Well done! I'd throw in the CN/VIA Turbo Train, which operated in Canada from 1968 to 1982 and the TEE trainset which ran as The Northlander in Ontario in the 1980s
Nice video. Would have liked to see the Bombardier Jet train see more express, but I would think most of the tracks it would have ran on can barely handle anything past 60mph, and track upgrades would bring forth funding disputes. Never knew there was supposed to be a GP70 either.
thats the real barrier to America having the best quality rails, if it can run a freight train at maybe 50mph than its good enough for them. Also lots of mainline is single tracked, probably truly need double tracks to safely run at higher speeds so you can throw the freight train onto a side track when you need to blast that Amtrak through at 160+ mph. However I would be neglecting the whole picture if I did not bring up another elephant in the room that is a problem for HSR in America, Grade level crossings. People already ignore gates and try and dodge plodding freight trains. imagine the optics when some knucklehead runs a gate and gets smacked by an Acela at full throttle.
The EMD F69PHAC, the GE ES44AC-H and the Bombardier JetTrain are actually my favorites in this group due to their uniqueness. Excellent work on this video as it is very educational!
If you ever did a follow up, the Krauss Maffei ML-4000, EMD BL2, GE BQ23-7, Baldwin's double cab "Babyface" and the MLW RSD-35 would be good candidates.
Thanks for making this video. There is an error regarding the GM10B. This locomotive had six powered axles with three two axle trucks. The total horse power was 10000 so there would be a lot of wheel slip with only 4 axles.
@@truedarklander I think this makes for less wear on curves. Older rigid three axle trucks wore the the rails on curves. Fortunately, new 3 axle trucks like radial steering EMD HTCR truck allow the axle to move with the curves.
So they built the jet train because anyone who remembered much about the problems with the big blows were all dead and would not have been listened to anyway. This is a very well organized and nicely done video. The conclusion was especially good.
The theory was that the diesel engine would power it up to around 50-80 mph, after which the jet engine would be started and take over powering the train, the thought being that this would counter the turbines inefficiencies at lower speeds, whether or not this worked, I don't know. But sadly, a lack of interest in non-electrified HSR from both the US and Canada was ultimately the real reason it never was adopted...
For high speed train that is not electric they could have easily use the HST Class 125 from UK they probably would make it more successful than Bombardier Jet train but none the less its unique
Earlier this year KLW announced the 4400 ACT4, a QSK95 repower. 9530, rebuilt from former BN SD70MAC 9530, has tested on CN and is currently testing on NS.
3:50 I remember watching that video as a kid along with other videos of 2010! It wasn’t that strange to me as a kid and it still isn’t today! It was just another cool painted locomotive to me and I loved it!
Honestly, I'd want to see a weird Multiple Unit video as a kinda follow up to this (hint hint wink wink, I live in Portland, home of one of the weirdest DMU's in the entire world)
EMU/DMU's are also a fetish/fascination of mine. Calgary briefly trialed the Siemens RegioSprinter DMU in 1996 and I never got a ride. That still kinda bothers me! ;-)
No what really killed the F69 was the simple fact that is had a different engine in it than a F40. It had a 710 series instead of 645 that Amtrak had pretty much standardized on. Except for the small fleet of P30CH's that stayed in Auto Train and Sunset Limited service everything else had 645 engines in them and when one of the 2 F69's failed and it was a power assembly they had to ship one in instead of grabbing one off the shelf of whatever shop they happened to be in. The inverters and traction motors were dang near bullet proof from what I was told it was the Diesel engine that caused the problem.
Nice video, I really like the interesting topic and had no idea about the gas turbine Acela! One small correction, the Tier 4 version of the GEVO-12 engine seems to be proving itself as a more reliable engine than the QSK95, performing rather well in heavy freight service especially in the cold up north and being a mostly familiar technology to crews.
I think partly it's because of choices by the author. There are plenty of wacky, niche, and unusual locomotives he has entirely neglected to explore. It is true that most modern freight locomotives look alike, but that is down to regulations and there only being two main locomotive manufacturers. Many of those he chose to cover are only variations or modifications on the same lines of locomotive development. I recommend looking at something like UP's old gas turbine units or the BART trains if you're interested. There's also some sort of switcher that looks like a shrunken locomotive shell on top of a single 3-axle EMD truck, but I can't find what it was anywhere at the moment.
@@squelchedotter Wait till you see UP #8080, it was another turbine, but in this case designed to run on coal dust. There's the Milwaukee Little Joes, or Baldwin Centipedes which both have unusual wheel arrangments. When it comes to passinger equipment there's always stuff like the Aerotrain (very weird), or the M-10000s. Shouts out to the GG1s as well and UP's 9000 series (a steam engine with a 4-12-2 wheel arrangment and three cylenders).
Funnily enough, many Americans call European Locomotives "dull Electroboxes". But I guess American Railfans just keep getting triggered by the mere Existence of Electric Trains.
@@Genius_at_Work I rather like the looks of some European electric locomotives. Certainly the ACS-64 looks nice. My problem is not as much with the locomotives as with the plethora of keyboard activists suggesting (or sometimes demanding) electrified lines across rural America where they don't make sense. Those are often the same people that suggest wholesale nationalization, despite never being actually involved in the details of the rail industry themselves.
Electrified freight trains are standard in most of Europe today. Instead of reinventing the wheel based on some EMD dinosaurs adapting the freight version of the Siemens Vectron to American specifications would totally do the job. But of course it also needs the overhead catenary.
The overhead centenary is the deal breaker, with the long distances US trains travel, electrifying all the infrastructure would be prohibitively expensive
You make an interesting point! After all, we already have one Americanized version of a Siemens electric locomotive: the ACS-64 for Amtrak and SEPTA, which is really an adapted EuroSprinter. I think that if anyone on this continent is interested in making an electric freight locomotive, Siemens could, theoretically, create an American Vectron. Thanks for the comment!
@@SleepTrain456 As a matter of fact Vectron is the follow up platform from Siemens that has replaced the Taurus (Eurosprinter), and the ACS64 has already more Vectron in it than Taurus. So Vectron is state of the art. But I guess many Americans who don't know that look at the Taurus and find it more sexy (as well as the name "Eurosprinter"). There are other European locomotive platforms though that are also very competitive. I would mention Stadler Eurodual.
@@Nils_Ki Good points! So an American Vectron would really be a slightly updated ACS-64! Also, considering how the Stadler Euro Dual can operate on both electric and diesel power (which makes it similar in purpose to, for example, the ALP-45DP in North America), I can see how it could be useful! Thanks for the information!
As for electric being best for HSR, that is true; but notice that there was, for example, a diesel version of the German ICE (ICE-TD), which was used on several non-electrified routes, last to Denmark. Unfortunately, it was also plagued with technical problems and was expensive to run because of the high cost of diesel, so they were mostly taken out of service and, since no buyer could be found, scrapped. One is in the DB Museum, and one or two(?) are used by DB Systemtechnik for testing.
There are many other European trains used in NA: Stadler FLIRT used by O-Train, TexRail, DART and Arrow, Stadler GTW used by Austin MetroRail, Alstom Corradia LINT used by O-Train, Bombardier Talent formerly used by O-Train, DB Class 628 used by Train de Charlevoix
I found this to be quite an informative video! I didn't know what the HTL4200AC was, or that it was the first usage of the engine that now powers our Siemens Chargers! Thanks for the video!
The HERZOG maintenance train locomotive, it's looks like a modified GP with a custom carbody. It pulls a train of flatcars with a rail crane that runs on top of them, litterally a train on a train, and has a second control cab on the back.
To be fair, the only really dated thing about the jet train is it's Acela body shell, the turbine is still in production, and Alstom still manufactures the TGV derivative traction motor that was used as the generator coupled to the turbine So in theory one could envision Alstom making a newer version using an Avelia Liberty powecar body, but we all know that will never happen...
Thanks for the Railroad technology. Greeting from my Railroad rails to your Railroad rails. CHEERS FROM THE HOT RAILS OF NEWARK NJ NORTH EAST CORRIDOR AND MY MODEL RAILROAD 👍♐️
Regenerative braking dates back at least to the GP-7 series. What was unique about the ES44AC-H was using the electricity generated from braking to charge a battery. IIRC, the Milwaukee used regenerative braking on the electric locomotives they used on part of their western extension to avoid smoke in the extensive tunnels. They sold the power back to the company they brought their power from.
Hybrid diesel electric locomotives show promise for the future. The regenerative braking is an innovative idea,but the storage batteries collecting and storing the dynamic braking current were not able to handle the current, and battery explosions and fires resulted! However, if batteries and electrical distribution of dynamic braking technologies advance,they may be feasible for mainline use.
Since Progressive Rails EMD SD70ACE T-4 isn't being sold, only UP and CSX has them besides lease units will this locomotive go Hydrogen or Electric/Battery power?
CAT owns Progress Rail which owns EMD. So, technically, CAT is already one of the two major manufacturers in the US.. Plus, Caterpillar was in the diesel loco business back in the 30s.
There was never going to be a GP70. No EMD documentation supports this. Not to mention no EMD traction motor of the time could handle 1000+ hp per axle without serious derating at low to mid speeds. The GP60Ms also suffered from serious issues as the result of that heavy cab. Combine that with another technological innovation of the time, the radial truck, and new GP builds were dead in the water. At the time of the SD70s introduction, EMD was pitching it's GP2000 rebuild program (NOT the BL20-2 rebuilds). The GP2000 was to utilize an 8 or 12-710 (2000 or 3000hp)... it only took twenty plus years, but this program is essentially the ECO program today.
In the old days the Erie Railroad had what they call tri-power locomotives they had an engine they had battery and they had pantographs or third rail shoes depending on what territory they were in and you had the battery or the engine to run to the locomotive when it was outside of the electrics really nothing new.
The GE ES44AC-H is hardly the worlds first hybrid locomotive as the first hybrid in Czechoslovakia (TA436.05) was build in 1987 and I doubt that was the first one either. The Swiss steam-electric dual power engines could be considered to that honor due to the fact that the pre-heating of water enabled some operational times without the overhead supply or coal burning.
I’m surprised they built the JetTrain. Turbine engines were used in the first prototype TGV locomotives in the 70’s before being abandoned for the exact same reason: for high speed rail, it’s more cost-efficient to use overhead power.
Diesel highspeed is possible, only America just didn't figure it, the ICE TD DMU is capable of service speeds of up 200km/h and the ICE L will be pulled by a diesel electrical dual mode Vectron allowing speeds of up to 230km/h.
The Siemens charger locomotive is a higher speed diesel-electric locomotive for the NA market. It can run at up to 125 mph (200 km/h) in service and ran at up to 140mph (225 km/h) in testing. It is in service on: Amtrak (Cascades, California, Surfliner, Midwest and LD), ACE, Coaster, Brightline, VIA rail and more to come. The thing is that the ICE TD failed miserably. Also, the ICE-L will only operate at 230 km/h with a Vectron 230 or BR105 Travca MS. With the Vectron DM, it will only be able to run at a max of 160 km/h.
American diesel locomotives have always been a hybrid system (diesel electric) . They main generator to power traction motors in the trucksets and an alt generator to supply various voltages to the locomotives other systems as well as HEP if the locomotive is supplied with that option as specified by the customer. Aside from that feature, most all freight locomotives are equipped with dynamic braking which will switch the traction motors from taking power to move the train, to having them generate current that is shunted to a resistor pack, GE's usually have them behind the cab and EMD will have the flared bit of the roof near the locomotives nid point
Hybrid would mean some kind of Battery or Capacitor System though; Diesel-Electric itself isn't Hybrid. E.g. were some Diesel-Electric Ferries betwen Germany and Denmark converted to Hybrid about ten Years ago, by removing one of the five Diesel Generators and replacing it with a large Battery. The Ferries always spend 45 Minutes "at Sea" on the Fehmarn Belt (more like a Puddle), before being in Port for 15 Minutes. The Battery gets charged in these 15 Minutes, and then discharged while accelerating out of the Port and then "Braking" (by Reverse Thrust) while going into the other Port. This removes the Load Changes (low Load in Port, high Load while Accelerating and Braking, medium Load at Sea) and keeps the Engines almost constantly at ideal Load, increasing Efficiency and reducing Emissions. A Battery or Capacitor on Diesel-Electric Locomotives would allow to store and re-use the Electricity generated from Dynamic Braking (then called Regenerative Braking), at least when braking shortly to come to a Stop. Going down a Mountain would require a massive Battery, so there full Electrification makes a lot of Sense. E.g. do three Trains going down the Gotthard Railway in Switzerland power one Train going up.
If the Russians have electrified about half of their network, and India is running electric double-stacked container trains, there's really no reason for American railroads not to follow suit, other than "but that would hurt shareholder value".
I wonder if we'll see trains going downhill with a boxcar full of batteries behind the locomotives to capture more of that energy; that seems like low-hanging fruit.
class 1 freight railroads allergic to it because they wanna keep their double stack trains in addition to that their cheapscake to their own infrastructure
Fantastic overview but Electric trains aren't zero emissions when the electric power plants burn coal to generate the electricity. Build nuclear plants first, then worry about the trains.
F69PHAC? Locomotives built with experimental technology, and they only built two to test it out instead of going right for a production line?? Hooray for sensible engineering decisions! I do question the obsession with "modern" locomotive technology. I get that it's a theme for the video, but there's a lot more to rail history than just "zero emissions" propaganda goals and the (mostly undeveloped, unreliable, or very expensive) technology that will supposedly achieve that. More variety would be nice, such as looking at some of the older technological experiments and dead ends that came before these.
The idea of battery locos is so baffling to me With electrification of rail networks being a thing for well over a century now, it seems like nothing more that a gimmicky way to reinvent the wheel when pantos and catenary give zero emissions too and are already well proven around the world and current battery tech still lacking.
When was the last time the entire US had a power outage and how long did it last? You can't just keep on burning diesel everyday forever just in case a very rare event shuts you down for a day or two. Besides, unlike an electric truck or car you can still use an electric train as normal while it's being towed, so you can run the same train with a diesel loco slapped on the front temporarily during the outage for the most vital service.
The systems often have their own power supply. I know the New Jersey Transit rail division is looking into a micro grid that would power just the transportation in the event of a grid outage.
@@AlRoderick The NEC had a power outage in 2003 due to a technical glitch leaving the Acela stranded on The Hell's gate bridge for over 9 hours. A diesel engine had to rescue the train. That means that diesel locos aren't without use yet.
