If i went to EMD and wanted SW600 with 6-645 750 hp engine for tight curved trackage. Would EMD sell this locomotive or would sell SW600 with no engine and tell me to import the engines.Gary
They’d ignore you or tell you to go to GE and bother them. A custom locomotive for only one sale isn’t profitable.
Out of curiosity – what is the intended service you need a locomotive of this kind to perform? Curves too sharp for an ‘ordinary’ SW are getting into Trackmobile territory…
EMD would likely tell you to pound sand – they haven’t catalogued a SW locomotive in decades. In fact to my knowledge no end-cab locomotive has been built even to comparatively large (MP-15, for example) standards for a long time, and therefore you’d be looking at an extraordinarily large special-product charge from Progress to build such a silly thing.
In fact what you want might better be answered by someone like Dave Goding, who has in fact commented already on EMD’s attempt to build a switcher with special trucks to accommodate very sharp radii (it was not of interest to any railroad and I believe he said it was ‘not proceeded with’ accordingly, but the design was an interesting one while it lasted). If I remember correctly there actually were some 6-645s produced (for use in export equipment) but certainly nothing more recent – and in any case no locomotive of that horsepower would be built today with that size frame and power assemblies; you’d use a Cummins, Cat or MTU high-speed diesel, or in fact a prime mover derived from OTR truck practice, instead, and benefit from all the parts and service and repair know-how costed down in ‘other markets’.
The ‘correct’ answer is that you’d go to LTE, or perhaps the fire sale at NRE as they close Silvis and Dixmoor, and buy the parts of some old SW you want for a pittance, then find and integrate whatever truck designs you need to get around curves and the prime mover and generator of your choice.
I would hope that whoever you talked to would not tell you to pound sand or ignore you.
But I think they would tell you nicely the same things mentioned in the previous posts.
I’ve run into some very nice corporate folks who didn’t HAVE to be nice but were anyway. Kaiser, for one, once sent me a pound of 256A aluminum alloy, just to play with.
Ed
Progress is not run by particularly nice people.
On the other hand, if you had plenty of money in your checkbook or account, they might tell you about practical alternatives to what is a relatively nonsensical railfan idea as expressed. I’m still trying to figure out why a derated prime mover is supposed to help with getting a double-truck switcher around tight curves… and not succeeding in the effort. The cause of patience would likely be better served by stating the desired operating characteristics up front, and not prescribing locomotive parts that won’t go well together even if directed by James Whale on a dark and stormy night.
That is too bad. I have worked for people like that, and it is disappointing, to say the least.
I will point out that an EMD GP20D has a minimum radius of 150’.
And that a UP SW10 had a minimum radius of 104’ (unit only).
And that a Baldwin 660 HP switcher had/has a minimum radius of 50’ (locomotive alone) or 120’ (with train).
Leaving out management attitudes, it would seem that the used locomotive market would supply many opportunities.
I look forward to the OP responding on this matter. And perhaps explaining the needs for his project.
Ed
As do I.
You would remember: wasn’t there a SW that was modified (longer truck cables?) to operate on the Baltimore street trackage that the famous ‘Dockside’ 0-4-0s were built to serve? That would be a useful example for him.
What trucks did that Baldwin 660 have? I dimly remember the Reading having a couple with really short minimum radius listed…
There was a refinery that leased a switcher from the Santa Fe which was the last EMD switcher on the roster because the curves were too sharp for bigger locomotives. The industry shut down and the switcher was cut up. Gary
I should have said the time frame was 1970 to 1980.Gary
In that case… we have some interesting possibilities. Others who have contributed to the ‘Locomotives catalogued but not built’ threads over the years will know far more than I do about how EMD would work with customers on special needs designs in those years; I can see some distinctive competence in export-locomotive practice that might become a resource for this kind of project.
So, as though analyzing this as a problem presented to EMD:
(1) what is the specific need for negotiating tight curvature, and what is the state of track structure, permissible weight loading, or other considerations involved?
(2) Why should the engine be derated below ‘normal’ for this application – or why use a 645 instead of 567 for this small application if derating it? (Keep in mind that using 645 power assemblies on a 567 and rebalancing things in the engine to suit is not done to increase power to “645 levels”, only to allow standardization of components when road locomotives largely use 645s…)
(3) does the budget permit designing or using trucks or suspensions with extremely short effective rigid wheelbase?
Personally, I’d think that in order to justify the costs of a custom design like this, you’d want additional horsepower to do ‘more’ work in a given time and thereby increase marginal revenue per crew or locomotive hour. Probably with some kind of good controlled-creep adhesion system on all wheels, if those were marketed in your period.
I believe that the OP is missing a very important point. He seems to be looking for a second generation SW1. What many don’t realize, is that although the SW1 looks small, short and cute, it’s actually the same length as all the other EMD switcher models. It’s right around 44’ OAL. The shorter hood with the bench seat below the radiator makes it look shorter, but it’s not.
I don’t know, but here’s a teeny picture:
built 4/1937. Apparently sold to Santa Fe. And resold…
Ed
Not sure who that is directed at, but I’d love to hear.
Regardless, PR/EMD sales folks would tell you politely that one new switcher is not something they would build for a number of reasons. If you wanted 50, they would be glad to help, but it would get a CAT C175 or smaller CAT engine due to the Tier 4 requirement. If you want other than a CAT or EMD engine, then they wouldn’t be polite.
To build one of anything makes no sense for EMD for a number of reasons:
-
Engineering expense - a complete set of drawings for every single part is required. Today, they only work with 3D CAD models so every piece that isn’t in the system already needs modeling, then new drawings. Then routings to make or buy each part. To design a new model takes a lot of engineering - I know the SD70ACe development was over 500,000 engineering hours. Once the first design of a model exists, they budget 10K-20K hours just for design of customer specific requirements, like cab seats, refrigerator, electronic devices, wiring and piping diagrams and drawings, horn, bell, painting and styling, etc., but most orders have more customization where it’s typical to spend 50K or more hours.
-
Tooling expense - to build the structures, especially the underframe, requires major expense to make or modify existing fixtures. If there are castings required, that’s vendor tooling. If you have to make new truck castings, you’re looking at $500K and up for patterns, flasks, and coreboxes. I doubt the switcher truck patterns exist today, so you’d have to accept rebuilt parts.
-
Service expense - anything new requires new service manuals and parts catalogs plus service coverage after delivery. Training on repair and operating is part of the sale as is warranty coverage. No new model has ever worked perfectly out of the box so there is the cost of enginee
Not really serious. And certainly not intended as a real ‘dig’ at any particular people.
Thanks for providing him the definitive version he needed to hear. But you might recap the story about those special ‘flexible’ truck frames for the single-truck project you described a few months ago – those might be interesting as an alternative to bogie trucks in his use…
Would EMD sell a locomotive such as G6B in the America.Gary
It’s an interesting question. Those were license-built and had some decidedly Australian features, and I suspect that either importing production examples or arranging to build the Clyde version here would add expense over a “domestic” switcher chassis modified to take a 6-567 or 6-645. I do not know where the 6-645 blocks (there were 25 of them) were actually fabricated, or whether balance parts needed to be custom-made for them.
As Mr. Goding indicated, any such locomotive built today would have a high-speed engine, likely a Cat C175 or Cummins QSK. (There are small-locomotive builders that will sell you a MTU prime mover, too, but I think the American motors are fine.) Unless you have other locomotives with 645 power assemblies, or you have special access to parts (e.g. through arrangements with a museum or shortline) there is little point in dealing with importing a 6-645 or fabricating a block and other parts for one. None of these engines were turbo’ed, and would have the relative problems that a Roots engine has.
Back in the 1950s EMD was willing to sell export model locomotives in North America, and also build customized units.
Some G8 and G12 units were sold to Canadian National and Ontario shortline/interurban London & Port Stanley. Some of CN’s were Cape Gauge, as were the unique NF110 and NF210 units that worked alongside them in Newfoundland. And don’t forget the GMD1, most of which rode on export A1A trucks.
All of these used a lot of standard EMD parts, the GMD1 for example can be thought of mechanically as a SW1200 on a longer frame, and the NF units were a six motor version of the same.
Why does the OP’s imaginary unit need a V6 engine? Could it make do with a 8-645, blower or turbocharged? On that note, the GP15T is yet another example of a custom EMD unit, built with the lighter turbocharged engine to achieve the same power as a GP15-1 but also be able to run on the light industrial spurs found in its original home territory.
It should be noted that none of these were ‘one off’ units, they all had production runs. And I’ll bet EMD baked in the customization costs into the selling price.
The reason for the 6-645 was that the ‘customer’ specified it.
As I recall there are balance issues with the 8-645, one reason there were relatively few of them built. Thing is, he was talking about derating the six-cylinder engine; why would he need more cylinders and a complex, fragile turbocharger?
Fair enough.
Where did Clyde get their EMD engines from? Were they manufactured down under, or imported from La Grange?
It would be an additional cost, but not impossible to import a 6-645 from Australia if it turned out to be the only source.