Western Railroad Discussion > Wabtech #3000 is southbound (timetable eastbound)

Wabtech #3000 passed the Modesto (CA) Amtrak station at 10:05 this morning in the consist of a southbound (timetable eastbound) BNSF freight, second unit, facing south (timetable east).  Weather here is foggy. 

That was quick, did they even have time to recharge it? 

Out 

There is an 89 foot TOFC car directly behind the power, loaded with Tier 0 Gensets and really long Home Depot extension cords!
callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That was quick, did they even have time to
> recharge it? 
>
> Out 

It would be nice if someone would come out and give some data on charging voltage, time to charge, etc. I mean it's none of our
business but a little info to satisfy the curious would be a nice gesture.

Out 

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would be nice if someone would come out and
> give some data on charging voltage, time to
> charge, etc. I mean it's none of our
> business but a little info to satisfy the curious
> would be a nice gesture.
>
> Out 

Watch this for a little insite
https://youtu.be/zIgmNOxa5aI
Dan



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/21 13:25 by danstar8.

https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/bnsf-wabtec-bel-pilot-under-way/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=22126#

Railway age link 

Dan

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would be nice if someone would come out and
> give some data on charging voltage, time to
> charge, etc. I mean it's none of our
> business but a little info to satisfy the curious
> would be a nice gesture.
>
> Out 

Never mind it's proprietary information...

Yah, just in case it doesn't work as intended.

Out 

So the fluff piece Wabtec video is right up there with a certain Marvel bad guy snapping his fingers. As one hoghead noticed, brakes 
aren't used much between Stockton and Bakersfield, dynamic or otherwise. Plus, answered none of my questions but hey as the Hall
man said "It's proprietary". Guess I can go back to gaga'ing BNSF stickers. 

Out

Okay so fair enough, I'm not a train crew guy and haven't spent a lot of time talking to people who've run heavy freight trains in a variety of territories. Though I have read a lot from y'all. on here.

Is the implication correct that a freight train would never ever use dynamic brakes on the flats between Bakerfield and Stockton (or Mojave and Barstow) to stop for meets or work events? That it would be silly (or dangerous or time consuming) to use DB (or this Wabtec regenerative equivalent), and instead the automatic air brakes or locomotive independent (friction) brakes are the only reasonable choice for slowing or stopping in flat territory?

If that answer is yes, then indeed the battery unit is just a dead weight on the flats. But isn't that also true of any extra diesel-electric locomotives put in the consist to provide enough power for the ruling grade (i.e. Tehachapi in this case) that would otherwise not be required on an all-flat territory (and might be equally as inert if cut out by something like Trip Optimizer anyway). And what exactly percentage is the fuel consumption penalty associated with dragging that dead weight around on the flat fraction of the route (relative to hauling the rest of the train) and how much does it negate the fuel consumption benefit over the mountain?

I assume this is exactly what BNSF and Wabtec are trying to determine with these runs.

So what am I missing here that makes this experiment so stupid?

It weighs roughly 210 tons, that's potentially 2 plus loads of high value freight. Yes dynamics are used on the flats though not often. If you're having to stop for
a signal in most cases you follow the green to red pattern and you can almost coast to a stop. BNSF for one drops the remotes required to power heavy trains
over Tehachapi at Bakersfield and the flat land power is optimized to the tonnage. UP runs to hpt/tpa required to make the grade and little more. So in essence
Southbound you hope you have a full charge to get you over the hill though you know the unit will be dead or almost so by the top of the hill. If Trip Optimizer
does it's thing to save charge you won't get full power for the climb. None of this is news, it's all well known fact. The PHL switcher application makes way more
sense. You operate in a switching mode, around a central charging station. Charged from a hopefully high efficiency power plant somewhere and use the unit
until it needs recharge. It doesn't get dragged, it doesn';t need to get setout, the application makes sense. Back to the road use, develop an inductive charge
pad where the fuel tank normally sits and place some inductive charge sections between the rail. Charge on the fly as needed. Just a thought.

Out 

pbouzide Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what am I missing here that makes this
> experiment so stupid?

Nothing, the experiment is a valid one, to enable proof of concept or otherwise.

'Inductive charge pad' - someone's lost their marbles!

No, I don't think so. California is going to push for catenary and with a Dem Congress and a green adgenda who knows what might happen. 
So now you're faced with at least 24 foot cat to clear double stacks and an enormous expenditure. Inductive charging is used in many mobile
applications why couldn't it be applied to a battery locomotive.

Out 

Hold a phone in one hand, and hold a 200 tonne locomotive in the other.... they're not quite the same are they?

pbouzide Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what am I missing here that makes this experiment so stupid?

My Granddaddy didn't do it that way!  HARRUMPH!!!!  Spitooey.  Dagnabit whippersnappers.

I do wonder how much of the venom is from folks who still believe there is no place for renewable energy because that is what they have been taught from their First Amendment Right to Lie Facebook feed quality news source.

So the claim is that the 3000 will save 10 % of fuel costs.  There are plans for a higher capacity battery unit.  I think it will be interesting to see how it works out.

Brian

Well, you may not need a catenary system, you could put it between the rails, like some 'trolley' lines do. You could also just do sections, say in Tehachapi. Leave fully charged, do some battery work here and there, hit the hill, and have full power available, which could also add charge to the battery potentially. Then run on battery later. 

I'm thinking like Cajon. San Berdoo to Summit is a hill, from there to Barstow is more rolling. So could spend the money on the west side of Cajon to feed power, but then not put in the infrastructure every where. I know it sounds crazy, but there are choices. 

Look at some of the shorter trucking lanes with partial catenary and battery the rest of the way. Technology is certainly changing. 

Mike ONeill
Parker, CO

Mike you're not going to electrify anything with the power source at ground level, the legal community would have a picnic!  If you're doing that the inductive
solution would be much safer. 
And as for ExhaustED, who's remarks are beginning to p me off, how do you thing the Chinese maglev systems work? 

Out 

Is it nuclear fusion? It's either that or distilled sky ions... but it's certainly not inductive charging.
 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/21 13:47 by exhaustED.