The shape of EMD's to come

 
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

Looks like 2 new types at Muncie

Rolled out in the last couple of weeks

Saudi Railway Organisation
http://www.flickr.com/photos/95750719@N08/8938427868/
a new type, 12 cylinder or 8?
Makes a change from the SDL50-2 clones (with camel hump air-cleaners) that NREC have been supplying to SRO over the last several years.

Ferronor for iron ore haul at Vallenar in Northern Chile, meter gauge
http://www.flickr.com/photos/95750719@N08/8937802225/
Reputedly GT46C, need confirmation of actual model description, may be AC/AC
When better photos emerge will be interesting to compare with photos of the SG Comilog units for Gabon (as in the dropped loco clip)

Looks like PR are steering well away from Downer designs

The 2 meter gauge lines in Northern Chile (Ferronor and FCAB), use a loading gauge similar to the ARTC standard gauge, though FCAB (no tunnels) is currently using NF210 that are 4.72 meters to the top of engine hood

There is also an order for 50 GT38AC for Indonesia, these will probably fit in the Queensland loading gauge


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt4CFOB3wSI

Sponsored advertisement

  fleabag Assistant Commissioner

Location: Perth
More fuglies.
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

Confirmed from other overseas groups, meter gauge Ferronor locos are GT46ACs- the "s" is part of the designation. Same/similar type as Comilog in Gabon.
  DounutCereal Chief Train Controller

Location: Who knows.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/95750719@N08/8938427868/

Looks like PR are steering well away from Downer designs
jmt

I wouldn't say they're completely avoiding the design, look at those radiators. Those and the comilog units seem to share the EDI GT46C-ACe design quite closely. But that's about the only similarity I can see between them and the Australian loco's.
  VRfan Moderator

Location: In front of my computer :-p
Why would progress rail use Downer designs anyway?

With that being said, I suspect that if any Australian operator ordered GT46AC locos from Progress Rail, they would have a full width cab.
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

Why would progress rail use Downer designs anyway?

With that being said, I suspect that if any Australian operator ordered GT46AC locos from Progress Rail, they would have a full width cab.
VRfan
This is the standard gauge Comilog GT46C-ACe on which the Ferronor locos are based, indicates RP's solution for restricted loading gauge export locos

http://www.cargolaw.com/images/Disaster2012_EMD-Loco1.jpg
http://www.cargolaw.com/images/Disaster2012_EMD-Loco3.jpg

Plus the 3'6" GT38AC for coal haul in Indonesia, These units fill a niche similar to Aurizons 2250 Class, similar weight

http://www.flickr.com/photos/eko-w/7249370708/sizes/l/in/photostream/
http://www.progressrail.com/freight-locomotives-GT38AC.asp
  GT46C-ACe Assistant Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
We can speculate till the cows come home but does anyone know the actual specifics of the deal struck and what if any IP is included?
  GT46C-ACe Assistant Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
We can speculate till the cows come home but does anyone know the actual specifics of the deal struck and what if any IP is included?
  VRfan Moderator

Location: In front of my computer :-p
This is the standard gauge Comilog GT46C-ACe on which the Ferronor locos are based, indicates RP's solution for restricted loading gauge export locos
jmt

Yes, but it doesn't mean that cab would be used here.


Plus the 3'6" GT38AC for coal haul in Indonesia, These units fill a niche similar to Aurizons 2250 Class, similar weight
jmt

Given what is currently being ordered, I would think Progress Rail would need to provide an equivalent to the Downer GT42CU ACe, which is 2460kW rather than 1491 Kw.
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

Given what is currently being ordered, I would think Progress Rail would need to provide an equivalent to the Downer GT42CU ACe, which is 2460kW rather than 1491 Kw.
VRfan

I only used the 2250 reference to put the locos in context size/weight/power wise, not to suggest that they be used here, though would be ideal for the north-south line in Tasmania

Now that Aurizon's central Queensland coal network is no longer constrained by government rail practice, and no longer has to comply with the QR loading gauge, I would expect their next tranche of diesel locos to be more closely aligned with what we are seeing in South Africa and Brazil, say a 16 cylinder version of the South African 43 Class? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_Class_43-000

The arrival of UGL's PowerHaul NG prototype must be close. There is a Turkish built prototype currently on cold climate testing in Sweden
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3780/9039594003_6b184ffde5_b.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerHaul_%28locomotive%29
http://mainlinediesels.net/index.php?nav=1000357&lang=en
  GT46C-ACe Assistant Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Why does the CQ coal network not apply anymore just because Aurizon isnt a GBE anymore? Did it magically expand?
  GT46C-ACe Assistant Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
CQ coal network loading guage*

(cant seem to edit posts on mobile)
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

CQ coal network loading guage*

(cant seem to edit posts on mobile)
GT46C-ACe
A for profit operator is not going to move locos south to Brisbane for service (or retain Redbank with it's restricted access) once the sale caveat is extinguished

Aurizon will outsource loco maintenance work in Central Queensland

Why would Aurizon want to maintain the constraints of an obsolete government loading gauge when it now owns the track?
  GT46C-ACe Assistant Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Why would they spend the money to enlarge the loading gauge when they don't have to?
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

Why would they spend the money to enlarge the loading gauge when they don't have to?
GT46C-ACe
What I am saying is that the coal operation may use the largest loco possible, these units will not move outside the coal network, so why adhere to standards that allow the loco to access government controlled rail. If you need to move the loco outside of the coal network, then move it by road
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

Jmt has a valid point.The CQ loading gauge is less restrictive than the mainline network south of Gladstone while most of the Bowen Basin coal lines can now support a locomotive weighing 159-tonnes. This was not the case when the GT42CU-AC was designed, but with the situation changed a narrow gauge GT46CU-ACe shouldn't be ruled out as a future option for the Central Queensland coal lines.
  bagus70 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Wanting to revisit Australia again.
There is also an order for 50 GT38AC for Indonesia, these will probably fit in the Queensland loading gauge
jmt

Now this is interesting. I was told that back in mid 1980s, the drivers of coal train in South Sumatera (the place where these GT38AC are operated) were trained by QR on how to operate long coal trains. They even had brief internship to gave them "feel" on how to drive coal trains.
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

The six Ferronor units on the move in the States, this photo is about a fortnight old

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/942398_10201445528642513_1245111869_n.jpg
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
If CQ coal doesn't have to access the state HO gauge then operators and providers would be silly not to build and operate to USDM or even Pilbara standards and equipment . Cheaper to buy off the shelf locos and wagons and they will do more for you .
It's about time QLD accepted Victorias lead and started the standard guage migration in certain areas . Really narrow gauge has SFA to offer except with tight curve radius and their loading gauge is nowhere . If starting with a clean sheet go with the economic best , other operators in Australia have.
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

If CQ coal doesn't have to access the state HO gauge then operators and providers would be silly not to build and operate to USDM or even Pilbara standards and equipment . Cheaper to buy off the shelf locos and wagons and they will do more for you .
It's about time QLD accepted Victorias lead and started the standard guage migration in certain areas . Really narrow gauge has SFA to offer except with tight curve radius and their loading gauge is nowhere . If starting with a clean sheet go with the economic best , other operators in Australia have.
"BDA"


No arguments that US standards are the best option, but dealing with a legacy network is the big problem. Victoria hasn't had to re-gauge lines carrying 80-million tonnes per annum or deal with widening structures or the roadbed. The status quo is going nowhere unless someone decides running 'big' trains is worth the billions of dollars large scale gauge conversion will need. The narrow gauge coal network will probably die a natural death in forty or fifty years as the Bowen Basin declines...but then again there's no telling what's around the corner I suppose.
  jmt Deputy Commissioner
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
So Ugly , hate to think what the cabs look like inside .
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

To wind up those that think that the GT46ACs is ugly

Just consider, in meter gauge 6 tonnes heavier than a 4100 with an additional 1370 HP. This beast will eat UGL/GE's proposed Powerhaul at 3700 HP

The lettering on the Demonstrator is in Portuguese, so it is going to be debugged in Chile by the team commissioning the Ferronor units, prior to trucking over the Andes to Brazil

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/523394_183938571783892_1535524712_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/523394_183938571783892_1535524712_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/1002769_183938328450583_694751545_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/1004881_183938001783949_679044915_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/972086_183937735117309_153071517_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/992860_183937778450638_1763654101_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/577167_183937971783952_163248135_n.jpg

The units are configured for running under loading chutes, hence the cab roof overhang
  fleabag Assistant Commissioner

Location: Perth
Ah, loading chutes.....so there's a reason for the ugliness. Still, where's Raymond Loewy when you need him?
  arctic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Zurich
These units make a VL look good. And that's saying something.....

Fit for purpose does not mean it HAS to be butt ugly.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.