotives and is no hurry to go with modifying two-stroke EMD designs, is how things appear here.

[NH2060]

As of June 1st, the contract with EMD has been signed. More technical details, etc. mentioned as well
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/pass ... tives.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Fan Railer]

Lol, if this is what the EMD F125 is going to sound like, then I approve:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4z39G_BoIM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The class 68 in this video uses the C175-16 while the F125 would use the 20 cylinder variant. Either it's me, or this engine has a distinct EMD sort of sound to it.

[amtrakhogger]

Sounds like a 567.

[Backshophoss]

Sounds like an FL-9 loading up with 10 car rush hour consist,regreatably that will be muzzled to make CARB happy

[NorthPennLimited]

That engine seems so small to be putting out 4,7000hp.

I guess if you add enough smaller cylinders in a 4-stroke it will equal the output of a 2-stroke V12 EMD built locomotive.

I'll hold my opinions on acceleration and wheel adhesion until it goes out for field testing, but my gut and experience is telling me 4,700 hp on a 280,000lb platform is going to get a lot of wheel slip.

[Fan Railer]

That engine seems so small to be putting out 4,700hp.

I guess if you add enough smaller cylinders in a 4-stroke it will equal the output of a 2-stroke V12 EMD built locomotive.

I'll hold my opinions on acceleration and wheel adhesion until it goes out for field testing, but my gut and experience is telling me 4,700 hp on a 280,000lb platform is going to get a lot of wheel slip.

Not necessarily; under ideal track conditions (dry rail, fair weather; which southern california has most of the time compared to new jersey and new york), wheel slip is typically more of a function of starting tractive effort vs adhesion weight, and not horsepower vs adhesion weight. The example I'll use is the NJT ALP-46 vs the NJT ALP-45DP. All three locomotives (F125, ALP-46, and ALP-45DP) are rated at 71,000 lbs of starting tractive effort. The ALP-46 weighs around 202,000 lbs and, as such, experiences wheel slippage when starting a train from a dead stop regularly in service. In such cases, depending on the consist and track conditions, slippage usually lasts until ~20-30 mph. The ALP-45DP, on the other hand, weighs 284,000 lbs and, as such, does not have much of a problem applying all 71,000 lbs of effort to the rails at low speed without slippage as the ALP-46 does. Given this example, I expect the F125, with a similar weight and same starting tractive effort as the ALP-45DP, to have perfectly fine adhesion characteristics.

Remember that the speed at which highest continuous tractive effort is achieved is the speed where maximum wheel horsepower is achieved. Below that speed, the locomotive is only putting a fraction of its rated horsepower to the wheel rim, with hp output closer to 0 at VERY low speeds (below 5 mph) and increasing incrementally until rated horsepower is achieved. Also remember that the F125 is never going to put nearly 4700 hp to the wheel rim. After factoring in a 90% (which is optimistically high) electrical transmission efficiency, you are left with about 4200 hp for traction. THEN you have to factor in HEP load to the passenger cars AND on board locomotive auxiliary loads. Metrolink estimates these loads at an average of 50 kW (67 hp) for the locomotive and 72 kW (95 hp) per passenger car (https://web.archive.org/web/20140201230 ... gation.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). Take those values, do the math, and you discover that, when powering a 6 car train with the F125, you are left with around 3560 hp for traction.

That being said, Metrolink operates significantly shorter consists than NJT does (3-6 cars versus 8-10 cars), so with 71,000 lbs of starting effort, the F125 should be relatively peppy with its trains. I'm not sure if Metrolink has the spare cars to lengthen its trains longer than 6 cars on a regular basis, but who knows... maybe we'll see 8 car trains rolling around the system in cali. That would be treat

[NH2060]

In case anyone hasn't seen it yet, here's a photo of the shell posted back in January on the Metrolink Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/Metrolink/phot ... =3&theater" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Judging from the profile of the shell it would appear the EMD is at least hoping that Amtrak would consider the F125 as a Genesis replacement. It can't be any taller and longer than either a Genny or a DE30. The overall design looks like a more curvy, streamlined version of a DE/DM shell. But regardless even without trucks, paint, and all the other finishing touches it looks quite sharp!

[Backshophoss]

The shell has elements of a HSP-46 crossed with elements of a DE-30 in this design.
About the same size of a P-42(Hey Athearn,it should fit on the "AMD-103" drive!! )

[deathtopumpkins]

The shell has elements of a HSP-46...

Fortunately it looks like they didn't repeat the mistake the MBTA/MPI made with the HSP, putting the headlight in the proper place rather than up top!

[NH2060]

Metrolink to possibly buy more F125s:

To overcome a surge in locomotive breakdowns that delay passengers, the Metrolink commuter railroad plans to spend about $200 million for some of the most sophisticated low-emission engines available.

Rail officials want to buy 29 so-called Tier 4 locomotives — powerful, fuel-efficient vehicles designed to slash potentially harmful releases of nitrogen oxide and fine particles of diesel exhaust.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hard to tell if that figure includes the 10 locos ordered almost 3 years ago -or if this is on top of that and therefore bringing the total to 39- but it sure sounds like they definitely want in on these engines.

[electricron]

Metrolink to possibly buy more F125s:

To overcome a surge in locomotive breakdowns that delay passengers, the Metrolink commuter railroad plans to spend about $200 million for some of the most sophisticated low-emission engines available.

Rail officials want to buy 29 so-called Tier 4 locomotives — powerful, fuel-efficient vehicles designed to slash potentially harmful releases of nitrogen oxide and fine particles of diesel exhaust.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hard to tell if that figure includes the 10 locos ordered almost 3 years ago -or if this is on top of that and therefore bringing the total to 39- but it sure sounds like they definitely want in on these engines.

Plans to buy 29 new locomotives means 29, not 39. Later in the news article it states they may order 20 more later this year - October or so is when those options run out. Of course, they could just order more after the option deadline passes. If they take advantage of the options and order 20 more, that would mean a total of 49 new locomotives and spending more money than $200 million.
Doing a little math:
$200 million / 29 = $6.9 million each.
$200 million / 39 (?) = $5.1 million each.
What's the going price for these Tier 4 locomotives?

Per their web site, they own 52 locomotives and are leasing 3 for a total of 55.
The 55 consist of 15 MP36PH-3C and 40 F59PH(I) locomotives.
The existing F59PH(I) locomotives are Tier 0, the MP36PH-3C locomotives are Tier 1.
49 new locomotives would almost replace every single one they have on a one by one basis.
Also per their web site, they run only 169 trains each work day.
How many spare locomotives do they need?
Can they run more trains without creating congestion?
Are all the platforms long enough so they can add more cars to the existing trains?

[NH2060]

Updated rendering via Progress Rail:
http://www.progressrail.com/cda/files/4 ... Screen.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Fan Railer]

[Graeme Salt]

Nice looking engine. Is there any up to date information on the expected delivery schedule?

To follow up postings earlier in this thread, the UK class 68 with the Caterpillar C175-16 prime mover does indeed make a nice sound, and one which bears at least a passing resemblance to a Roots-blown EMD 567 or 645 - despite the Cat being turbo-charged and a four-stroke...