Amtrak to get new locomotives

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

PerRock

Engineer
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
2,021
Location
Ann Arbor, MI
I got sent an internal press release via a friend from Amtrak (he doesn't work for Amtrak). I'll work on getting a link to it. But in essence it states that GE will be installing HEP into two Tier 4 ES44ACH locomotives to evaluate the performance of the locomotives in a "passenger-oriented environment." They mention that the current fleet of P40/2s is slated to be replaced by the end of FY 2025.

"These tests are scheduled to continue through the duration of 2017 and will coincide with future programs involving the testing of new single-level passenger equipment on long-distance trains." (Viewliners?)

peter
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Press release (potato quality, but it's all I have):

8thfMj4.jpg
 
Are those 6 axle locomotives good for at least 90 mph? Hope it's not another SDP40 in the making!
 
Can Amtrak just order new locomotives like that, without putting the contract out to tender and allowing competitors to make a bid, as happened with the Chargers etc.

If this contract is able to fly below the radar, it must be because it's a small batch, so not really a replacement for the entire P40 fleet.
 
Well, since most LD trains do not operate anywhere at 90 mph under diesel power, they can be adequately handled by locomotives that run at 80mph.

I guess the only LD trains that operate over 80mph anywhere on their run under diesel power are the SWC and the LSL. Are there any others?

All other diesel powered trains that run over 80mph are medium distance trains mostly funded by 209 State participation.
 
Amtrak is not buying anything. They're testing the locomotives. If the tests are successful, then maybe an order is in the future. If the tests are not successful, then the locomotives will go back to GE.
 
Does anyone know or even have an educated guess as to what trains these locomotives will be tested on? Also, is it known where they are coming from? Are they active freight locomotives or are they still owned by GE? I have also seen freight railroads occasionally lease locomotives from another owner that does not actively operate a railroad (I can't remember the name of the company), so that is another possibility.
 
Very interesting. Definitely throws cold water on the prospects for a Siemens Charger order (which some posters have proclaimed as being imminent). Nothing but pure speculation (premature, and way out on a limb...), but if the tests prove successful, might Amtrak opt for a cowled version of the locomotive; Essentially a P44CH ?

Are those 6 axle locomotives good for at least 90 mph? Hope it's not another SDP40 in the making!
While we'll never know for sure, there is informed speculation that had the SDP-40F been HEP equipped from the beginning, and not carried tanks for steam generators, it would not have had the tracking problems which scrapped the fleet. There have been plenty of successful six-axle passenger locomotives; I suppose an alternative for this test would have been a hypothetical SDP-70F - which would be interesting, at least.
 
the ES44AC is a design of over 10 years old , it only had 4 traction motors (A1A-A1A) so what would be gained ?? 200 hp over a P42 barely enough to make up for extra weight .

Not so sure ride is going to be comfortable at that speed in a lead sled of such dimensions. not to mention extra maintenance of the 6 wheel trucks and problems with clearances in North East ?

I doubt you will see much in terms of potential purchase, as locomotive in no way would conform to PRII requirements.
 
Yeah, maybe some stopgap leasing. That would indicate that the HEP add-on should be easy to add and remove.

Then again on trains that normally sport two engines, one could be used with just HEP Pass through cabling too, no?
 
the ES44AC is a design of over 10 years old , it only had 4 traction motors (A1A-A1A) so what would be gained ?? 200 hp over a P42 barely enough to make up for extra weight .

Not so sure ride is going to be comfortable at that speed in a lead sled of such dimensions. not to mention extra maintenance of the 6 wheel trucks and problems with clearances in North East ?

I doubt you will see much in terms of potential purchase, as locomotive in no way would conform to PRII requirements.
Something I didn't notice before (and should have), the (still unreleased) press release contains some unusual wording, and also states "new tier 4 locomotives", while the out-of-production ES44AC is tier 3. Perhaps this will be corrected (ET44C4 perhaps?), or maybe rebuilt units (with HEP addition) are to be used for the tests; If the tests are this year as indicated, they will need to start soon it would seem. But given these discrepancies, and with complete respect and not to doubt PerRock's word, how certain are we this grainy image of a (unreleased) press release is even authentic?
 
To operate at any speed for passenger service it will have to go to Pueblo and be certified for 10 MPH above final MAX speed. Is that required for freight operation ?
 
Odd choice. The Chargers would very definitely be better, absolutely without a doubt. I suppose it doesn't hurt to test the GEs but they will suck.
 
If true, this is probably being funded by GE as a last ditch effort to convince Amtrak out of getting Chargers. Do the chargers require urea to be tier 4 compliant or not?
 
If true, this is probably being funded by GE as a last ditch effort to convince Amtrak out of getting Chargers. Do the chargers require urea to be tier 4 compliant or not?
Both the Siemens Charger and the F-125 require urea to achieve tier 4 compliance, but a unit based on the freight designs from either General Electric (ET44C4) or EMD (SD70ace-t4) would not utilize urea.
 
If true, this is probably being funded by GE as a last ditch effort to convince Amtrak out of getting Chargers. Do the chargers require urea to be tier 4 compliant or not?
Both the Siemens Charger and the F-125 require urea to achieve tier 4 compliance, but a unit based on the freight designs from either General Electric (ET44C4) or EMD (SD70ace-t4) would not utilize urea.
This is probably why Amtrak might be looking to test other options than the chargers. Since the freights are strongly opposed to the use of Urea, there are no urea filling stations on the LD train routes except at the terminals. Amtrak might be looking for a non Urea option for the LDs. Most corridor trains are short enough to make the round trip with just one tank of Urea and commuter trains definitely can.
 
The freights managed to meet Tier 4 without using urea? Really?

I don't think there would be a problem with urea supply on most of the long distance trains. LA, Oakland, Seattle, Portland, and Chicago will certainly be providing urea. I'm not sure about Boston or DC, but both seem likely (thanks to MBTA, MARC, VRE). That leaves Sunnyside in NYC, Hialeah in Miami, Sanford, and New Orleans terminals. That's probably enough to cover all the LD trains except the Transcons, which might need intermediate urea refilling stations. Albuquerque already has one for RailRunner if I'm not mistaken... I would expect Salt Lake to have one for FrontRunner... it seems likely that most of the infrastructure is already going to exist.
 
Odd choice. The Chargers would very definitely be better, absolutely without a doubt. I suppose it doesn't hurt to test the GEs but they will suck.
Maybe they are trying to put some pressure on Siemens. Not that they assume they are going to get the contract for sure and set the price accordingly.
 
If true, this is probably being funded by GE as a last ditch effort to convince Amtrak out of getting Chargers. Do the chargers require urea to be tier 4 compliant or not?
Both the Siemens Charger and the F-125 require urea to achieve tier 4 compliance, but a unit based on the freight designs from either General Electric (ET44C4) or EMD (SD70ace-t4) would not utilize urea.
This is probably why Amtrak might be looking to test other options than the chargers. Since the freights are strongly opposed to the use of Urea, there are no urea filling stations on the LD train routes except at the terminals. Amtrak might be looking for a non Urea option for the LDs. Most corridor trains are short enough to make the round trip with just one tank of Urea and commuter trains definitely can.
Indeed, I've wondered the same thing. Given the freight railroad avoidance of urea after treatment, it seems an obvious question whether Amtrak would pursue a similar strategy. That means either rebuilt locomotives (which don't require tier 4) or a prime mover from GE or EMD. I've questioned, somewhat facetiously, whether it were possible to fit a 1010 based engine into the F-125 carbody (seems unlikely), but going with a six-axle design from either builder would solve such problems.
 
If real, to me there seem to be a lot of potential advantages to both GE and Amtrak.

First, an extended trial period which should sort out any issues the chassis or powerplant would have in passenger service.

Second, a passenger option (gearing and hep) to existing freight engine may have lower cost overall, and allow for a purchase of a few locomotives each year (rather than replace half the fleet all at once). This potentially could allow incremental wreck replacement as well as end of life replacement.

Third, a locomotive that can be converted to freight service might be attractive for lease holders, which might be the only practical funding method for Amtrak today.

Fourth, a standard off shelf locomotive could be maintained at multiple non-Amtrak shops, whether RR or independent contractors as long as they are equipped to service the freight version.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If real, to me there seem to be a lot of potential advantages to both GE and Amtrak.

First, an extended trial period which should sort out any issues the chassis or powerplant would have in passenger service.

Second, a passenger option (gearing and hep) to existing freight engine may have lower cost overall, and allow for a purchase of a few locomotives each year (rather than replace half the fleet all at once). This potentially could allow incremental wreck replacement as well as end of life replacement.

Third, a locomotive that can be converted to freight service might be attractive for lease holders, which might be the only practical funding method for Amtrak today.

Fourth, a standard off shelf locomotive could be maintained at multiple non-Amtrak shops, whether RR or independent contractors as long as they are equipped to service the freight version.
Makes sense, absolutely.

I've often wondered why Amtrak goes for custom designed locomotives rather than modifying something that is already pretty much commoditized.

What's the top speed an off-the-shelf freigh engine will go?

What's the top speed you can re-gear for before you start running into poor dynamics or excessive damage to track?
 
If real, to me there seem to be a lot of potential advantages to both GE and Amtrak.

First, an extended trial period which should sort out any issues the chassis or powerplant would have in passenger service.

Second, a passenger option (gearing and hep) to existing freight engine may have lower cost overall, and allow for a purchase of a few locomotives each year (rather than replace half the fleet all at once). This potentially could allow incremental wreck replacement as well as end of life replacement.

Third, a locomotive that can be converted to freight service might be attractive for lease holders, which might be the only practical funding method for Amtrak today.

Fourth, a standard off shelf locomotive could be maintained at multiple non-Amtrak shops, whether RR or independent contractors as long as they are equipped to service the freight version.
Makes sense, absolutely.

I've often wondered why Amtrak goes for custom designed locomotives rather than modifying something that is already pretty much commoditized.

What's the top speed an off-the-shelf freigh engine will go?

What's the top speed you can re-gear for before you start running into poor dynamics or excessive damage to track?
The top speed for a freight locomotive such as the ES44 is 75.
 
Back
Top