The SD60MAC's are oddballs. the traction motor pinions and corresponding bull gears, inverters, and control system is totally unique to these "prototypes". Siemens no longer supports them and parts are impossible to find. They are tired units to start with after getting their pants run off all over the country. They have never been overhauled. they have governors, not EMDEC so they are not "up to date" on emission and not suitable for new engine component testing. In short....they are worn out and obsolete. For years they have been used as little more than "boat anchors" at TTC to simulate heavy tonnage for testing on other units like the SD70Ace. The units will almost certainly return to TTC and become prototype test beds. As long as they remain at TTC, they are basically "exempt" from FRA requirements as that is what TTC is for....development.
Railroad Forums
EMD SD60 series official thread (covers 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
Those fine folks at http://altoonaworks.info have detailed the rebuilding of SD60's into SD60E's by Norfolk Southern. Of interest is the new NS designed version of the North American safety cab. Why they did not apply an existing design is a mystery. Perhaps they are not satisfied with the current incarnation of the EMD safety cab. If so it shall be interesting to see if this new cab gets specified for installation on the soon to be built SD70ACe's for NS.
D.Carleton wrote:Those fine folks at http://altoonaworks.info have detailed the rebuilding of SD60's into SD60E's by Norfolk Southern. Of interest is the new NS designed version of the North American safety cab. Why they did not apply an existing design is a mystery. Perhaps they are not satisfied with the current incarnation of the EMD safety cab. If so it shall be interesting to see if this new cab gets specified for installation on the soon to be built SD70ACe's for NS.
rest assured that the new style of safetycab that NS has designed for its SD60E rebuilds will NOT be found on the coming SD70ACe's or any other new locomotives. This is not a negotiable option.
Bryan Jones
Brooks,KY
Bryanjones wrote:rest assured that the new style of safetycab that NS has designed for its SD60E rebuilds will NOT be found on the coming SD70ACe's or any other new locomotives. This is not a negotiable option.Despite this being the SD60 thread and despite the former Westinghouse transformer plant in Indiana in which Progress Rail is now setting up shop, would you know if the NS SD70ACe's will be built 'in-house' or assembled from kits in outside shops.
For those who care this is what NS' version of a safety cab looks like.
It has been reported that Norfolk Southern has pruchased 20 SD60's of UP/CNW heritage from Helm. I cannot recall any time previous when Class I's picked up so much used power.
The last time a railroad picked up so much used power was CN's aquistion of UP C40-8s and BNSF B40-8Ws.
atsf sp wrote:The last time a railroad picked up so much used power was CN's aquistion of UP C40-8s and BNSF C40-8Ws.Exactly. The last time there was iron-horse trading of this magnitude was when IC picked up several dozen SD40-2's from BN ~20 years ago. The "new" SD60's are being integrated into the NS roster. It does say something about the overall quality of third generation diesel locomotives.
Read thru all the pages and was hoping to find some answers.
Can anyone tell me if there are any real differences between the SD60's each roadname purchased new?
Can anyone tell me if there are any real differences between the SD60's each roadname purchased new?
As with any locomotive, the SD60 went through various "phases" during production which slightly altered their appearance over time, and certain major details also varied from railroad to railroad and even order to order. For example, on many Conrail SD60s the screens over the dynamic brake intake immediately behind the cab were flush with the carbody, whereas other railroads used a screen that protruded slightly (same as the inertial intake and radiator intake screens). Some CR SD60s even had older style Flexicoil C trucks from trade-ins while most other railroads had long transitioned to the newer HT-C truck. A number of CR SD60s had the radiator Q-fans mounted in a shallow well in the roof in order to lower the units' maximum height by several inches (perhaps due to concerns when operating in electrified territory?). Then, of course there were the variations between railroads which were more cosmetic in nature - location and placement of horns, bells, headlights, markers/classification lights, presence or absence of winterization hatches, fuel tank size, and so on.
Others here I'm sure have more knowledge and details. The above is merely what I could think of at the moment...
And then of course there are all the major variations of the base SD60 - SD60M, SD60MAC, SD60F, SD60E et al ad nauseum, most of which if not all have been discussed previously.
Others here I'm sure have more knowledge and details. The above is merely what I could think of at the moment...
And then of course there are all the major variations of the base SD60 - SD60M, SD60MAC, SD60F, SD60E et al ad nauseum, most of which if not all have been discussed previously.
Thanks for the info. I should've also specified that im looking for info on the Standard cab SD60's, no widecab.
It has been reported that the SD60E's rebuilt by Norfolk Southern are now rated for 4000 hp. Is this the first regular operation of 4000 hp on the EMD HT-C truck since the 4200 hp SD45X? Can the HT-C truck handle the extra stress of the added hp?
No problem for the HT-C truck. It is vertical load, curving forces, and tractive effort that stresses the truck frame. As long as they kept the D87 motors and the same alternator, the maximum tractive effort is likely changed little from the original rating, so the extra HP will just push the TE curve out a bit. The HT-C truck was designed for a much higher vertical load than it has ever carried so that is not an issue.
bogieman wrote:No problem for the HT-C truck. It is vertical load, curving forces, and tractive effort that stresses the truck frame. As long as they kept the D87 motors and the same alternator, the maximum tractive effort is likely changed little from the original rating, so the extra HP will just push the TE curve out a bit. The HT-C truck was designed for a much higher vertical load than it has ever carried so that is not an issue.Thank you, Mr. Bogieman. The rebuilds retain the as delivered tractive effort, 100,000 lbs. Sounds like they know what they are doing.