Potentially. I don’t know if GO has made up their mind about the eventual disposition of those units. Metrolink in LA will have a lot of spare F59PHs and some PHIs when their F125s finally enter full service. Those may be in worse shape though, and in need of a major overhaul.
I wonder, I’d assume the F40 is equally capable of getting an ECO upgrade as the Caltrans F59PHis got…Does the HEP tapping off the prime mover complicate that? Also, didn’t Metra just finish rebuilding the whole fleet a year or 2 ago?
This subject is a bit complicated, but here’s how it breaks down:
EMD built 26 ‘true’ F40PH-2Cs for the MBTA, which have longer frames to acommodate the standalone generator. M-K/MPI built 12 clones for MBTA, 5 for Coaster, and 3 for Caltrain and Coaster. ACE bought 3 of updated model F40PH-3. These were all built new and have rear porches.
The rest of the 'F40PH-2C’s were converted from F40PH/F40PH-2s by adding a generator to the rear of the locomotive. This eliminates the rear porch.
Metra rebuilt 41 F40PH to F40PH-3 in 2016 and 2017, I think. There are still about 35 F40PH-2 and 30 F40PHM-2 left.
The Caltrans F59PH got a 710 Eco Repower upgrade package for EPA Tier 2. That might work with a F40PH too though it has an 645 engine. MPI built its Tier 2
MPI36PH-3S with EMD 16-645 engines with HEP from the main engine using an inverter.
Metra planned to rebuild its MPI36PH-3S to MPI36PH-3c standard with seperate HEP generator. I don’t know how far they got.
Regards, Volker
Except for when the locomotive is in “stand-by” mode, which has the motor running at about 5th-notch rpm. But in “stand-by” the engine cannot move under its own power. Too bad the locomotive could not be adapted to stay in stand-by RPM’s while also be able to develop power for the traction motors. Sure would have made sitting on the locomotive awaiting departure from the downtown terminal much more tolerable (at least before the cabs were air-conditioned).