He probably means the Kockup ‘Collins’ class. These are Hedamora (Swedish) engines, and if I am not mistaken there were at least two types of locomotives that had their engines installed.
I’d be interested to hear technical details of these engines (and the T45 locomotive). They may have had problems but nothing like the woes of the 338s!
Wizlish wrote the following post 4 hours ago:
carnej1
one submarine class I am very familiar with has three 90 degree V-18 engines arranged abreast.
He probably means the Kockums ‘Collins’ class. These are Hedemora (Swedish) engines, and if I am not mistaken there were at least two types of locomotives that had their engines installed.
I’d be interested to hear technical details of these engines (and the T45 locomotive). They may have had problems but nothing like the woes of the 338s!
I shall be very careful what I say here since I am on my work terminal…
All of the Collins were built by the Australian Submarine Corporation to a Kockums design. Kockums made the hull sections for “Collins” which were welded together in Adelaide. We weren’t impressed with the Swedish welding and particularly not their flexible hoses.
After a lot of work the Collins are now operating very well but like all submarines they are not cheap to build or operate. The RAN has a very close relationship with the USN on many aspects of submarine equipment.
While Hedemora was a Swedish company, it became an Australian company after they were unable to fund the reworking of the 18 cylinder engines.
The e
Nope. 664 Cubic Inches per cylinder.
TIMZ: Then why wouldn’t EMD have used the GE displacement metrics and really had a powerful engine?
This is a clear answer…
I seem to have missed the question, however…
M636C
I think the more recent boats use CAT 3516 engines…
Certainly there is a shock qualified CAT 3516 available and we replaced the Detroit 16-149s in our FFG-7s with Cat 3516s. I’m told the crews like them and they reliably produce their rated power.
M636C
Engine dimensions are basically an historical legacy…
In the early 1930s, Winton, then a GM subsidiary developed the 201 engine which was an 8" x 10" engine with a 60 degree vee angle and in line versions. This was developed into the 201A which launched the EMC, later EMD locomotive range.
It was realised that the 201A wasn’t up to the job and a much more complex design, the 567, 8.5" x 10" with a 45 degree vee angle was developed, being installed from 1939 onward.
The engine was developed and modified, the biggest changes being the 567B which introduced more or less the current design of crankcase and the 567C which introduced the fully water jacketed cylinder liner.
In 1966 the cylinder bore was increased to 9-1/16" making the displacement 645 cubic inches. Later the stroke was increased from ten inches to eleven inches, giving a displacement of 710 cubic inches, which now looks like as far as it will go.
The reason for this progression of dimensions and displacements was to maintain a production line of engines while introducing progressive improvements.
By comparison, GE had a single engine, which started off in around 1951 as the Cooper-Bessemer FVL (and an in line version the FWL used in 70 ton switchers) and briefly appeared in export locomotives rated at 1800 HP for the V-16 before appearing as th
I admit I’m late to correct this out but I did not type the above comment, it was a quote from another poster included in one of my replies…
I would ask that people be careful when quoting to ensure that they are not inadvertently attaching my name to someone else’s comment (I try to do likewise)…
Thanks.
That’s a great explanation; thank you. I will wonder no more. 
carnej1 wrote the following post 6 hours ago:
Wizlish
carnej1
one submarine class I am very familiar with has three 90 degree V-18 engines arranged abreast.He probably means the Kockup ‘Collins’ class. These are Hedamora (Swedish) engines, and if I am not mistaken there were at least two types of locomotives that had their engines installed.
I’d be interested to hear technical details of these engines (and the T45 locomotive). They may have had problems but nothing like the woes of the 338s!
I admit I’m late to correct this out but I did not type the above comment, it was a quote from another poster included in one of my replies…
I would ask that people be careful when quoting to ensure that they are not inadvertently attaching my name to someone else’s comment (I try to do likewise)…
Thanks.
Indeed the original quote was mine…
In a recent post I correctly quoted you but the original poster’s name disappeared from the “boxed” quote through no action of mine.
I assumed that in that case, it was still clear that you posted the “outer” quote referring to the unidentified “inner” quote.
[quote user=“M636C”]
carnej1 wrote the following post 6 hours ago:
Wizlish
carnej1
one submarine class I am very familiar with has three 90 degree V-18 engines arranged abreast.He probably means the Kockup ‘Collins’ class. These are Hedamora (Swedish) engines, and if I am not mistaken there were at least two types of locomotives that had their engines installed.
I’d be interested to hear technical details of these engines (and the T45 locomotive). They may have had problems but nothing like the woes of the 338s!
I admit I’m late to correct this out but I did not type the above comment, it was a quote from another poster included in one of my replies…
I would ask that people be careful when quoting to ensure that they are not inadvertently attaching my name to someone else’s comment (I try to do likewise)…
Thanks.
Indeed the original quote was mine…
In a recent post I correctly quoted you but the original poster’s name disappeared from the “boxed” quote through no action of mine.
I assumed that in that case, it was still clear that you posted the “outer” quote referring to the unidentified