Hi All
I’m currently working on an Evolution Series Switcher locomotive Called the GE ET30ACB - a 3,000 HP road switcher with speeds of up to 90 MPH at Notch 8 full power
What do you think of it?
and yes its on a B40-8W frame the ES30ACB is on a B32-8WH frame
No wide cab on a switcher – do what ATSF did with the FP45s at an absolute minimum. I would in fact think about using a taller ‘clear vision’ orientation for the cab and windows a la Alco C415 and put a platform on an abbreviated height short hood to get the general effect of that Washington Terminal converted RS3 that was posted a while ago.
Did you anticipate getting any reactive effort at all out of that rear truck? Or braking effort in flat-switching either? Needs weight, and a lot of it.
Long frame on a switcher is dumb, dumb, dumb, even if you think someone might want to run it 90mph. It’s short so it can work with more cars in a given track, or on a given siding without fouling.
I don’t see cooling even remotely adequate for 3000 traction hp… let alone for Tier 5 levels of control without using full SCR/DEF (for which you have made little accommodation as drawn).
Good in theory, but in practice….
I just spent the past week in a wide body switching.
But would you have wanted it purpose-designed that way?
What are you doing about getting a GEVO to load quickly enough to be an effective switch engine.
Batteries. He can only do it with energy storage if some kind; three-slope control and slow acceleration to governed speed for pollution control guarantee that.
KERS (e.g. flywheel, as in wayside storage) is too easily damaged, even on resident suspension, and supercaps are sensitive to voltage spikes. The battery does not need to source full current for very long, but it must be constructed and cooled for very high and modulated peak current.
To be honest, the worst parts of it were how far the control stand is from seat, and mirror placement.
Designers failing ergonomics
When they designed the control stand, they used a 7’ tall engineer.
When they designed the bathroom, the 7’ tall engineer marked off and a 4’ tall engineer off the list was used.
