The case for freight locomotives as passenger power

[dowlingm]

Separate power and generation in daily service in Ireland (well, when there isn’t a pandemic)

Enterprise: EMD 12-710 at one end, generator van behind the power, De Dietrich coaches, NPCU at the other end; 90mph
Cork-Dublin EMD 12-710, CAF coaches, CAF APCU; 100mph

The same class locomotives (201 class) without push pull coupling etc fitted operate some freight movements but others are currently stored.

The Enterprise used to get HEP off the prime mover, but it meant 201s had to be rotated on and off the service because of the frequency with which failures occurred. Some Mark 3 generator vans were refitted to operate as push pull when that fleet was mostly scrapped.

Ontario Northland also uses GP38s and APUs but last year acquired a couple of F40s fitted with generators. Not sure if they are intended to be APCUs or just APUs though.

[Tadman]

I haven't seen them lead yet, but few pictures get out of the great north.

But that also raises an interesting point. The F40 was a freight locomotive, so was the F59. So was the MP36. Seems they work just fine in passenger service.

[Railjunkie]

I haven't seen them lead yet, but few pictures get out of the great north.

But that also raises an interesting point. The F40 was a freight locomotive, so was the F59. So was the MP36. Seems they work just fine in passenger service.

Yet none will fit through the Empire tunnel. Guess the idea of a new dual mode will still be on the table.

[mtuandrew]

I haven't seen them lead yet, but few pictures get out of the great north.

But that also raises an interesting point. The F40 was a freight locomotive, so was the F59. So was the MP36. Seems they work just fine in passenger service.

The F40PH and F59PH are as much freight locomotives as a Chevy Suburban SUV is a Silverado pickup truck. Shared heritage, some shared parts, and they can do some of the same things, but markedly different and continuing to diverge in parts and purpose.

The MPXpress series would be like reverse-engineering a Suburban into a frame-on-body sedan - like a modern Checker Cab I suppose - then eventually (the MP54) trading the big Chevy V-8 for a hybrid drivetrain. It may not be a conventional car, but it’s definitely not a truck anymore.

Call me back when you catch an MP36 in freight service

[GOLDEN-ARM]

I haven't seen them lead yet, but few pictures get out of the great north.

But that also raises an interesting point. The F40 was a freight locomotive, so was the F59. So was the MP36. Seems they work just fine in passenger service.

reading this makes my head hurt. when were any of those locos built for, purchased by, and operated on a freight railroad?

[John_Perkowski]

Let me be blunt.

FTs ran with the Super Chief, as did F3s, 7s, and 9s.
GP7s had steam generators, UP bought SDP-35s with steam generators, and SP bought SDP-45s with same.

There is no reason on Gods green earth Amtrak cannot buy, off the shelf, an SD70Ace or an ES44C with passenger gearing.

A locomotive is a frame, a fuel tank, an engine, electrical generators, trucks with motors, a braking system and a cab. The concept hadn’t changed since 1934, only the design and size of the parts.

It’s time for Amtrak, and the interurbans, to buy off the showroom floor again.

[David Benton]

There is no reason on Gods green earth Amtrak cannot buy, off the shelf, an SD70Ace or an ES44C with passenger gearing.

The reason is because they can buy an off the self Charger,specifically designed and far more suited to passenger service. Andrew summed it up beautifully.
I can drive my wifes tank to work , but I prefer the little zippy car , which is way more suited to commuting. Well, actually I drive my ute , with all the farm tools inside , but thats because I usually go to the farm after work.
Horses for courses.

[ApproachMedium]

Theres a perfectly good reason why amtrak cant buy those things. They are too heavy. and none of them are going to do over 75mph without riding horribly and possibly causing a rough ride for the coaches. Freight cars do not care. We lest forget the F45 fiasco?

Even with the F40s there was problems with the trucks and ride quality, truck hunting at higher speeds etc so modifications were made to the frame and special dampers were added to try and keep the things tracking straight. No matter what happens in the end, amtrak is not going to buy freight locos for off corridor stuff because every single one of them is too heavy. The only possibility of such would be the auto train because of its limited exposure to amtrak specific rails, however, this would require some kind of facility to maintain these things on either end of the auto train network. You would possibly loose the ability to bring them thru the virgina ave tunnel because of clearances. I am not exactly sure what they are but usually when they bring stuff in to DC thats freight power it comes in from the north end.

[DutchRailnut]

thanks for that post , a lot of people who ride cushions do not understand locomotives ride way worse.

[ApproachMedium]

thanks for that post , a lot of people who ride cushions do not understand locomotives ride way worse.

im sure it could have been better written but yes, the freight guys can come and vouch for me that most locos esp heavier freight junkers do not ride well.

For the record, as an engineer you can def feel the difference in weight operating a P32ACDM vs the P42. The P42 is lighter and rides better. The P32 is heavier and tends to bottom out a lot.

[photobug56]

Doesn't that suggest a problem with the suspension? That it's not beefed up enough for the heavier locomotive?

[Tadman]

I haven't seen them lead yet, but few pictures get out of the great north.

But that also raises an interesting point. The F40 was a freight locomotive, so was the F59. So was the MP36. Seems they work just fine in passenger service.

reading this makes my head hurt. when were any of those locos built for, purchased by, and operated on a freight railroad?

Aren't you a freight railroader? I'm sure you know the F40 is a GP40 with a funny body. Same frame. Same engine. Some most everything but it's got a shaft-driven HEP and a funny body. There is almost no difference.

Same with the F59. There is no magic here. The ghost of Charles Kettering did not come down from the Heavens and create a new dreamy passenger locomotive. A stylist from GM was loaned to EMD and they put a cowled and also a semi-streamlined body on a GP60 frame. Same ladder frame. Similar 710. Similar traction motors, different gear ratios.

And yes, plenty of ex-Amtrak F40's wound up hauling freight and Via loaned CP a handful when CP was very short of power. Also, because the F40 was basically a GP40 in a cosmetically different body, Railworld was able to strip that GP40 heart out and transplant it into some former Soviet engines in Estonia around 2000.

But this is all wikipedia level information .

[ApproachMedium]

A Gp40 and an F40 are very much the similar machine yes. But you guys are talking about current off the shelf things. Which these things do not equate to. yea you could have a GP40 pull an amtrak train. In fact they did it. So go for it. Put a HEP motor in the back. But all you are doing at that point is going backwards in the time machine and not making any progress forward. You are running a 45 plus year old locomotive to pull passengers around in 2020.

[SouthernRailway]

It seems wasteful for Amtrak to have two locomotives on long-distance trains when one has enough power to pull the train- for example, the Crescent has been running with five cars. One freight locomotive would surely be more efficient if it could haul a passenger train.

[mtuandrew]

It seems wasteful for Amtrak to have two locomotives on long-distance trains when one has enough power to pull the train- for example, the Crescent has been running with five cars. One freight locomotive would surely be more efficient if it could haul a passenger train.

And hauling that passenger train with one passenger locomotive would be more efficient yet. A Charger weighs 50,000 lbs less at least than the lightest GEVO - probably more like 100,000 lbs - and further has two less axles worth of friction. I’m still not sure about the specific fuel consumption but would be willing to bet that a Tier 4 Charger uses less fuel per horsepower-hour than a Tier 4 GEVO.

Also, I can’t say the last time I saw a single-engine freight train. Most have at least two, even locals, since it costs railroads dearly to have a locomotive fail en route. Amtrak is sort of playing fast and loose by using only one Genesis per Regional.