Western Railroad Discussion > GP34ECO

Progress and NS have announced (featured on Railway Age this AM) the GP34ECO which features a 12-710 utilizing both DEF and SCR to meet Tier 4 standards. 
And of course this will be the first line haul application to use both features to both increase efficiency and reduce fuel costs. No mention of the bridge they're sellling
to finance this disaster. Does have a new crash proof cab and new electionics. Progress boasts they've built 50 ECO repowers since 2008! Meanwhile Wabtec has
done over 1000 rebuilds in a far shorter time frame. So after the rails have had problems with the SCR units, said no to DEF, Progress continues to try and find a
way to get Tier 4 out of their venerable 2 stroke. Yikes.

Out 

Not really a "line haul" application though, more of a yard engine or local thing.

Bill Miller
Galt, ON



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/21 11:36 by CCMF.

The railroads were originally against the use of DEF, maybe some 20 years ago. Within the last more than 10 years, the railroads have "watched" the marine industry flock to the 710 prime mover with DEF, with excellent results. Maybe the railroad mechanical officers are learning?

DC?

That's a good question, they don''t mention AC traction so I'd say yes, it's DC. And as to the "line haul", those are their words
which is pretty giggly since BNSF and UP are taking virtually all 4 axle off "line haul".

Out 

DEF, SCR?

Robert



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/21 12:35 by koloradokid.

It's DC traction for use in local and yard service:

http://www.nsdash9.com/rosters/4800.html


Chris Toth
​NSDash9.com

koloradokid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DEF, SCR?
>
> Robert

DEF is Diesel exhaust fluid
SCR is Selective Catalytic Reduction

This method of emissions reduction is widely used for over the road diesel engines.  The reason railroads tried to avoid it is because DEF is consumed at a rate of 2-3% of the fuel.  It means another tank on the locomotive that needs to be filled up periodically.  Volkswagen got in big trouble by claiming their diesel engines were clean enough without using DEF.

NSDash9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's DC traction for use in local and yard
> service:
>
> http://www.nsdash9.com/rosters/4800.html
>
>
> Chris Toth
> ​NSDash9.com

Thanks for the photos Chris!

The RR's should go with DEF.  Our new VOLVO trucks at my LTL company run great, even with DEF.  We all love them.

Progress only has the 710 to really stand on.  My guess is the RR's want to keep using the EMD-designed 710, and not the CAT engine.  The CAT engines have never really lasted in RR service for some reason.  If they can make it all work with the 710 engine, then the sun will rise again for Progress.

Here is a link to the article:
https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/ns-progress-rail-unveil-green-power/
The photo caption, in light type, mentions "line haul locomotive applications".
However the article lead, in bold type, clearly states "yard and intermediate service".
Intermediate service is probably intended to mean transfer and/or local service.
Neither PR-EMD nor WABTEC are building new four axle T4 units.
ALLEN :)

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The RR's should go with DEF.  Our new VOLVO
> trucks at my LTL company run great, even with DEF.
>  We all love them.

You must not have to fix them.........

junctiontower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> coach Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The RR's should go with DEF.  Our new VOLVO
> > trucks at my LTL company run great, even with
> DEF.
> >  We all love them.
>
> You must not have to fix them.........

I totally agree. I could start a podcast with all the horror stories I've personally experienced with Tier 4 semi tractors. I've been with my current employer 6 years, and I have driven well over 30 trucks in that time. Anybody who thinks this technology is proven or perfected is seriously misguided.

Even our brand new Peterbilts have emissions trouble and breakdown. The amount of sensors and wiring to control the emissions system in a new truck is a nightmare. I don't even want to imagine the headaches this will cause on the railroad. Just wait until locomotives are derating on the mainline because a faulty NOx sensor causes the computer to throw a fit.

Tier 4 trucks are CAPABLE of running well with VERY tight maintenance intervals and VERY careful preventative maintenance. But railroads are notorious for running their equipment hard. I've seen what happens when you don't baby these new trucks. They drop like flies left and right. The same will happen on the railroad.

I can see NS or some other Class 1 getting federal, state, or local taxpayer grants, ie corporate welfare, to buy a piece of junk so they can brag about working together to "save the Earth"...

My advice to any future GP34 customer is always keep it hooked to a GP40 slug mother. That way when the GP34 dies, at least the GP40 doesn't have to drag its deadweight around all on its own.

Dylan VanAntwerp
Jesup, IA



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/01/21 10:23 by RI_SD40-2_4790.

RI_SD40-2_4790 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Tier 4 trucks are CAPABLE of running well with
> VERY tight maintenance intervals and VERY careful
> prevetative maintenance. But railroads are
> notorious for running their equipment hard. I've
> seen what happens when you don't baby these new
> trucks. They drop like flies left and right. The
> same will happen on the railroad.
>
> I can see NS or some other Class 1 getting
> federal, state, or local taxpayer grants, ie
> corporate welfare, to buy a piece of junk so they
> can brag about working together to "save the
> Earth"...
>

Reminds me of the NRE gensets we had at BNSF. They had these little decals on them that read "Keeping the Air Cleaner in Texas." Sure, it's easy not to pollute when the motor is dead. We were required to use them until the grant expired, then they were stacked up on a couple elevator tracks until they got shipped to Galveston.

As far as maintenance is concerned, even if BNSF wanted to maintain locomotives (spoiler alert: they don't) they've cut mechanical to the bone and closed facilities. Even when you just need SFS chances are you'll only get fuel. Want to bad order a locomotive? Try the sanders. If it's that bad now, wait till finicky delicate locomotives are added to the mix.

Posted from Android

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My
> guess is the RR's want to keep using the
> EMD-designed 710, and not the CAT engine.  The
> CAT engines have never really lasted in RR service
> for some reason.

Only two EMD locomotives use a CAT engine: F125 and EMD24B.

EMD, Cat and several others have TRIED to make various Cat engines work in a locomotive over the years.  Not a success story in the bunch.

> The photo caption, in light type, mentions "line haul locomotive applications".
> However the article lead, in bold type, clearly states "yard and intermediate service".
> Intermediate service is probably intended to mean transfer and/or local service.
>
> Neither PR-EMD nor WABTEC are building new four axle T4 units.

Plenty of fodder for four-axle rebuilds, especially if you stay with DC. However, I am very excited by the 710 T4 because this development opens up other possibilities.

So 184 days isn't a good maintenance interval for a Tier IV truck?

Out 
PS - I hurt myself laughing.

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So 184 days isn't a good maintenance interval for
> a Tier IV truck?
>
> Out 
> PS - I hurt myself laughing.

We have so much trouble with some of these trucks you are lucky if you get 184hrs between shop visits. The Peterbilt 579s we have been getting the last several years are shop queens. The Macks, Volvos, and Freightliners are a little better, but not much...

Dylan VanAntwerp
Jesup, IA



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/01/21 14:16 by RI_SD40-2_4790.

The ideal operating cycle for diesel engines equipped with Tier 4 SCR/DEF and diesel particulate filters is steady RPM moderate load conditions, with minimal variable RPM, minimized variable load, or extended idling conditions--an operating cycle that few, if any, railroad locomotives ever see.  As others have noted, the complex emission control systems require numerous monitors, sensors,  computers, and mechanical components to work properly, and failure of even one or two components can literally cause the engine to go into "limp" mode.  It's not a good situation when a failed $50 sensor can lay up a multi-million dollar locomotive out on the road somewhere.  As usual, the politicians and bureaucrats who come up with the regulations are not the people who have to bear the costs and problems that  the regulations cause.  The truckers have been dealing with all of this since the 2007+ model years on trucks and it has been an expensive nightmare.  I own a 2012 diesel pickup with SCR/DEF/DPF and, if one wants to avoid very expensive emission system problems, you don't just drive the pickup, you have to "manage" it to avoid situations that will cause problems in the emission system--which often interferes with the truck's  basic operation to do the job it's designed to do.  Imagine having to do that on a railroad scale, with thousands of locomotives and you can see the challenge.