How are the GEVOs going to make the railroads so much more money than EMD units, when they’re parked and not making any money due to a defective component? Seriously, you can blame these shaft failures on the companies that produced them for GE, but ultimately they passed GE validation or they would not be in the turbos. I scratch my head wondering why GE wasn’t making these turbos themselves, considering they make the best aviation turbines.
The company bean counters are going to look at the GEVO units not being used due to a shaft failure, again a shaft that met GE validation, when they go to order more locomotives. EMD lost their lead because they got complacent, much as GE is doing now.
If GE wants to maintain unit sales, they have to show the railroads that they mean business in preventing future snafu’s such as this. It’s been said that the EMD 50 series is what relegated them to second performer status - this might well turn out to be GE’s version of the 50 series.
The SD70M-2/ACe is proving to be a seriously reliable unit. Bean counters will look at that.
As somebody who has worked a lot of years in this industry, and has first hand knowledge of the 50 series problems, I can say the GEVO problem is very minor compared to the major problems EMD had with the 50s design. EMD REFUSED to acknowledge any problems with the 50’s until they had a gun to their head. Even then, they made constant excuses why it wasn’t their problem. GE never denied the problem, and immediately sought a solution. They are not being complacent AT ALL. Bean counters are also going to look at the fact that GE’s are more fuel efficient and have better technology than new EMDs. Even Honda and Toyota have recalls for defective components. As long as they make good to their customers, they maintain their sterling reputation, and maintain repeat sales. Like I said before, railroads like the performance and economics of the GEVO over the EMD. This problem will be fixed, and the railroads will continue to order from GE. You can bank on that.
If you are the purchasing agent for a RR don’t you want to be in the position of saying “'at least not all our locomotives are this same model”? If you are a small RR don’t you have to worry more about not spreading your maintenance force over too many models?
The point is almost any mechanical monster that is built will develop some kind of maintenance headache. It may happen soon or maybe later. Examples SDP40s derailing on some RRs, P-42s having traction motor lockups, SD-90s so bad production discontinued, etc. If XYZ RR had bought SD90s in quantity our discussion might be of them?
Now if your RR is so tight on equipment that a 20% failure of any type slows down your operation that may be different. Maybe CN?
An SD50 has lower axle loads than a GP40-2. 390,000 over 6 axles is 65,000# per axle. 270,000 over 4 is 67,500#. The difference is often more about the curves on the line rather than the weight.
The concerns about 6 axle locomotives is more about the longer wheelbase of the 3 axle truck, vs the wheelbase of the 2 axle truck on a 4 axle locmotive. Axle loading is a secondary concern. Thus the development of the the Steerable truck by both EMD and GE as an option on their 6 axle offerings in recent years.
Well we’re getting off topic. I wonder if you railroad types, especially shop forces could tell us what the GE trouble shooting guide has to say about what to look for if the exhaust gets a little smoky and how to check a turbo(not running) for bearing clearance such as end play( thrust bearing wear) and side-to-side clearance if any. I was wondering about these smoky locomotives progressing many miles without any one of the crew noticing the smoke and the engine itself not shutting down or the computer seriously derating the engine to solve the low boost pressure/smoke problem. I’m not sure but on ships the engineer can get in serious trouble in some areas for excessive smoke but the captain on the bridge should be watching out for that. There’s plenty of people in the engineroom to deal with it. The locomotive engineer is undoubtedly focusing his attention well forward to deal with unexpected obstacles.
We are off topic still. Why don’t you start a new post on how the EPA changed my life or something. I’m still waiting for GE’s helpful hints on turbo troubleshooting. I guess that those who would know are up to their … ah, armpits in alligators right now.
After contemplating this thread I’ve noticed that the CSX freights passing by are over powered when using GEVOs. Because I am not in a heavy throttle area I cannot tell but it appears that they are running at a lower throttle setting to save the turbos. Any of you CSX people know??