MBTA's MPI HSP-46 Locomotives

The 2004 got to Area 52...i.e. Rochester yesterday. Took a unique routing this time:
Into Framingham on CSX Q436, then B725 to Attleboro, B726 to Middleboro, Mass Coastal
to Rochester.

This is the first time a HSP got routed this way. The 2034 went to Worcester, then PW to
Pawtucket, Keolis/T to Readville, then to Middleboro.

D

It is interesting to compare the specifications boxes on Wikipedia between the MPI HSP-46 and the Siemens SC-44 Charger. The HSP-46 appears to have twice the displacement of the SC-44 for almost exactly the same horsepower, despite HSP-46 only having to meet less stringent emissions. Both locomotives are about the same size, but HSP-46 is 8.6% heavier, has a hard-to-believe 38% longer wheelbase and 15% larger minimum curve radius. SC-44 Charger has more powerful HEP provision (longer consists+dining cars).

The "T" should be thinking about what to order next for replacement/expansion given the long lead times (assuming the coach shortage is addressed, lol). Assuming the SC-44's Cummins QSK-95 becomes proven, an ideal order would be something like the Siemens with de-rated trucks to meet a cheaper price point that the T could afford.

the SC-44 engine having half displacement but twice RPM.

Right, that's the magic sauce and we will know in 2? 5? 10? years whether they hold up. They can always replace the prime mover with a turbine I didn't look up the cost figures but I think the SC-44 is more $$ than the HSP-46, but that is apples and oranges since the orders were years apart and stuff like included spares differ and the HSP-46 can't be built new.

GEVO-12 prime movers are ubiquitous in the freight world. The GE ES44AC and ES44C4 freight locos use it, with those two makes selling a combined 1700+ units to-date rostered on every single Class I in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. And still in production 13 years after first introduction. It's a flexible enough platform to have Tier 4 variants out now, as well as some alternate-fuel test trials for future variants. There'll be a 50-year parts supply for that prime mover, no doubt. Ditto the GE GEB-15 traction motors, the same ones used for 2 decades on the Genesis P32AC-DM, and the GE 5GMG211 AC alternator. The traction motor replacements when they were first delivered was an installation screw-up, not a component problem.

The only thing custom about the HSP-46 is the component selection/integration, carbody, and software...not the components themselves. It's that systems integration where they're having extended teething problems. Everything else is as generic as it gets. Even if no other railroad buys this make, they will be fully supportable through multiple rebuilds because the component supply is inexhaustible. And you can find second-source vendors to build to the spec if MPI says "no mas". It just may be the same guts in a different carbody with different computers and such, depending on what vendors offer what. We don't have to worry about these becoming dead-end white elephants, and they aren't necessarily consigned to real-world fleet fragmentation if the next loco order has to be something other than a rote HSP-46 refresh. It'll probably be another GEVO-12 / GEB-15 / etc. -derived platform, unless the Chargers/F125's/etc. are so hands-down better an off-shelf buy than another GEVO that systems fragmentation proves too small a concern to worry about.

We also don't have to worry about general build quality making them razorblade fodder at less-than rebuild age like the Brokem coaches because the component selection is tried-and-true. Whether they're long-term worthy is all about success in debugging the integration...particularly the computers. The GP40MC's weren't pieces of crap because the GP40 platform is a piece of crap; Geeps are some of the 20th century's most successful and reliable makes, in both freight and passenger variants. The T just went way too far off-script with the quirky 'MC' computer mods and saddled otherwise bulletproof locos with a "garbage in, garbage out" situation at the control stand. That's the hurdle the HSP's newfangled systems integration has to clear, and stay permanently cleared of without further bug regressions.

How ready for winter will the HSPs be?

as ready as last few winters ?

Hopefully much better (which Is why I asked), because a lot of the trouble seemed to be software/integration issues as F-Line described upthread.

How is Keolis doing managing BET?

Arlington wrote:

DutchRailnut wrote:as ready as last few winters ?

Hopefully much better (which Is why I asked), because a lot of the trouble seemed to be software/integration issues as F-Line described upthread.

Remember 2014-2015 there were only a handful in service, and 2015-2016 was very mild, but they were able to learn enough and have made a lot of the necessary adjustments. So indeed they will be much better. The better question is the learning curve for both the train crews and the mechanics. There have been many times an HSP has "died" line of road, been assisted to Boston, put in the shop and they find nothing wrong with the engine - other than that the crew and trouble desk were unable to resolve the issue due to lack of familiarity. The more these run the better they'll be, but they aren't experts yet like they are with the EMD products that have roamed the system over the last 30 years.

BandA wrote:How is Keolis doing managing BET?

That's a different topic for a different thread. But firing 9 people for stealing time and hiring a whole bunch indicates they are making an effort.

How are the HSP's holding up after warranty mods? Bugs pounded out? Looking more solid for the long haul? Or still jitters and/or moderate disappointment that they aren't going to live up to the hype?

the HSP's are falling apart, little things, but it is very sad to see how these were built. Dials breaking off, chairs broken, bell buttons not working correctly, horn toggles breaking off, door handles breaking off, HVAC not working properly, and let alone how they handle with moisture on the rails....give me an F40 any day

Ouch. Hope that stuff is covered under warranty, and that they get those items repaired/replaced before the warranty runs out...

Unfortunately the poor performance under wet conditions is not... I remember all of the hype on how much better the AC traction would perform on them in wet conditions before they arrived, once they arrived big disappointment!

Keolis plagued by train, coach issues

Problems not all firm’s fault, but T officials losing patience

http://commonwealthmagazine.org/transpo ... ch-issues/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Snipet of relevance to this particular thread:

... Brian Shortsleeve, the T’s acting general manager and chief administrator, said seven of the T’s new locomotives have suffered turbocharger failures this year. He said those trains are under warranty and repairs will not cost the T anything, but their loss has led to trip cancellations and been disruptive to passengers.

Leslie Aun, the spokeswoman for Keolis, said another new locomotive suffered turbocharger failure on Monday, bringing the total since the beginning of the year to eight. She said the turbochargers, which inject oxygen into the engine, were failing because their fan blades were shattering and they were leaking oil into the engine. Aun said Keolis is repairing the eight turbochargers and plans to change out all of them. ...