New locos at UGL

 
  DBclass Chief Commissioner

Location: Western Australia
The 3800s have already gone past the 130-tonne mark so that should be acceptable, and to be honest, adhesive weights really should push past 140-tonnes to take advantage of the additional horsepower. The current 26.5-tonne axle load on the Aurizon coal lines could allow for a loco up to 159-tonnes now.
Sulla1

Something I cannot understand. Heavy wagons and light locomotives. I would think that 80 odd wagons would do more damage then 3 locomotives.

However it may be difficult to add 29 tons to a locomotive after manufacture. that would be nearly 4m3 of steel if they decide to do it after.

Sponsored advertisement

  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

Something I cannot understand. Heavy wagons and light locomotives. I would think that 80 odd wagons would do more damage then 3 locomotives.

However it may be difficult to add 29 tons to a locomotive after manufacture. that would be nearly 4m3 of steel if they decide to do it after.
DBclass

I'm hearing you DB, I was looking towards the new builds rather than retro fitting. A big effort went into the CM30-8 and GT42CU-AC designs to stay within the 20-tonne axle load mark...all that weight saving may not be necessary now, and locos could be built to a 'natural' weight - still may not be 159-tonnes on narrow gauge, but it could be between 140-150-tonnes looking at the current Australian standard gauge designs. Either way, it looks like the ES40ACi (or even an ES44ACi) has become an option for Australia now, even on standard gauge.
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
A couple of things may set the cat amongst here , fuel load and exhaust muffling . Long range tanks are bulkier as are mufflers that comply with NSW standards anyway .
  M636C Minister for Railways

A couple of things may set the cat amongst here , fuel load and exhaust muffling . Long range tanks are bulkier as are mufflers that comply with NSW standards anyway .
BDA

Fuel load shouldn't be as big a problem as with the FDL-16...

The 12V250 (GEVO-12 equivalent) weighs 20.19 tonnes dry
The 16V228 (FDL-16 equivalent) weighs 22.14 tonnes dry

and for comparison

the ME16G7C (16-710 G3C equivalent) weighs 18.37 tonnes dry.

So based on the engine weight you have nearly 2 tonnes more fuel available.

The big question is the cooling. The huge radiators and intercooler on the ES44DCi lengthens the locomotive by one full metre compared to the domestic models. While South Africa isn't the Pilbara, I understand it still gets hot there. Width may not be a problem but fitting everything into thirteen feet high might be...

I wonder if the reduction in power to 4000 from 4400 HP is driven by the need to limit the size of the cooling package? There shouldn't be a problem with putting 4000HP to rail using AC motors, even on 1067 gauge.

The PH37 MAi was designed to meet 120 tonnes gross with limited fuel. Clyde/EDI/Downer wouldn't have sold as many GT42CU AC units if they had weighed 132 tonnes. They wouldn't be working in the WA South West if they weighed that much and some lines in Queensland would not be available (PN wouldn't be able to use them on intermodal trains, for example).

With the reduction to 4000 HP for whatever reason, the new locomotive is not as much an improvement on the PH37 (300 HP rather than 700HP).

If the power reduction applied on standard gauge locomotives in Australia, why would anyone want a GEVO instead of the FDL which already provides 4350 HP, even if the engine weighs just under two tonnes more?

M636C
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

This is what GE competed with for the South African order

CAD projection

Chinese press releases are saying 3300kW. No model nomenclature or prime mover vendor stated

http://news.sciencenet.cn/upload/news/images/2014/3/20143181849136530.jpg

Image may be compressed, but only 5 doors to engine compartment which may suggest a high speed diesel?

With 4400 HP is 10% up on the ES40ACi
  M636C Minister for Railways

This is what GE competed with for the South African order

CAD projection

Chinese press releases are saying 3300kW. No model nomenclature or prime mover vendor stated

http://news.sciencenet.cn/upload/news/images/2014/3/20143181849136530.jpg

Image may be compressed, but only 5 doors to engine compartment which may suggest a high speed diesel?

With 4400 HP is 10% up on the ES40ACi
jmt

There isn't an MTU 4000 in that power range.

The Cummins QSK95 is shown as 4200 HP in the brochure I have, but may be good for 4400HP

13.2 tonnes, V-16, 191x210 mm, 1800 rpm.

M636C
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

Fuel load shouldn't be as big a problem as with the FDL-16...

The 12V250 (GEVO-12 equivalent) weighs 20.19 tonnes dry
The 16V228 (FDL-16 equivalent) weighs 22.14 tonnes dry

and for comparison

the ME16G7C (16-710 G3C equivalent) weighs 18.37 tonnes dry.

So based on the engine weight you have nearly 2 tonnes more fuel available.

The big question is the cooling. The huge radiators and intercooler on the ES44DCi lengthens the locomotive by one full metre compared to the domestic models. While South Africa isn't the Pilbara, I understand it still gets hot there. Width may not be a problem but fitting everything into thirteen feet high might be...

I wonder if the reduction in power to 4000 from 4400 HP is driven by the need to limit the size of the cooling package? There shouldn't be a problem with putting 4000HP to rail using AC motors, even on 1067 gauge.

The PH37 MAi was designed to meet 120 tonnes gross with limited fuel. Clyde/EDI/Downer wouldn't have sold as many GT42CU AC units if they had weighed 132 tonnes. They wouldn't be working in the WA South West if they weighed that much and some lines in Queensland would not be available (PN wouldn't be able to use them on intermodal trains, for example).

With the reduction to 4000 HP for whatever reason, the new locomotive is not as much an improvement on the PH37 (300 HP rather than 700HP).

If the power reduction applied on standard gauge locomotives in Australia, why would anyone want a GEVO instead of the FDL which already provides 4350 HP, even if the engine weighs just under two tonnes more?

M636C
"M636C"


It is worth pointing out that while much of the GT42CU-AC's success could be attributed to their versatile 20-tonne axle load, of the 163 units working in Queensland, 127 work almost exclusively on 26.5-tonne lines, where higher adhesion factors are being given up for that unrealised versatility. The late nineties idea of a 120-tonne AC diesel for coal service in Queensland has probably run its course with so much of the coal network now available for heavier designs with greater tractive effort.
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

When Aurizon move to heavier 3'6" locomotives, Redbank will be redundant

I guess that the site can be re-developed, probably useless to UGL, Downer or the like as no standard gauge connection
  GT46C-ACe Assistant Commissioner

Location: Gold Coast QLD
Redbank is still used for rolling stock building and overhaul/maintenance, how will heavier locomotives make it redundant?
  M636C Minister for Railways

It is worth pointing out that while much of the GT42CU-AC's success could be attributed to their versatile 20-tonne axle load, of the 163 units working in Queensland, 127 work almost exclusively on 26.5-tonne lines, where higher adhesion factors are being given up for that unrealised versatility. The late nineties idea of a 120-tonne AC diesel for coal service in Queensland has probably run its course with so much of the coal network now available for heavier designs with greater tractive effort.
Sulla1

I seem to recall that following the original coal lines electrification, a lot of diesel locomotives were modified to alter them from coal traffic to general duties on other main lines.

I understand the main problem with diesel hauled trains on electrified lines is the slower speeds on hills, a function of horsepower and not adhesion weight. The PH37 provides more power although perhaps not quite enough, with the ability to run on non coal lines.

The GT42CU AC is at least suitable for operation on other main lines if replaced by more electrics or more powerful and heavier diesels.

M636C
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

Redbank is still used for rolling stock building and overhaul/maintenance, how will heavier locomotives make it redundant?
"GT46C-ACe"


Redbank has become too peripheral to Aurizon's Queensland operations these days. The bulk of the locos used on the North Coast Line are based in Townsville (just under 100 Aurizon diesels are based there) and almost the entire coal fleet is based at Callemondah, Jilalan and Pring - hundreds of kilometres away from Redbank...the Rockhampton and Townsville workshops are far better placed to survive than Redbank now.
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Yep cooling , knew I forgot something .
M the thing is that from a cooling point of view 4350 FDL HP probably doesn't generate much if any more heat than 4350 Evo HP .
We don't have the same draconian emissions standards for locomotives that the Yanks do so it probably isn't as much of an issue here .
An Evo 12 should be shorter than an FDL16 so it may be possible to extend the radiators further forward along the hood .

For the record what weight rail and sleepers are used on QLDS coal roads , wouldn't be 60 kg rail on the shorter equivalent of our SG 30 TAL concrete ones ?
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

60kg rail on concrete sleepers has been the standard in QLD for more than a decade now, most Aurizon coal lines are largely 60kg, so is the QR North Coast Line between Gladstone and Townsville and parts of the Mt Isa Line. There's also 47kg, 50kg and 53kg on some parts of the Aurizon coal network, and south of Gladstone the NCL is mostly 53kg almost all on concrete sleepers.
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Yeah I was just wondering because it seems Sydney Trains get hysterical about anything over 22TAL on 60Kg rail and 25-30TAL concrete sleepers . Sorry - we must be using "Long Tonnes" uniquely under wires in NSW .
What speed can you run say a 140T/23.33 TAL loco at on those coal roads ? On ST metals 22TAL at 115 is allowed but then the sky falls in .
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

Yeah I was just wondering because it seems Sydney Trains get hysterical about anything over 22TAL on 60Kg rail and 25-30TAL concrete sleepers . Sorry - we must be using "Long Tonnes" uniquely under wires in NSW .
What speed can you run say a 140T/23.33 TAL loco at on those coal roads ? On ST metals 22TAL at 115 is allowed but then the sky falls in .
"BDA"


Loaded 106-tonne coal hoppers and the 132-tonne 3800s and 71s are allowed 80km/h. At the risk of making an assumption, if the 26.5-tonne axle load hoppers can run at 80km/h, I imagine a loco with a 24-tonne axle load and steerable bogies would be given similar allowances. Intermodal on Queensland narrow gauge is allowed 100km/h between Brisbane and Townsville, but all rollingstock involved in that traffic is so far limited to 20-tonne axle loads.
  Shacks Ghanzel

Location: Sir Big Lens of the Distant Upper Hunter
Seams we are getting a bit off topic here, so to drag the thread back on topic, I have the following news.

MRL001 is sitting out in the test area at UGL BMD. It is RED !

Sory, no photo's.
  Poath Junction Chief Commissioner

Location: In front of a computer most of the time.

The MRL's should look something like this once painting is completed. IMage from the MRL  the quarterly report at http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20140129/pdf/42mcg6gc3g6ypz.pdf
  EFB5800 Chief Train Controller

Location: On my office roof.
CRL001 at UGL today. Note it still has CRL in the number boxes.



  GT46C-ACe Assistant Commissioner

Location: Gold Coast QLD
Second livery it's worn without entering service?
  EFB5800 Chief Train Controller

Location: On my office roof.
It's second livery, and perhaps it's third 'identity'. CRL numbering for supposed owner CRL, but no CRL livery was applied. Then Aurizon paintwork for supposed lease or ownership by Aurizon, but no Aurizon marking was ever applied. Now MRL paint. Looking quite sure to finally leave for an operator this time. Meanwhile, lonely old GWU010 still sits outside in banana undercoat.
  Shacks Ghanzel

Location: Sir Big Lens of the Distant Upper Hunter
Any idea on how many they are getting ?
I was told over the weekend there was a loco chassis on a truck outside Forgacs in Carrington.
  wn514 Chief Commissioner

Location: at a skyhooks concert living in the 70's
been told 6. only second hand info though.
  Wallip Chief Commissioner

Location: Perth
Just after help to update my list.

What comes after
12-484 - ACC6030
13-485 - ACC6031
13-486 - ACC6032

Where do the CRL/MRLs fit in
Cheers
  M636C Minister for Railways

Aurizon are running three rakes now, aren't they?

The new wagons are the same size, more or less, so I'd expect at least six units would be needed.

Aurizon have the six ACAs and three(?) ACCs available for this service, although these units can get involved in the Esperance traffic as well.

If they are going to run three trains each with two units, they'll need either to buy spare locomotives or PN will have to keep a couple of 93 class (or CF class) available as spares.

So I'd expect the six ex CRLs to go to Mineral Resources now and a couple more to turn up as time goes on.

M636C
  M636C Minister for Railways

Just after help to update my list.

What comes after
12-484 - ACC6030
13-485 - ACC6031
13-486 - ACC6032

Where do the CRL/MRLs fit in
Cheers
Wallip

CF4409 and CF4410 are 494 and 495
So CF4412 should be 497....

The CRLs and MRLs should be after the last batch of 93 class, unless their numbers were reserved.

I've seen 9316 but not standing still long enough...

John Cleverdon shows:

PacNat 9307 R0111-02/13-487
PacNat 9308 R0111-02/13-488
PacNat 9309 R0111-02/13-489
PacNat 9310 R0111-03/13-490
PacNat 9311 R0111-03/13-491
CFCLA CF4407 R0106-05/13-492
CFCLA CF4408 R0106-05/13-493
CFCLA CF4409 R0106-05/13-494
CFCLA CF4410 R0106-05/13-495
CFCLA CF4411 R0106-05/13-496
CFCLA CF4412 R0106-05/13-497


M636C

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: