How com there are makeind 13 sd70s for Australian and ween metra wanting 27 units there told metra that was a big order so tha why metra went to mpi so is 13 more then 27 no no we have to put up with the mp36s in chicago i hate them i wish emd made metra some f59s i know there be alot better then the mps and wont brake down all the toime it said to see the f40c get replace by some junk made in a farm somewere out in idaho
Railroad Forums
Why didnt Emd make units for Metra
- 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
The reason is EMD doesn't make new units with the 645 engine in them. Metra wanted locomotives with 645s for parts standardization, and MPI was the only company willing to do that. Also, MPI was the lowest bidder and public agencies like Metra are often required to go with the lowest bidder whether they like it or not.
Last edited by scottychaos on Wed Dec 22, 2004 3:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The reasons that Metra went to MPI for their units is because they were the only manufacturer that met the bid specifications. The crashworthiness standards have changed since EMD and GE built their last passenger locomotives, and both must have decided that the cost of designing a new unit from the rails up was not cost effective for a 27 unit order.
There is more to designing a locomotive than throwing a hood over an engine and trucks and then deciding how to paint it. Some things like frame harmonics, weight distribution, noise supression, interaction of lateral, buff and draft forces, crashworthiness, etc., etc., all have to be carefully evaluated and considered.
I think you better be careful about throwing around the term junk in relation to the MPI units. Most of the components used in their construction are either the same ones used by EMD (air brakes, radiator cores, air compressor, etc.), or derivatives of EMD designs (prime mover, traction motors, trucks, alternator, etc.) The carbody construction is similar in design to a F59PHI, with the extra space for the separate HEP plant.
And, no, they aren't built on a farm. For information on how these locomotives were designed and built there is an excellent article in the May / June 2003 issue of Diesel Era.
Before you bad-mouth these, or any other locomotive by any manufacturer, you better have some facts to back you up, instead of spouting off like some railroader wanna-be foamer.
There is more to designing a locomotive than throwing a hood over an engine and trucks and then deciding how to paint it. Some things like frame harmonics, weight distribution, noise supression, interaction of lateral, buff and draft forces, crashworthiness, etc., etc., all have to be carefully evaluated and considered.
I think you better be careful about throwing around the term junk in relation to the MPI units. Most of the components used in their construction are either the same ones used by EMD (air brakes, radiator cores, air compressor, etc.), or derivatives of EMD designs (prime mover, traction motors, trucks, alternator, etc.) The carbody construction is similar in design to a F59PHI, with the extra space for the separate HEP plant.
And, no, they aren't built on a farm. For information on how these locomotives were designed and built there is an excellent article in the May / June 2003 issue of Diesel Era.
Before you bad-mouth these, or any other locomotive by any manufacturer, you better have some facts to back you up, instead of spouting off like some railroader wanna-be foamer.
it that why everone i know that work for metra hates them then all there do is brake down and how come ween i watch them u can see a f40ph move fater then them just becasue there have 3600 hp doesnt mean anything too me and any time i ride a train with one it late
You must not be a locomotive engineer. Only a person who has never operated a locomotive would want their railroad to buy F59s.
Internally, these locomotives are basically EMDs. You could call them "EMD F50PH-3"'s and that would be fairly accurate.
Internally, these locomotives are basically EMDs. You could call them "EMD F50PH-3"'s and that would be fairly accurate.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
A couple of reasons for the Metra order not going to EMD include the fact that Metra wanted a unit powered by the 645 series prime mover so that they can keep a standardized parts inventory. Another reason is that EMD would have had to design a totally new locomotive to meet the new crash worthiness standards that had been adopted. This would have been very costly to do, especially for a locomotive that would only fit a certain market, passenger/commuter service. It would have been a specialty locomotive.
The SD70ACe's that are on order for BHP Billiton Iron Ore are not a specialty model. This is EMD's new AC traction locomotive that is replacing the SD70MAC (as is the SD70M-2 replacing the current SD70M). These are standard locomotives just like the 20 units that CSX is testing and the 4 EMD demo units, not to mention the 16 that Montana Rail Link has on order and 115 for UP.
More or less, the Austrailian SD70ACe order and the Metra MP36PH-3S orders have nothing in common. You need to know the facts before running your mouth on something you obviously know nothing about.
Bryan
The SD70ACe's that are on order for BHP Billiton Iron Ore are not a specialty model. This is EMD's new AC traction locomotive that is replacing the SD70MAC (as is the SD70M-2 replacing the current SD70M). These are standard locomotives just like the 20 units that CSX is testing and the 4 EMD demo units, not to mention the 16 that Montana Rail Link has on order and 115 for UP.
More or less, the Austrailian SD70ACe order and the Metra MP36PH-3S orders have nothing in common. You need to know the facts before running your mouth on something you obviously know nothing about.
Bryan
The last time EMD built units for Metra they had to re-open the assembly bay at the La Grange plant, because the Metra units were funded with a requirement for a particular minimum percentage of US content. They could not achieve the required content with assembly in Canada. Now that the original La Grange plant has been demolished they would probably have to partner with another company that has a US assembly site in order to meet the content requirement. This makes the estimating and bidding process to compete for passenger locomotive business an extremely complex undertaking. Boise (MPI) is part of Wabtec and has no problem meeting the content requirement.
The Boise units are what they are because they are what Metra requested in their RFP. Metra prefers to have both HEP and propulsion supplied by the same diesel engine, the main advantage being potentially lower maintenance costs. However, any time you have both the transmission system and the head end power driven off a single prime mover, whether with a gear box driven generator or a static inverter like the Metra units have, if the diesel engine shuts down for ANY reason you not only can't move the train but you can't heat, light or cool the train either.
Many other public transportation agencies prefer units with the HEP supplied by a separate diesel generator so that if the main engine shuts down you still have the HEP engine operable and can still keep the passengers relatively comfortable until help arrives, and if the HEP engine shuts down the main engine is still available and you can still complete the run or at least get to the next station. The disadvantage with separate HEP engine and main engine is that you have the extra expense to maintain two diesel engines in one locomotive, plus if either of the two engines has a problem the locomotive is tied up for maintenance.
You can debate the advantages and disadvantages of each method all you want. I get to look at the availability figures for units with both types of systems every day of the week, so debates aren't of much interest to me.
The Boise units are what they are because they are what Metra requested in their RFP. Metra prefers to have both HEP and propulsion supplied by the same diesel engine, the main advantage being potentially lower maintenance costs. However, any time you have both the transmission system and the head end power driven off a single prime mover, whether with a gear box driven generator or a static inverter like the Metra units have, if the diesel engine shuts down for ANY reason you not only can't move the train but you can't heat, light or cool the train either.
Many other public transportation agencies prefer units with the HEP supplied by a separate diesel generator so that if the main engine shuts down you still have the HEP engine operable and can still keep the passengers relatively comfortable until help arrives, and if the HEP engine shuts down the main engine is still available and you can still complete the run or at least get to the next station. The disadvantage with separate HEP engine and main engine is that you have the extra expense to maintain two diesel engines in one locomotive, plus if either of the two engines has a problem the locomotive is tied up for maintenance.
You can debate the advantages and disadvantages of each method all you want. I get to look at the availability figures for units with both types of systems every day of the week, so debates aren't of much interest to me.
This is a subject I was curious about as well, as it seems EMD has officially been out of the passenger locomotive market in the US for quite some time, unfortunately.
I realize that one order for 26 locomotives by itself might not be much for EMD to get excited about, but when you consider that just about every one of Metra's locomotives (assuming a 30yr life span, with last production in late 80s) will need to be replaced in the next 10yrs, plus a big potential order from GO Transit in addition to all the other commuter agencies current and future needs, there would be more than enough business out there to justify a current production model. But then again, I don't work for EMD and don't know what their ROI requirements are.
I guess time will tell if the MP36 order was a one-time event (like the F40Cs), or if not we must all become comfortable with them as they will be the ONLY locomotive here in Chicago commuter service in the future.
And I agree with the post above about the F59PHIs, we are better off without them here. I was working for Amtrak in Los Angeles at the time of their initial deliveries to Metrolink in the late 90s, and they were and continue to be both rough riders and maintenance nightmares for the folks out there. I'd love to see EMD come out swinging with something new and great, but I might be waiting quite some time.
I realize that one order for 26 locomotives by itself might not be much for EMD to get excited about, but when you consider that just about every one of Metra's locomotives (assuming a 30yr life span, with last production in late 80s) will need to be replaced in the next 10yrs, plus a big potential order from GO Transit in addition to all the other commuter agencies current and future needs, there would be more than enough business out there to justify a current production model. But then again, I don't work for EMD and don't know what their ROI requirements are.
I guess time will tell if the MP36 order was a one-time event (like the F40Cs), or if not we must all become comfortable with them as they will be the ONLY locomotive here in Chicago commuter service in the future.
And I agree with the post above about the F59PHIs, we are better off without them here. I was working for Amtrak in Los Angeles at the time of their initial deliveries to Metrolink in the late 90s, and they were and continue to be both rough riders and maintenance nightmares for the folks out there. I'd love to see EMD come out swinging with something new and great, but I might be waiting quite some time.
I doubt we'll see any new passenger locomotives from EMD anytime soon, or at least until it gets sold (supposedly "very soon" at any given time). My reasoning behind this is that GM is a car company, and their #1 concern is of course selling cars. If they made passenger locomotives, that would indirectly cut into their car profits and we all know how money hugry the automakers are. If EMD ever does get sold that would be the best thing that ever happened to it. Right now it sticks out like a sore thumb in the vast assets of GM, because unlike cars if you can't build a reliable locomotive then your business will leave. Cars have a sort of sheep-like following, where people will buy a certain brand because that's what they've always bought, even if there are better choices. If there's a GE that's better than an EMD, then the railroads will buy it - there isn't any brand loyalty in the industry, whoever makes the better product gets the business. It's always kind of bothered me that EMD was the only part of GM that was "honest" in the way it got it business, through reliability and an overall good product, unlike the automobile sector which is all about planned obsolescence and making the customer pay more for options they don't really need.
Five MP36s will be built for New Mexico commuter rail this year. The press release called them "MPXpress" locomotives and said they will be similar to the units built for Caltrain.
Good news for Wabtec/MPI.
Good news for Wabtec/MPI.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
good news for MPI, another potential order for EMD gone. If my tally is correct that is somewhere between 70 and 80 million dollars in locomotive business MPI has gotten with the MP36. Not a small chunk of pocket change for any company, and there is a lot more out there in the future.
As to the EMD sale, i too think that the sooner the better. It has not been a focus of GM at all, and the results speak for themselves. I wonder if they knew how much business they would lose when they awarded UP the western haulage contract for new automobiles. I cringe when I think about how many GE locomotives have been ordered by BNSF over the last few years because they are 'supposedly' upset with GM over that decision. I think we can thank UP for almost single handedly keeping them in business recently.....
We'll know in the next year or two whether EMD intends to be any kind of a player in the passenger market. I hope they are at least taking part in discussions with commuter agencies, as there are a couple of them that need to do some serious shopping coming up. The midwest high speed rail initiative for one is going to need a lot of equipment when that gets started, plus metra expansions and other projects around the country. Sure would be nice to see some new EMD builders plates out there hauling fast passenger trains again.
As to the EMD sale, i too think that the sooner the better. It has not been a focus of GM at all, and the results speak for themselves. I wonder if they knew how much business they would lose when they awarded UP the western haulage contract for new automobiles. I cringe when I think about how many GE locomotives have been ordered by BNSF over the last few years because they are 'supposedly' upset with GM over that decision. I think we can thank UP for almost single handedly keeping them in business recently.....
We'll know in the next year or two whether EMD intends to be any kind of a player in the passenger market. I hope they are at least taking part in discussions with commuter agencies, as there are a couple of them that need to do some serious shopping coming up. The midwest high speed rail initiative for one is going to need a lot of equipment when that gets started, plus metra expansions and other projects around the country. Sure would be nice to see some new EMD builders plates out there hauling fast passenger trains again.