Western Railroad Discussion > EMD and Progress Rail "J" family

Be prepared for the EMD J family.
EMD J family

Pedro


 

Pedro Rezende
Vespasiano MG,

---

---

---

Nice locmotives, we'll see if this catches on in the US,

Larry

Ah yes, the "Family Joules", UP will buy some and run them for a while. The B-B truck option with the big battery would
make a great Tehachapi helper! 

Out 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/22 19:49 by callum_out.

Gosh, they sure don't want any protection up front for the crew... Yeah, and it's ugly IMO.

Victor B.

Looking at the specifications, it appears that they have 2 to maybe 2.5 hours of battery capacity at their maximum power rating.
This from dividing the traction power into the battery capacity.
So how long does it take to replentish the battery?

railstiesballast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looking at the specifications, it appears that they have 2 to maybe 2.5 hours of battery capacity at their maximum power rating.

So is this EMD's answer to the GE battery booster unit that gets charged while doing downhill and gets cut in for extra power going uphill? Haven't heard much about that lately.

I’m sure some will get bought with our tax dollars, they will spend 75% of their life cycle NOT bring used, and as soon as the specified time is up, they will be scrapped. Sound familiar?

Posted from iPhone

junctiontower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I’m sure some will get bought with our tax
> dollars, they will spend 75% of their life cycle
> NOT bring used, and as soon as the specified time
> is up, they will be scrapped. Sound familiar?
>
> Posted from iPhone

Likely that's the ONLY way these get sold...or leased....but the failure will chalked up to learning....what we already know....2.5 hours of use will not take a train anywhere and will not do a suitable amount of switching...the out of service time for charging is absolutely unacceptable 

engineerinvirginia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> junctiontower Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I’m sure some will get bought with our tax
> > dollars, they will spend 75% of their life
> cycle
> > NOT bring used, and as soon as the specified
> time
> > is up, they will be scrapped. Sound familiar?
> >
> > Posted from iPhone
>
> Likely that's the ONLY way these get sold...or
> leased....but the failure will chalked up to
> learning....what we already know....2.5 hours of
> use will not take a train anywhere and will not do
> a suitable amount of switching...the out of
> service time for charging is absolutely
> unacceptable 

In the same way 300 horsepower per diesel unit is unacceptable, but the first box-cabs of the 1920s had that much horsepower, because that's what the technology of the day allowed for... 100 years later, here we are again... I'd wager this is not the final form of battery locomotives, merely the door being cracked open...

Well, let Wabtec and Progress use them as in plant switchers, and in about thirty years they can try to sell the improved version. I have no issue with them experimenting, they SHOULD be doing that. What I object to is like I said, tax dollars will undoubtably be used to subsidize a product that is not even close to being ready for prime time.

Posted from iPhone

Like they used early diesels as in plant switchers until the technology had matured right? Seems the complaint is more about where tax dollars are going than the locomotives themselves.

Battery tech is moving faster than diesel ever had and as has been said, this is only the beginning.

The original diesels were purchased by private companies with private money, and most had a VERY short service life, because while the technology was CLEARLY viable, they had yet progressed to the point of being truly useful, and better replacements were coming along almost yearly. I don’t feel that electric locomotives have even reached the viable stage yet, and even if and when they do, the technology is likely to change so quickly that even somewhat useful locomotives will quickly become boat anchors, which is yet another reason I don’t want the government doing what they did with genset locomotives. That program was a whole lot of style and very little substance over a product that anybody with the IQ of a houseplant knew was bound to fail.

Posted from iPhone

MitchGDRMCo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seems the
> complaint is more about where tax dollars are
> going than the locomotives themselves.
>

Correct... Problem with that is that these folks seem to forget that the government's gonna do what it's gonna do with tax money, and no amount of whining about it on an internet forum is going to do anything about it... I don't think battery technology is there yet, either, but I'm also confident that they're not going to give up on it, and investment in the tech will continue...

Internal combustion locomotives came along when, early 1920s? It wasn't until the FT of 1939 before anyone really believed it could replace steam... I still say it's too early to say battery power has failed even though I agree the present ones aren't up to the same level as a modern diesel electric... Even if I get accused of having the IQ of a plant for thinking so...

But there's the liquid aluminum battery and it only needs a 700 deg F operating temperature, wouldn't
that be OK?

Out