F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:So MPI's in a very tough spot if there's no more rabbit tricks to pull with the MPX's. That's why they needed to put out a completely fresh platform free from the MPX's constraints. Not that the HSP-46 is svelte by any means, but the time-tested GE platform is more predictable for projecting weight gain in different configurations and offers more room for growth in the arms race vs. the F125's and Chargers before absolute weight becomes a limiting factor. For MPI's long-term future they had to do it. Of course...what happens to that long-term future if no one shows interest in any follow-on orders is anyone's guess. The MPX is still a porker that's almost completely tapped out of wiggle room for performance growth within its single-engine configurations.
So here's a question for you F-line: What do you think of the HSP platform's future?
I almost feel at this point as if MPI, despite the bath they took on them, has to feel a little optimistic about the HSP platform in the long run.
Just look at where the market is today. Tier 4 has taken the non-"rebuild" MPX's off of the market, and the only thing that's left is a frankensteined green goat on some Bane-level steroids. Like you said, GO transit or a well-funded startup might just be crazy and cash-filled to jump on the MP54AC bandwagon, but the other 80+% of carriers won't go near them.
At the same time, look at the other options for Tier 4 passenger locos. You've got not one, but TWO high-performance (and high-maintenance) European passenger diesel locos that have been put on major growth hormones to meet US loading gauges and power requirements, the Charger and the F125. In addition to their expensive carbodies, finicky computer systems, and maintenance-intensive European traction systems and suspensions designed for 125mph service that literally NONE of them will see on commuter railroads, they also come with a pair of lightweight high-speed prime movers that are completely untested in American passenger service, built by manufacturers that have absolutely no experience building American locomotive diesels!
I feel like all you need to do is look at the MK5000c's history or the teething problems that the ACS-64's have had to see the lemon-potential that both of the non-MPI Tier 4 passenger locos have, and I'll eat my hat if even ONE of them sees a rollout that isn't plagued by major teething problems and reliability issues. Maybe Amtrak can afford that headache, but I have a hard time seeing any of the more conservative commuter operators taking a bite.
Which takes me to where the commuter market is today. Ridership numbers seem to be stable if not on the rise for most American commuter railroads, and yet a sizeable chunk of passenger service nationwide is still hauled by rapidly-aging F40's and F59's. I'd imagine that in the next 5 years or so, a whole lot of passenger railroads will have to make the difficult decision of whether to rebuild their F40's and F59's to one of the Tier-X specs, or bite the bullet and replace them outright, and I'm guessing that most of them will choose the latter, due to the headaches of bringing 20-30 year old, relatively underpowered locos up to modern emissions specs.
Now this is why I think MPI might actually be in a pretty good spot, because I also have a hard time seeing most of these cost-conscious and technologically conservative operators springing for a pair of bloated Class 43 wannabes, especially if the Charger and/or the F125 have any sort of teething issues. Meanwhile, what MPI now has is a passenger-grade locomotive platform that can hit 110mph, and is powered by a tried-and-true medium speed prime mover with a proven history as a Tier-3/4 freight engine. I'd also imagine that if EMD's reanimated H-engine proves to be a solid powerplant, that it'd also be fairly straightforward to re-engine an HSPxx as a 12-1010 engined "HSP44ACe-T4" if a railroad specified it.
As to the HSP46's teething problems, remember how the MPX's started out. The MP36ph-3S was an absolute lemon, with some much more significant issues early on than the HSP46's are having and at the time, it was also seen as potentially being the loco that would put MPI out of business. In retrospect, the MP36ph-3S's major teething problems and the ensuing headaches that they caused Metra seem to have allowed MPI to iron out the kinks on the MPX platform early on. By all accounts, the resulting -3C's and MP40's were very reliable, and sold like hotcakes to commuter agencies who were scared of the Gennies, to the point that they became the best-selling American commuter locomotives since the F40ph.
Is it that out there of me to suspect that we might see history repeat itself, where Amtrak and one or two adventurous commuter railroads choose the Charger/F125, while a Tier-4 HSP variant goes on to be the the definitive F40/GP40/F59 replacement for the other two dozen American commuter railroads?
