Does GE still suport the HDL engine?

[dash7]

Hi, i was wondering if GE have droped the deutz hdl series engines? and if so, do GE still supply the parts? ie:power assemblies etc? or do railroads buy second hand from dealers? or did they pause production on the HDL due to tier 2?, or is it from major failures in the design?(which i have heard) cheers dash7

[MEC407]

The new GEVO engine is basically just an improved 12-cylinder version of the HDL.

Additionally, I would assume that some of the HDL engines around the world are still under warranty -- so GE would still have to support them with parts, etc.

To my knowledge, most of the early problems with the HDL have since been resolved. If it was a bad design, they wouldn't have used it for the basis of the GEVO.

[Peter Radanovic]

Yeah, since GE seems to be advertising spare parts, they must sell the smaller cylinders and pistons, used on their V-16s.
Like EMD, GE has customers who do not base themselves in a country so environmentally developed. Doesn't the Blue Tiger run off of the 4000-hp V-16 used on the C40-8?

[dash7]

Thanks, MEC 407 and Peter, i guess they are still in production,which is a good thing as all that devolopment and cost will be redeemed.i didn't know that GEVO loco's used the HDL12 and get 4000-4500HP?,it kinda reminds me of the C30-7A which i think used the FDL12 and still managed to develop 3000hp over the phase 2 C30-7's FDL16.Its like history repeating itself! thanks, dash7

[Bryanjones]

GE still supports the HDL prime mover, but it is nolonger available in other products. The HDL design was a failure with many problems. Many of these problems were corrected, but the damage was done. The HDL design was reworked and reengineered to correct the flaws of the original engine and to produce what is now called the EVO prime mover. From the information I have gathered, the biggest difference in the HDL and the EVO is a completely redesigned crankcase for the EVO, something that was a major weak point in the HDL.
Its hard to say for sure what will happen to the locomotives equiped with the HDL prime mover, which was only used in the AC6000CW and only ordered by 3 railroads. 4 of BHP Billiton Iron Ore's 8 AC6000CW's have been reengined with 16 cylinder EVO prime movers, partially to test this design before it is used in production of 300 new 6000hp units that GE will be building for China. Presumably GE funded this repowering not only to allow for testing the prime mover but also as a move to improve performance of these units. This could be done to the CSX and UP units, but cost would be the greatest factor, particularly due to modifications which could be necessary to the cooling systems on the US units to allow them to meet proper emissions regulations. This is not an issue for BHP and the units still have the original cooling system, but this would be different here in the US because the diesel engine itself is not the only factor when it comes to meeting these standards but also involves cooling and exhaust systems. (in simple terms not just swapping the HDL for a 16 cylinder EVO).

Bryan Jones
Brooks,KY

[Allen Hazen]

Interesting news, Bryan Jones!
I haven't seen much since the original press release about the Chinese order-- original p.r. wasn't even clear as to whether these units would be powered by EVO-16 or by the original HDL engines!
--
There were good reasons for the original AC60. UP had done computer simulations that showed its heavy fast freights could be handled more economically by a smaller number of 6000hp units than by a larger number of 4400hp ones. (Not surprising, given that they often have over 20,000hp on a train!) I would assume the same economics would apply to BNSF too. So my (personal, amateur, outsider) guess is that as soon as the EVO-16 has some sort of record for reliability, we will see domestic orders for "ES60" units. In Yellow, and very likely in Orange: operational needs in the Eastern U.S. are different enough that we might not see Blue ones immediately, and the Black-locomotive crowd seems to like standardizing on lower-powered units with DC traction motors.

[D.Carleton]

Please don't misunderstand me, the idea of the horsepower war heating up again between EMD and GE is front row entertainment. What irks me is the necessity to travel halfway around the world to test the latest version of a new engine. UP has over 100 underpowered AC44's on the roster capable (in theory) of a 2000 hp upgrade. UP's system is vast enough to achieve thorough testing in all manners of service. But this shan't happen due to bureaucratic interference. Shame.

[Bryanjones]

Interesting news, Bryan Jones!
I haven't seen much since the original press release about the Chinese order-- original p.r. wasn't even clear as to whether these units would be powered by EVO-16 or by the original HDL engines!
--
There were good reasons for the original AC60. UP had done computer simulations that showed its heavy fast freights could be handled more economically by a smaller number of 6000hp units than by a larger number of 4400hp ones. (Not surprising, given that they often have over 20,000hp on a train!) I would assume the same economics would apply to BNSF too. So my (personal, amateur, outsider) guess is that as soon as the EVO-16 has some sort of record for reliability, we will see domestic orders for "ES60" units. In Yellow, and very likely in Orange: operational needs in the Eastern U.S. are different enough that we might not see Blue ones immediately, and the Black-locomotive crowd seems to like standardizing on lower-powered units with DC traction motors.

Even once the EVO 16 is proven I have my doubts about new 6000hp units returning to the rails here in the states. With the large fleets of 6000hp units that they operate, both CSX and UP have discovered that they are not nearly as versatile as they would like for them to be. In many cases two 6000hp units will be overkill, but one unit not enough. When you have a pair of units on a train and one of them dies this may leave the train dead in the water or barely able to make it over the road. In heavy haul service these units are very slippery due to the power to weight ratio. The 4000-4400hp units offer much more flexibility when putting together sets of power and perform equally well in high speed service such as intermodal or in heavy haul coal service.

Bryan Jones
Brooks,KY

[alasgw]

UP has over 100 underpowered AC44's on the roster capable (in theory) of a 2000 hp upgrade. UP's system is vast enough to achieve thorough testing in all manners of service. But this shan't happen due to bureaucratic interference.

First, the AC6000 Convertibles (C6044AC in UP parlance) are not underpowered for the service they are assigned to.

Second, UP's system has already conducted all the testing necessary of 6000 HP locomotives for the past 10 years.

Third, it has nothing to do with bureaucratic interference -- there are two other reasons. Primary reason they won't be upgraded is that UP has discovered that the disadvantages of 6000 HP outweigh the advantages; secondary reason is that upgrading the EMD and GE convertibles is more complicated than expected.

You will not see GE develop a 6000 HP Evolution Series locomotive for North America unless a North American RR asks for one.

[Allen Hazen]

I recently noticed, on GE-Transportation's WWWebsite, that GE is offering two models of marine diesel engine. One is called a Model 225: I assume it is basically the same sort of critter as an FDL. (Photo looked FDL-ish, and 225 is (approximately?) the cylinder bore of an FDL in millimeters. The other was a Model 250. Is this ... GEVO? HDL? some hybrid of the two?

(My recollection is that, back in the early Cretaceous when the AC60 and HDL projects were first announced, with the HDL a joint project of GE and the German company Deutz, the scheme was that GE would manufacture the big, V-configuration, versions of the HDL engine for rail and non-rail applications, with Deutz doing the marketing and support for non-rail applications. But a lot of water has gone under the bridge since then: the GE-Deutz partnership ended in a lawsuit, and GE put a lot of money into developing an alternative engine design-- the GEVO-- at least for locomotive applications.)

[alasgw]

The other was a Model 250. Is this ... GEVO? HDL? some hybrid of the two?

Comparing the crankcase of the GEVO with that of the 250 I would say they are the same.

[MEC407]

Here is the page with marine engine info:

http://www.getransportation.com/na/en/m ... gines.html

Note the part where it says, "Our V228 engines (formerly 7FDM)..."

FDM was the marine version of FDL.

I wonder why they changed the name...?

Here is the page about the V250, which I guess we can assume is the new name for the marine HDL (HDM?):

http://www.getransportation.com/na/en/v250.html

The article makes references to "the H system" which would be a possible indicator that this engine is, or is related to, the HDL. It certainly looks like it in the photo.

[alasgw]

I have compared the photo of the bare crankcase in the PDF brochure for the 250 with a photo I have of a bare crankcase for the GEVO -- they are the same.

The HDL crankcase is no longer in production.

[Allen Hazen]

Obviously I should read more carefully: I hadn't noticed the bit about the 228 being the engine formerly known as FDM... and 228 is closer to the bore than the 225 I erroneously quoted in my previous post. (Actual bore is given, in the pdf for the 228-- I hadn't gotten that far-- as 228.6 mm, which is exactly 9 inches.)

As for the 250... I take Alasgw's remarks about the bare crankcase as conclusive: this IS the marine GEVO. There's something funny about the turbocharging, though. The pdf brochure boasts of an improved turbo, and showsd a "two-handed" gizmo like the one used on the 228, but the photos of complete engines appear to show twin turbos on a 12-cylinder 250 engine. (GEVO 12 cylinderr engines for locomotives have single turbochargers, don't they?)

(B.t.w.-- I mentioned a technical article about the GEVO engine in an old post, "GEVO numbers," now on the second page of the GE forum index. I think a copy of this is available as a file at the "GElocos" Yahoo group, and I think I can send a pdf copy to anyone who wants one if it isn't already available on the web.)

[Allen Hazen]

Hmmm... I THOUGHT the pdf of the tech article mentioned was a "file" at GElocos, but it doesn't seem to be. Given the trouble I've had with computers in recent months, I'm not 100% confident that I have a sendable copy, but reasonably: if you want, e-mail me and give me an address....