What is wrong with this locomotive?

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 00:38:13 -0500, Ignoramus10926


I had to wait for two of those engines labeled "Canadian Pacific" shunted cars in their local yard this morning.
--

Gerry :-)}
London,Canada
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Do they carry mail for Canada Post ?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 19:33:04 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"

No, that would have been "Canadian National", CP was the money making line.

--

Gerry :-)}
London,Canada
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Slower than molasses.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That is a 'Monster' - it is longer than normal and has a 'ventilated' rear power unit. Looks like the repair shop took a unit that smashed up the cab but had a good generator and made a monster for long coal cars or heavy loads.
Martin
On 6/28/2013 7:34 PM, Ignoramus10926 wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Does it have two engines?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In rec.crafts.metalworking,

Looks like it is spelled right on the other side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwlzUmBlIB8

It is on screen starting at 20s to 34s.
And it's correct here:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?idU8546 Date: 11/4/2006 Location: Hot Springs (subdivision), UT
Also correct here:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id 27799 Date: 7/1/2008 Location: Railroad/Marshall, El Paso, TX
I can't find any other photos newer than last year and all of them seem to have it right. I suspect a repair with painted siding that didn't match.
Elijah ------ or photoshop
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree with this assessment. Even so, they really should have immediately corrected or hid the misspelling to avoid a PR disaster.
Whether or not anyone at UP actually cares, is another matter all together
Erik
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's probably the standard issue 4400 hp unit, or prthaps the 6044 convertable variant, fairly common.
"The AC4400 (or C44AC) was GE's initial entrant into the AC-traction market, and has proven extremely successful. Debuting in 1995, it has evolved into several different versions over time, adding power-management and emissions features to increase its flexibility and be more environmentally friendly and effecient"
http://www.actionroad.net/UPRRintheRockies/UP_Roster_GE.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 19:34:43 -0500, Ignoramus10926
Somebody can't spell! :)
Front loco. and the one behind it have the same spelling error
Bob rgentryatozdotnet
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

How did you ascertain that??
--
EA


>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The "Union Pacif" part of the name is on brighter yellow panels than the "ific" part - and also several inches higher on the loco - so I suspect side panels from a different loco have been installed.
The sign is correctly spelled on the loco in the background. You can see this same engine (UP5720) in motion - sighns correct - at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0ngPDZw08k
Also here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPUUmQercbw

It is a GE AC4400CW with Computerized Tractive Effort option - 4400 HP AC traction motors built between 1993 and 2004. Union Pacific alne owns 1338 of these locomotives.
AC indicates AC traction motors (with separate inverters for each motor for speed control). The 4400 is the horsepower, the C indicates 6 axle trucks (in place of the B series 4 axle trucks) and the W signifies the "americannsafety" or "wide" cab. The same basic trainwas also built with 6000 HP as the AC6000CW series.
See :
http://images.wikia.com/locomotive/images/d/de/UP_AC4400CW_with_CNW_OLS_logo.jpg
for an AC4400CW-CTE and note the location of the final "IFIC" of the signage and imagine it on the opposite side. The "Operation Lifesaver" and "we deliver" Are missing on the picture in question
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Notice the size of the fuel tanks.... holy shit.... Plus, in very cold weather, some railroads leave these diesels on 24/7. Breathe deep.... These hyooge diesels cannot navigate all track, even assuming the correck gauge.
Ed H. should note that these diesel-ELECTRICS accelerate just fine off the throttled diesel generator.... Heh, which bodes quite well for the plain ole otto-cycled AngstMobile, I"m happy to say.
These diesel electrics also run hyoooge (often) Quincy air compressors, for the train-line braking system. Also inneresting is that in at least some diesel-electric designs, the generator also acts as the starter motor for the diesel -- super cool, imo.
Personally, I think 6,000 hp in one unit might be a bit much. The torque at the wheels is so high, there isn't really enough coefficient of friction to take full advantage -- esp in the rain. Spinning steel wheels can quickly put divets in rail, rendering it useless, dangerous. Mechanically more efficienct -- esp on the couplers, rail, etc -- would be to have several smaller diesels spread throughout the freight consist. Unless the consist is SO large, so heavy, they need these 6,000 hp behemoths spread throughout the consist.
Smaller utility diesels can have a mere 350 hp.... and what they can pull is fukn amazing -- altho their capacity rapidly decreases up grades. But a mere 1,000 hp can haul well over 1 million pounds, up grade.... altho how fast is another issue. Heh, sort of like the AngstMobile, with its get-me-TF-home backup genset.... LOL
--
EA





Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

All of them do it. They use water instead of antifreeze and cannot allow it to freeze.

And gentle for the motor.
i
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Well, I don't know about water. The diesels I'm familiar with use antifreeze. Why would diesels, big or small, use pure water?? For a variety of reasons, corrosion just one among them.
The main reason, afaict, is like trucks: cold-weather starting of diesel fuel. The only reason not to leave the engine running would be electric heat for, well, everything fuel related, which might burn more energy than letting the engine idle.

Why especially gentle?? I figgered it was pure economy of function.
--
EA


>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 19:34:43 -0500, Ignoramus10926
Nothing - they recycled some of the doors from another locomotive that had the lettering laid out differently - note the background yellow is more faded on the forward doors. They save everything that's still usable, and raid the boneyard for parts just like you do.
And the paint jobs are low priority, until there's a capital investment program to re-paint them al in a new color scheme. A lot of times it's "get it back in service and making us money" period.
The extra louvers on the rear doors might have been from adding dynamic braking resistors to a loco that wasn't built with them - you really don't know unless you have the shop records, or ask the engineer operating it.
That would be far from the first monster that a railroad has built - they took all the surviving EMD F series streamline locomotives and re-bodied them into freight locomotives, because you couldn't see for beans with the full bodies on them. You don't need to see close for mainline cross-country work, but you do for switching and siding deliveries.
They take locomotives with blown engines or wrecked bodies, whack off the body, and turn them into "Slugs" - powered trucks for climbing hills. At low speeds the generator in the locomotive is turning full speed and putting out full power - but the motors in the trucks can't use it all without burning up because they're creeping. (Even with external fan cooling.) A Slug gets power from the lead power unit locomotive.
Union Pacific even ran Gas Turbines for a while - Jet Engines running on #6 Bunker Oil pre-heated. And they parked under bridges and melted the asphalt off the road deck a few times... But when the supply of cheap heavy bunker oil went away (as they figured out how to crack and refine it into gasoline and diesel) so did they.
--<< Bruce >>--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Locomotives are a very simple device to control compared to predator drone aircraft.
Is anyone working on using computers and low cost foreign labor to replace all the locomotive engineers in north America? a lot of subway systems do not have a human operator on the train.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable)"
wrote:

There's not much point to dynamic braking on a diesel, no matter how big. The reason is most of the freight consist cannot brake regeneratively, and instead uses "train-line" compressed air from the diesel-driven compressors for braking -- since there are no motors on any other cars for regeneration..

Or spinning out. Traction control notwithstanding.
because they're creeping. (Even with

Thank gawd. Some railroads use jet-engine snow-blowers, and you'd think you've descended into hell, being even a few blocks (few hundred yards) from these things. Holy shit....
--
EA


>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Trains do have regenerative braking, meaning that their electric motors generate electricity to slow down the train. But that electricity is purposely wasted in the braking resistors.
i
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

*Passenger cars* with electric motors almost universally use regenerative braking. But it's pointless in diesel locomotives. If a 6,000 hp diesel is hauling a consist of, say, 100 cars, and NONE of those cars have electric motors, ergo no capacity for regen brakes, what purpose does the regen braking in the locomotive itself serve? Itsa drop in a bucket.
The diesels I'm familiar with in fact do *not* have regen brakes, and there is no real reason for ANY diesel to use regenerative brakes, unless it is shuttling around consists considerably lighter than itself. And then, in this case, the speeds are so low that regen braking is ineffective. Regen braking needs about 10 mph min, and that's often the max allowable speed in switching/train yards. Below 20 mph, regen braking is minorly effective, perhaps the "break-even" point between regen and friction.
I'm not saying there are no diesels with regen brakes. I'm saying it's pretty pointless for diesels to have them, AND not all of them do. It would be understandable, and no slight of design, if in fact few of them have regen brakes. The diesels that would benefit from regen brakes would be diesels doing a lot of solo travel, or hauling short consists at high-ish speeds. But both of these functions violate the intended purpose of diesel locomotives, and thus are likely not common scenarios.
As I mentioned, what diesel locomotives DO have are hyooge air compressors -- for about 100 psi or so trainline air pressure -- to activate the friction brakes of every single car (heh, every axle) in the consist, clear down to the caboose.
There are two ways to activate trainline brakes. One is to have huge air tanks in the locomotive supply all the trainline air for braking, right to the brake pistons. The other more efficient way is to have each car with its own reserve tank, and the air from the diesel locomotive activates electromagnetic valves in each car, which release a specific car's stored air to that car's brakes. Thus, the air from the locomotive is more of an "air signal" than the actual "brake air" or "piston air" itself -- that air is supplied by the local reserve tanks.
On electric passengar cars, each car (or every other car in a "married pair") has its own supply tank AND compressor, with the operating engineer controlling the trainline "signal air", which activates each passengar car's electromagnetic valve between the brake piston and the supply/reserve airtanks. Signal air is stored in its own tank. And these cars also have regen braking as well, which is ALSO controlled by the trainline air signal! Highspeed braking in electric passenger cars is nearly 100% dynamic or regen braking, with the friction brakes kicking in at under 20 mph.
Altho some ultra modern systems may dispense with air signalling in favor of electric signalling, new cars being delivered to the NYC subway system are ALL outfitted with the trainline air signalling system -- for a variety of reasons, also having to do with tripping the emergency brakes of trains. This too could be accomplished electrically, but to this day, air is used.
Freight consists do not generally have the dynamic/friction crossover, they are all friction.
--
EA


>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.