Model Railroading > Greenbrier gets rid of the Hopper "Bays"

Interesting announcement coming from Greenbrier. By getting rid of the 3 individual bays on the traditional grain hopper and having just one huge bay with a long "Tsunami" gate, they shrunk the car by almost six feet. They could add a dozen more cars without adding train length to a typical grain train. It also greatly lowers the center of gravity and improves aerodynamics. And dealing with just one gate instead of three, time to unload and load is also reduced. If the "Tsunami" gates work reliably, I suspect the design will take the industry by storm as it solves a variety of long standing issues with traditional grain hoppers. Model train manufactures may want to take note, but the design will likely evolve as production starts.

https://www.railwayage.com/freight/greenbrier-announces-new-covered-hopper-railcar/?fbclid=IwAR2IzK-duQWZ9wE3bhPL9XliWrlT6Hk7mHzbxJuX9V3ToX8Vg1TB1Pf3gzA
 

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

---

I would think that an HO scale version might have issues with convex verttcal curces....but in ship design, the idea is to get the best cubic in the best shaped space...this looks like thewy solved it.

Bob

Makes sense, but I'm sure the application of these hoppers would be limited. The unloading client would have to have a pit long enough to unload the full length of the car, which I'm assuming most industries DON'T have that large of pits. But if industries want to reduce unload times, perhaps constructing longer pits is a good option.

I know here in Decatur, IL there's been a pool of hoppers that have 2 long "bays" for unloading at ADM. Same idea as the car you show here; bigger unload gates = quicker, but larger pits required.

Don't care for them much... I'm old school... I prefer the older hoppers from the 70's and 80's!!!!

Interesting design, thanks for posting.

Posted from iPhone

Nice design! I wonder why it was not built years ago!

4thDistrict Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> navarch2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I would think that an HO scale version might
> have
> > issues with convex verttcal curces....
> >
> > Bob
>
> Why? If the track is built reasonably well there
> should be no problem. If this car would bottom out
> on said convex curve, then there is something
> seriously wrong with the way the grade transition
> is constructed. Pilots on locos, as well as the
> overhang on long passenger cars, would also not
> work if the track is that poorly constructed.


I was a ssuming that the "hump" in a single model railroad siding could be an issue depending on how close to the ground the longitudinal gate is....

Bob

Press release with a video showing how the Tsunami Gate works;

https://www.gbrx.com/press-room/press-releases/greenbrier-introduces-advanced-covered-hopper-railcar-for-grain-transport/

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

The attached photo is taken from the Difco advertisement of the Car & Locomotive Cyclopedia 1997 edition.

---

BN7023 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The attached photo is taken from the Difco
> advertisement of the Car & Locomotive Cyclopedia
> 1997 edition.

Interesting, looks like a rebuilt P-S 4427 high hip hopper car.

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

Sorry, but they are ugly. I like the look of the traditional hopper better.

Reminds me of the 5211cf TrinFlo covered hopper with longitudinal gates.

Posted from Android

These don't hang any nearer to the tracks than a doublestack well car, so if you can run well cars on your layout this will work too. === === = === JLH

The BN 899999 was experimental BN hopper car built by Difco/Trinity with the longitudinal gates.

It was numbered directly above the 5-section experimental trough-train cars built by Bethlehem Steel (not to be confused with the later 13-section through-train cars built by Johnstown America that saw revenue service) that also had longitudinal gate unloading.   But longitudinal gates have now been around for over 50 years - going back to even the Burlington (CB&Q) 163000 series cars of mid 1960s.

All of these cars were built on the supposed basis of faster loading and unloading means lower cycle times, leading to more shipment cycles per month, requiring fewer cars - without much thought/mention to the increased complexity leading to more out of service cars...   (Remember that planners and marketers think of and plan for the perfect world whereas civil and mechanical engineers plan for real conditions and thus realize simple designs are often the best)

It looks like the new Greenbrier cars have series of many lateral gates (not longitudinal) with interconnected sliding covers.  (When that gets jammed what happens?)

Time will tell if they follow the traditional pattern of the most complicated cars being those that spend the most time out of service.