Modern SD40-2

This is just hypothetical questionWHAT IF?? EMD went to the major railways and proposed; “Modern” SD40-2 say bring back the 645 power plant, or a detuned 710 power plant, rated at about 3,000 HP, with a MINIMUM of electronic gear on board, just give it the BEST of the NEW “goodies” like the wheel slip systems, conventional control stands and offer a wide cab versionAt CONSIDERABLE cost savings over an SD 70Heck, make as MANY parts interchangeable with the older SD40-2’s {I know this precludes the 710 engine}The idea is to make a “more” inexpensive road locomotive with high reliability, the SD40-2’s are proven in this regard
It would not replace the modern high horse power units, but would be VERY effective at hauling locals, and have plenty of power to power mainline trains, or dedicated helper serviceWhat do ya’ll kind folks think? I know I am just thinking out loud here but I think their would be a market for such a locomotive
Andy J http://www.blueridgerails.com/

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: Modern SD40-2, RAILDOG, Dec-18-04, 08:07 PM, (1) RE: Modern SD40-2, century242, Dec-18-04, 08:10 PM, (2) RE: Modern SD40-2, Andy J, Dec-18-04, 08:40 PM, (3) RE: Modern SD40-2, NewEnglandRailFan, Dec-18-04, 08:56 PM, (4) RE: Modern SD40-2, GrandTrunkFan, Dec-18-04, 09:57 PM, (5) RE: Modern SD40-2, trainmaster_1, Dec-18-04, 11:47 PM, (6) RE: Modern SD40-2, DRGWK36, Dec-19-04, 08:30 AM, (10) RE: Modern SD40-2, GrandTrunkFan, Dec-19-04, 08:36 PM, (16) RE: Modern SD40-2, DRGWK36, Dec-21-04, 07:57 AM, (20) RE: Modern SD40-2, NW_611, Dec-18-04, 11:54 PM, (7) RE: Modern SD40-2, ns_sd70m, Dec-19-04, 02:37 AM, (8) RE: Modern SD40-2, Gixxer86g, Dec-19-04, 05:53 AM, (9) RE: Modern SD40-2, FURX, Dec-19-04, 11:52 AM, (11) RE: Modern SD40-2, century242, Dec-19-04, 11:59 AM, (12) RE: Modern SD40-2, JonN, Dec-19-04, 06:23 PM, (13) RE: Modern SD40-2, chucksc, Dec-19-04, 07:03 PM, (14) RE: Modern SD40-2, JonN, Dec-19-04, 07:47 PM, (15) RE: Modern SD40-2, NewEnglandRailFan, Dec-19-04, 09:54 PM, (17) RE: Modern SD40-2, Erick_Cantu, Dec-20-04, 01:12 AM, (18) RE: Modern SD40-2, NW_611, Dec-20-04, 01:42 AM, (19)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

I like it! bring back old power to today's specs maybe it would bring back EMD? I wish Jeremy Smith West Plains,MO
BNSF Thayer Subdivision

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Maybe if they were quieter so I would not have to shout to talk to the guys a few feet away.I do not think it would work, mainly because of all the EPA requirements. Personally I do not like the SD-40s. They are cramped, noisy and difficult to get in and out of (and I am skinny). The toilets are a real pain to use being down in the nose with a ceiling of about 5' or so (I am 6'9"). Now that being said, I do think they look a whole lot better than these wide cabs.Regards,
Erik Pierson
Sacramento, Cawww.sacramentolocomotiveworks.com
You can find information about SLW upcoming releases at the following links
Elvas Tower Forums
3dTrains Forums

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

They could get past the EPA on some of the locomotives, by rebuilding them on OLD SD frames. So technically they would be an older locomotiveRemember, we are not talking about high horsepower locomotives, they should be able to meet regulations with newer fuel injection and turbo technology, and use the same exhaust silencers they use on the newer unitsThe idea is a NEW medium power locomotive, kind of a “jack of all trades” and it should incororperate some newer tech, but keep it simple. For reliability and cost sake. Using only well PROVEN componentsI think their is a market for such a locomotive
Andy J http://www.blueridgerails.com/

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>Maybe if they were quieter so I would not have to shout to
>talk to the guys a few feet away. Yeah, but its a good sound.I would love to see a new SD40-2. If you don't like the sound, maybe EMD would go about building a Isolated Spartian cab
-Dave

You can e-mail me at davej8010@aol.com -or- hrrc_7324@yahoo.com -or- feel free to aim me.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Dec-18-04 AT 10:00 PM (EST)

"I do not think it would work, mainly because of all the EPA requirements." I hate the EPA. Dont do what they say. But anyway, I think a modern SD40-2 is needed, seeing how rail traffic is up so much.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Dec-18-04 AT 11:51 PM (EST)

AndyJ wrote = “Modern” SD40-2 say bring back the 645 power plant, or a detuned 710 power plant, rated at about 3,000 HP, with a MINIMUM of electronic gear on board, just give it the BEST of the NEW “goodies” like the wheel slip systems, conventional control stands and offer a wide cab version That would be good, but I would prefer a 16-645E3 power plant than a detuned 12-710G3 power plant, even though with 4 less cylinders but still producing 3,000 hp as a 16-645 engine. Both 16-645 and 16-710 engines are the same(except with a 12-710G3 engine), the platform is the same and the engine block is the same (correct me if I'm wrong) the bore and stroke is different. But re-introducing a "Modern" SD40-2 with all those features that you describe above would be awesome, mind you that you can have a 645 engine rebuilt and remanufactured can and will exceed EPA Tier-2 specs, I hope the crews will love it. Mike
Future CPR Locomotive EngineerPontiac Grand Prix GTP - Built For Drivers"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven" - Jean Chretien

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>I hate the EPAAs someone who works for the EPA, that's not very nice.Andy

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-04 AT 08:57 PM (EST)

Im sorry I offended you, but I still maintain my opinion.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I'm not really offended. I've heard a lot worse than that. I'm sure you have a very good and well informed basis for your opinion.Andy

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Well, if the four-axle units are truly out of production, then an SD40-3 might not be completely out of the question, especially if the Class I carriers get attractive offers from firms other than EMD or GE. Norfolk Southern already is, from what I understand, in the process of transforming GP50s into GP38-3s, so I wouldn't say that it was unimaginable. Likewise, if someone figures out how to transform an tired SD40-2 into a viable shortline locomotive, something like what was envisioned in the above posts could happen. After all, the AT&SF pulled off the CF7, so stranger things have happened.

____________________________________________________________________
Norfolk & Western’s Radford Division, Pulaski District: Who needs the Marias Pass?

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

> Personally I do not like the SD-40s. They are cramped, noisy and difficult to get in and out of (and I am skinny). The toilets are a real pain to use being down in the nose with a ceiling of about 5' or so (I am 6'9").Are the cabs of EMD locomotives nosier than the cabs of GE locomotives?

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I think the market is there,but is supplied by loco rebuilders.When the GP-15 was released,there was a huge market for 1500 hp locos.Why buy new when you can get a rebuilt Geep for less money?

"Hold tight,feel the drivers bite,hear the whistle moan.Engine rockin' to the left and right,vibratin' in my bones.Once the locomotive steals your soul,you got a Casey Jones!"---Ian"Lemmy"Kilmister

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

...EMD tried getting in on rebuilding themselves.. anybody remember the "BL20-2"? ....I'd say that the 16-645E is a proven technology........ think about how long EMD stayed with it until the "50" fiasco.... which pushed that thing to it's limits
I think using a combination of components of proven technology, with modern requirments (aka emissions, etc).. ..?.. could it work?What I really find neat is that the SD40, and even more so SD40-2 have become the "Geep" of the 2nd generation.
All those leasing companys that use SD40s(-2) to rebuild.... they are taking SD45s, replacing the 20-645 with a 16-645..... think about it. The 16-645-E3 is what I consider "old" technology.. but it is proven... it works... they are equiping "new" <rebuilt> power with "old" <proven> components <16-645-E3s> I'd say it works......adjustments... ..it needs to be cleaner in terms of emmissions output... and comforts like high back seats (oh man those are nice) and modifying the spartan cab to be quieter.... letting it sit on rubber donuts, or a rubber seal, or something like that.... keep the dynamic brakes in the middle, as oppsed to right behind the cab............about the bathroom... that;s alittle tough,... seeing how there really is limited space..... is there any practicle way to place it at the end of the long hood...?I know there is "vacant" space back there,.. where things like a fire ext are kept, and from what I've seen, spare elec. cables, etc....
Redesign the trucks to become "steerible"... with piviting center axle... ..I'm thinking of those GE trucks... arn't they called "Hi-Ads"? ... anyways, keep the weight for tractive effort, nice big fuel tank.
..If you could move the rest room to the rear of the long hood, use the nose for storing grips, .../ cooler, fridge, etc. Boy, it's a good thing it's not my job to design locomotives.... after writing this, I've realized there is alot I don't know....
...take care,-Jeffrey

Courteous Future Engineer
NKP 2-8-4 #765. www.765.org
Chessie System Historical Society. http://moosevalley.org/cshs/
My Website; www.xanga.com/csxd765
MY Pics;
www.picturetrail.com/gp30rdmt

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Both the GE and EMD cabs from that era are noisy and cramped. Around here, I can not recall the last time I saw a GEs, with the exception of a wide cab Regards,
Erik Pierson
Sacramento, Cawww.sacramentolocomotiveworks.com
You can find information about SLW upcoming releases at the following links
Elvas Tower Forums
3dTrains Forums

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-04 AT 06:39 PM (EST)

Basically, my proposal would be an SD59: Despite being a proven, reliable, and relativly inexpensive engine, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the 16-645E prime mover will never pass the EPA Teir-2 regs, so we'll have to use a compliant version of the 12-710. Also, rather than the ancient AR10 alternator and D77 TMs of the SD40-2, we should use the newer, higher capacity AR15 alternator and D87 traction motors of the '60 series: these are older than the AR20 alternator and D90 TMs used on the '70 series, but they are less expensive and are still in production for the F59PHIs. I would offer a widecab as standard, with a spartan cab as optional: HTCR radial trucks would also be standard. Electronic systems and onboard computers would be minumum 60-series standard, as this is basically old technolegy and shouldn't up the pricetag by very much. The dynamic brake equipment will also conform to 3rd-generation EMD practice, that is in a box ahead of the engine rather than a blister on top of it, since few customers (even regional roads) would likely bother with a no-DB option these days anyway...Jonathan Nikiforovs.
Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.

Repainter for Yonder Locomotive Works.

"A crictic is a man who creates nothing and thereby feels qualified to judge the work of creative men. There is logic in this; he is unbiased - he hates all creative people equally." - Lazarus Long

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Jonathan I hate to rain on you guys parade but there are several things wrong with what you are proposing from a technical/engineering view point....
For openers you cannot get a modern locomotive past the applicable tier (whatever) regulations with out enough computational power to launch a moon shot! All the modern stuff you want requires it.... Emissions and Adhesion controls especially! The older stuff was replaced because it is no where near as efficient or clean as the new stuff! Have you looked at fuel consumption for a SD40-2 vs a vs a SD70ace ?????? Don't it will scare you!
Nobody builds relay logic or the old type of electronics and control systems that the SD40s used..... It would cost more than the high tech stuff to build today and rebuilt would be just that, rebuilt junk! The closest I've seen to modernizing the old 40 series is in some of the MK rebuilds into commuter engines... And given their relatively light duty compared to what they did hauling freight they are just not reliable!
The best use for the old sd40s I've seen is what CSX does around here on the old RF&P.... When I watch a freight come through it will usually have a AC4400 or AC6000 or SD70ace followed by one or more "leased sd40s".... They get the drag starting the train from the AC unit and all the 40s do is add HP for going over the road....
I say the juice go through with an AC6000 and 1 LLPX SD40 followed by about 50 or so refrigerated trailer flats..... The trash train typically has several SD40s as trailers (occasionally a gp40 or sd50 in the mix)....
Face it the RRs are spending their very limited capital dollars on new high power units and using old road units like the sd40, which are fully paid off, in switching and helper service.... BTW, seeing as what GM has turned out recently according to the trade press it appears unlikely they could duplicate the SD40s anyway. Chuck Schneider
Chief Cook, Bottle Washer and (Virtual) CEO

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-04 AT 07:48 PM (EST)

>For openers you cannot get a modern locomotive past the applicable tier >(whatever) regulations with out enough computational power to launch a >moon shot! All the modern stuff you want requires it...In that case, my proposal will have to live with (expensive) ultra-modern computer/electronics systems, rather than '60 series ones: though I still think there's a place for a 3,000HP road unit: I mean, the concept of railways like Vermont or ONR having to use hulking SD70/75s seems kind of absurd: but of course, the demands of Class 1 roads are the ones that really determine how manufacturers design and market their products, and the little guys simply have to live with that.Jonathan Nikiforovs.
Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.

Repainter for Yonder Locomotive Works.

"A crictic is a man who creates nothing and thereby feels qualified to judge the work of creative men. There is logic in this; he is unbiased - he hates all creative people equally." - Lazarus Long

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Ya know, all this emissions talk makes me wonder how ALCo would've done I think the chance of a modern SD40-2 is about slim to none. And Jon, your right. We er uh Short Lines and Class 3 roads are in dire need of a new "switcher". I cannot picture a C44-9W or a SD70MAC lumbering their way down the former NH Berkshire line, where the curves are too sharp to handle any 3 axle trucks. I'm perfectly content with the GP9's tho
-Dave

You can e-mail me at davej8010@aol.com -or- hrrc_7324@yahoo.com -or- feel free to aim me.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>Well, if the four-axle units are truly out of production,
>then an SD40-3 might not be completely out of the question, Wouldn't the new unit need to be called the SD40-4 as the SD40-3 already exists?"The F59PHI and Genesis are the lamest excuses for locomotives Amtrak has ever operated - accept it and move on. Hug an F40 before it's too late!""To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
- Theodore Roosevelt"Ahhh, a mother/daughter bonding over gay porn at lunch - the visions of my youth."
-That girl I like too much for my own good

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Observe my brilliance at railroad punditry! Darn, I'm smooth. Yes, make it SD40-4, unless the current SD40-3 fits the bill suggested by the thread. Me, I'm still trying not to scoff at the notion of a D9-40CW working the five or six-car local.

____________________________________________________________________
Norfolk & Western’s Radford Division, Pulaski District: Who needs the Marias Pass?

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | How To... | File Library ] Copyright © 2004 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.