Does Amtrak still operate this locomotives? Why they decide to discard them?
The last time I saw them they were at NRE in Mount Vernon, Illinois for disposition. They may be gone by now.
Yup. Stopped by Mount Vernon in mid-July and I did not see them there.
The F69’s were test beds for AC traction that were leased to Amtrak for operations. They rarely operated without the EMD test car while in Amtrak service.
Do you know why Amtrak decide not to use AC?
Economics. AC has two main benefits and you need to take advatage of both to “win”. The first is increased tractive effort at low speeds. If you can take advantage of this and reduce the number of locomotives on a train, you can earn back part of the increased capital cost for the AC locomotives. Even with high speed gearing, a P42 still makes more than enough tractive effort at min cont. speed to get any Amtrak over the ruling grade on any route (except maybe the SW Chief over Raton), so two units is the rule on most LD trains and one on most short haul trains. There is not much room for reducing the number of locomotives.
The second main benefit is reduced traction motor maintenance. This is a big deal for the frt roads since a third to half of the total maintenance cost of a DC locomotive in mainline service is traction motors. While sustained passenger train speeds can be hard on the commutator, it’s the high current, low speed operation that’s really tough on the motor’s windings and insulation. So, I suspect that Amtrak doesn’t spend nearly the % of total maintenance on traction motors as the frt roads do.
That’s make sense… Thanks for the info.
For the record, Amtrak’s Genesis II dual-mode has AC traction motors (hence the designation P32AC-DM; the same type of engine is used by Metro-North Railroad). A number of other passenger diesels have AC traction, like the LIRR’s DM/DE30AC and NJ Transit’s PL42AC. Motive Power’s MP36PH-3C/3S use DC traction, as does GO Transit’s new MP40PH-3C. (And of course, Metro-North had a number of FL9s rebuilt as the FL9AC.)
I always wonder why did Amtrak bought those ugly Genesis Locomotives. They should stay with F69PHAC with a Engine 12-710G3 @3,000 HP.
How could they “stay with” a locomotive they never owned (and was an experimental design, to boot), of which were a mere two examples?
The newest (and last) EMD that Amtrak operates in passenger service is the F59PHI. These are too tall (at 15’ 11") to operate in the Northeast. These have the 12-cylinder 710E3, also rated at (what is now a rather low) 3,000 horsepower; from anecdotes I received from hoggers that operate them, their acceleration is anemic.
Amtrak helped develop the Genesis type with GE, IINM. EMD could not meet the set of specifications they put out. (This is why the P40DC was originally called the “AMD-103”.)
Frankly, the design of the F69PHAC’s nose is the more homely, when put next to the design of the Genesis. However, if you’re really that much of a fan, you can always visit the lookalikes that operate in Chicago, which are the F40PHM-2 “Winnebagos”…have fun.
JT22CW:
Interested information![bow]
JT22CW:
You have the F40PHM-2 @3200 Horsepower with a 16-645E3. It has a Full-cowl carbody, steamlined cab, built-out windshield sloping back from tip of nose. If the horsepower was an issue they should kept this one. [:O]
Another good unit is the new Motivepower MP40PH-3C. It’s basically a copy of EMD stretched F40 with seperate-end power generator. We an engine of 710 can reproduce 4,000 HP. I don’t know why Amtrak doesn’t take a bite. [tup]
I’ve read that Amtrak has had availability issues with the p42s and not had them with the F59PHIs. They use them all over California and on the Portland/Seattle run.
A cowlbody passanger loco based on the SD70MAC/ACe or a 6 axle Genesis derivative would have been cool! Amtrak must still be hung over from their 1970s SDP40F experience.
I believe Amtrak actually did own the 451 for awhile, and then sold it back to EMD.
Well, Amtrak isn’t buying more units, because they don’t have the money too, not cause they’re scared off. Their situation though is the opposite of the Situation in the most powerful locomotive thread. The only route on the system that they even begin to struggle with is Raton pass on the Chief. There goal is to maintain speed on relativly short trains. In that application, BB locomotives are a better choice. I know there are many examples of C-C Passenger power, but none were very numerous.
And think about this, an E unit has 2 engines in it and the A1A truck configuration essentially means 2 traction motors per engine, so they were even higher HP/Axle then an F.
In any case, I suspect Amtrak isn’t gonna buy until they absolutely have too/They actually get enough money to do their jobs. When that does happen, I bet they’ll contract out a new design Which will need to be Tier 2 or 3 compliant, maybe even a hybrid and it will probably be DC and BB trucks.
I agree that Amtrak’s next locomotive will be BB’s not CC’s, but I disagree on the DC motors. For a given power output, an AC induction motor is lighter and cheaper than a DC motor. The prices for AC locomotives are still higher than DC, but I suspect that within a very few years that the AC locomotives will be cheaper.
A hybrid passenger locomotive makes more sense to me than a hybrid freight locomotive, the problem is that there isn’t an energy storage system with the lifetime (i.e. charge/discharge cycles) and specific energy (watt-hours per pound or kilogram) to be truly useful. Li-ion has incredible specific energy, but when the depth of discharge is limited to get 100,000+ cycles, the effective specific energy is less than the ultracaps. Flywheels might be another option, but don’t know how well they would stand up under locomotive service.
The idea of a hybrid locomotive first came to me when reading about the F69PHAC - one detail that struck me was that it could use dynamic braking power for the HEP - then thought how nice it would be to store some of that power. What would make this especially attractive is if the locomotives short term rating could be 2 to 3X the continuous rating (IIRC, the GE hybrid has a short term rating about 1.5X of the continuous rating).
Hybrid tech may make gas turbines practical as the turbine could be sized to run at full output most of the time.
I seriously doubt that hybrid technology would ever result in a resurgence of interest in gas-turbine propulsion. The outstanding problems of exhaust heat and high fuel consumption would have to be overcome, and simply putting batteries on the locomotive doesn’t mitigate that.
If the weight of B-B diesels remains at its present level, then any future diesels will have to go six-axle. The MP36PH-3S is already too overloaded per axle for certain locations on Metra. I’m surprised, for my part, that the self-steering C-C trucks have not seen passenger applications; they appear particularly suited for this, even more so than on the freight engines. (The F40C went far longer in service than any Amtrak F40PH, certainly, riding on C-C trucks the whole time; same with NJ Transit’s former U34CH U-boats.)
Amtrak needs to replace their ageing fleet of locomotives soon. Another option is to do over haul on their existing engines but that is going to cost money as well. The last option is to beg the goverment for more money.[#ditto]
Amtrak’s fleet isn’t THAT old, but remember, no matter what they choose, to do they will be begging for money from the federal government. They are afterall a federal agency. It’s implicit.
Why are the MP36 units so heavy?