I can imagine climbing up on that BEAST,,, spooling up and pulling out thinking ,, " nobody's stopping me",, 😝 nobody , screaming " stop the train and get off now" 😂 what a great job 💪😝
sound *Jet Engine* ! This is why I love EMD 710 ! Thanks a lot to General Motors Electro Motive Division for making such gigantic great sounding diesel engines 👌👌 !!
They are the next gen emds of indian railways which would be made as WDG-5, that uses the same V20-710G3A/G3B/G3C and provides the same net hp ranging from 5,000 to 5,500 as the successor of the existing GT46AC based WDG-4, that uses its closest predecessor, V16-710G3A/G3B/G3C and provides a net hp ranging from 4,000 to 4,500. The saddest news is that only 7 units are produced by GM-EMD and DLW Banaras. They are:- 50001, 50002, 50003, 50004, 50005, 50006 and finally, 50007, which are presently being homed and care taken at Diesel Loco Shed Sabarmati. The first SD80AC WDG-5, #50001, is named as "Bheem".
I wish the 80s had been ordered by more railroads than just Conrail and that mining operation in Brazil. I'd love to see a few on my side of the country in BNSF, UP, or MRL livery. Whatever, I can dream.
If Union Pacific had any SD80MAC's,they would've looked exactly the same as their SD9043MAC's did,they had the same bodies and frames. As already mentioned,CNW had orders put in to get them right before Union Pacific did the merge,but they were canceled because Union Pacific was only interested in the AC6000CW's,and that decision bit them hard just like it did for CSX ordering them. Most of the SD80MAC's went to Norfolk Southern after the merge,a dozen went to CSX,but then they gave them to Norfolk Southern later on.
UP and a few other companies were actually about to order these, along with Conrail placing a 2nd Order. It was when GM-EMD hurriedly built its successor - the 6000 HP (4.5 MW) SD90MAC (which was the Actual Failure), these companies withdrew their order, including Conrail's 2nd order, thereby, resulting in only 30 units being built, all procured by Conrail alone. These got transferred to NS and CSX post the 1998-9 merger and dissolution of Conrail. Later in 2015, NS acquired all of them and later in 2020, they were all scrapped - 6 by CP (for 70acu spare parts) and rest 23-24 by Progress Rail.
@@JishyFishy4106 Union Pacific was never interested in the SD80MAC's,only the AC6000CW's.Chicago Northwestern was just about to order them,but the merge discontinued that.
EMD (Electro Motive Division) originally was EMC (Electro Motive Corporation) in 1922 until later on when General Motors acquired them and changed the title. With General Motors also making the foundation of Detroit Diesel in 1938,that's really when the diesel-electric locomotive became revolutionary.EMD locomotives all basically have gigantic two stroke Detroit Diesels in them. In 2005,General Motors sold off EMD and then Caterpillar some time later became their parent company after purchasing Progress Rail (PRLX). EMD is PRLX's subsidiary.That also means that EMD is now four stroke. The four stroke 1010J's in the SD70ACE-T4's are extensively rebuilt EMD 265H's that Caterpillar fixed with certain changes.The 265H's were what the SD90MAC's and SD90MAC-H's had and they were very unreliable.It was the first and last four stroke prime mover that EMD/GM built,to meet EPA regulations.The last of two stroke EMD was really the SD80MAC's which turned out to be the only successful locomotives with the highest power single-handed from one prime mover.
I heard a ditto similar kind of Rev Up for the First time 2008-09, when i was a 2-3 year old kiddy, from a Pair of UBL WDG-4 EMD GT46MAC locos (dervied from SD70MAC), powered by EMD v16-710, with a BOXN Coal Consist. The Locos' Numbers I dont remember right now. I was scared of such Jet Engine like Sounds and I used 2 cry back then, for I was a Baby. but now I really love them. EMD 710 is a Great Engine !
More the cylinders, denser and more terror the sound is. Wish there was a v24-710 engine of 6000+ HP LOL for the 90mac (I understand that there Fuel Consumption Concerns, but still I imagine about one like that)
I don't know why the 80mac's were made less and scrapped off, while sd45's were made more, in spite of being highly fuel efficient compared to the latter ??
Exactly what my thoughts are. Mind you that America is far too car centric unlike India that utilizes passenger rail , which I admire greatly. I was born and raised in America, but I absolutely hate car centric society....its deadly and unsustainable. I worked as a deckhand on river towboats on the Ohio river, and EMD engines were the very best and mind you 3 of the v20-710 engines can push 100,000 tons of weight up the river pushing barges with direct drive on the propellers. These engines can last 100 years or more with proper maintenance. Unfortunately, we live in a disposable economy and culture.
Most of the SD45's that were manufactured were rebuilt into SD45R's or SD40M-2's because the 20-645-E7's were not successful.The motor flexing of the blocks and it's length was too much stress on the frames and they kept breaking crankshafts aside from issues involving internal vibration.Less than a handful survived preservation and most of them got rebuilt with the 16-645E3's just like the SD40-2's.Even when the SD45-2's were debuted,they still had issues,and nearly all were rebuilt as SD45U's. Conrail was the only railroad that purchased the SD80MAC's,then obviously Norfolk Southern got them on the roster after the merge,while CSX did purchase a dozen of them. The SD80MAC's used 20-710 G3B-EC's and have been the only successful locomotives with a twenty cylinder engine,at that,with 5,000 HP. The entire ordeal of the SD80MAC's was to keep EMD in competition with GE after they released the AC6000CW's. The AC6000CW's didn't have great longevity because of the fact that they didn't have sequential turbochargers and never redesigned the crankshafts,thanks to Deutz MWM,which caused them to have mandatory mainteance every three months to replace turbochargers that were having oil leaks or worn seals. The problems had no solutions and CSX along with Union Pacific made the decision to rebuild them.CSX derated their CW60AC's and designated them as CW44-6's while retaining the original 7HDL-16's. Union Pacific completely rebuilt them into C44ACM's having newer 7FDL-16's. CSX has sold most of theirs to Progress Rail but Union Pacific still has a certain amount of them in service. Norfolk Southern sold all but six SD80MAC's to Progress Rail where most were torched and scrapped.The last six of them are owned by Canadian Pacific to be used as parts donors for their SD9043MAC's and SD70ACU's,including ones they purchased from Union Pacific. This also includes the fact that Norfolk Southern sold most of their SD70ACU's.
@@Slim_Slid NS and CP still run the 90MACs, but under their rebuild designation the SD70ACu. Both bought 90MACs then rebuilt them, one change NS made was removing the original Siemens electronics (Siemens also made the AC traction motors for 70,80, and 90MACs) and replacing them with newer and more reliable electronics made by Mitsubishi. This goes along with other engineering changes such as the newer cab design from the SD70ACe.
There is only six of them left under Canadian Pacific that they are using as parts donors for their SD9043MAC's and SD70ACU's,until they are worth scrap.Very unforunate,with Norfolk Southern selling those SD80MAC's to Progress Rail,all of them got scrapped and torched.
@@railfandepotproductions You're asking the right questions,but to the wrong person for answers. The SD80MAC's have been long past their time for a couple of years now and thanks to EPA compliance,they are done. The entire ordeal of tier four emissions standards is also why there never will be high horsepower locomotives again,like the AC6000CW's and SD90MAC's for example which were problematic on both performance and mainteance. Another example is the SD70AH-T4's which ended up becoming unreliable, which is very ironic because they were based on the SD90MAC's that obviously were no better. The only correlation to the SD80MAC's that are left is their 20-710-G3B-EC's which are also used in marine applications for tugboats,but EPA standards apply differently between railroads and overseas.
@@railfandepotproductions Norfolk Southern was actually never going to rebuild them,they were slowly being put in storage because of retirement and their years were coming to an end,aside from EPA compliance. PSR had absolutely nothing to do with them being decommissioned,it was age and emissions standards. The SD9043MAC's that Norfolk Southern bought from Union Pacific to start the SD70ACU rebuild program was what really replaced the SD80MAC's,before Norfolk Southern sold them and half of their SD70ACU's on top of that to PRLX. Nothing was wrong with reliability when it came to the SD80MAC's,it was the SD90MAC's and AC6000CW's which became inevitable disasterpieces. Like I've mentioned already,it really was tier four emissions standards that discontinued their service,even though cost and age were already considered.
