FL9AC rebuilds and disposition

Somehow I've come to know quite a few people in the scrapping and used machinery business. They let nothing go to waste. On a locomotive, the traction motors get rewound and either sold to another railroad or an oil company for use on a rig. The PM's will go to new locomotives, and once they get worn out will generally find a final home in a third-world country coastal freighter or ferry. You'd be amazed the utter garbage that businesses in third-world countries will buy because they have no money for good equipment, labor is cheap, and their mechanics can keep something running forever. Of course, the safety standards go out the window and the maintenance technique is not comparable to something you'd find employed at Harmon shops - usually we're talking bailing wire, welds on top of welds, sledge hammers... The saying goes "heat it, beat it, or burn it". But the pieces of those FL9AC's are going all over the world, no two ways about it. Some pieces may sit on a shelf for 20+ years at a place like NRE or LTEX, but a rare replacement part that can be bought for $100 when nobody needs it can be sold for $2000 when somebody needs it and none can be found. Coming from the heavy machinery industry, I've seen used cranes sold for twice the price of a new crane because the used crane is already built and can be operating in one week on-site as opposed to 6-12 week delivery.

Don't forget duct tape......spit and gum.........etc.

Don't forget duct tape......spit and gum.........etc.

and shoelaces, baling wire, old (and new) rags. lol.

Pat

Ok lets stick to topic at hand not inept humor by rail foamers.

The FL-9 ac hasd very little recycled, only main engine and alternator were sold off, everything else was cut up, including the AC traction motors, truck frames , wheelsets etc etc etc.

The 700 series in the FL-9AC's were these brand new from EMD? Or were they rebuilt?

Ok lets stick to topic at hand not inept humor by rail foam

I truly appreciate your contributions to this forum. Your expertise is second to none, and I actually look forward to the many technical answers you provide. I happen to know lots of your fellow employees through my former career as a firefighter. You are held in high esteem by them, like it or not.
There was no disrespect intended in my last post nor I don't thing Sarge was going in that direction either. I like to laugh and chuckle while going through the forums. Not all of us are "true" rail foamers. I grew up in Harrison,NY watching the Virginiams hauling freight, the EP-5's flying through town, and the washboards plying their trade. One of the reasons I moved to Dover was because of the train service that could get me to work in case of a vehicle breakdown. I personally think Metro-North is the best commuter railroad. If my sense of humor bothers you, what can I say ?

Lighten up big guy, laughter is the best medicine.

Pat McCarty Harrison FD (ret)

Let's all have a group hug and move on, please...

-otto-

MN-P32AC-DM-201-227 wrote:The 700 series in the FL-9AC's were these brand new from EMD? Or were they rebuilt?

FL9-ac's were never in 700 series, the MNCR units were 2040 > 2046, the LIRR units were 300 > 301.

i think he was referring to the prime mover, not the locomotive numbers

The FL9's were deliverd with a 1750 hp 16/567B engine, the 12/710G3 engine was part of rebuilt by ABB

The 700 series in the FL-9AC's were these brand new from EMD? Or were they rebuilt?

Thank you Dutch, yes I was referring to the prime mover not the locomotive number.

Tadman wrote:

MN-P32AC-DM-201-227 wrote:The heart of the beast. Very nice shots FL-9AC,Otto!!! What other locomotives was the 710 used in?

Basically an EMD built after 1986-ish. 60-series, 70-series, 75-series, 80-series. The SD9043 I believe used the H-engine.

The SD9043MAC used a standard 710 (hence the "43" which indicated 4300 horsepower). The "real" SD90MACs, rated at 6000 HP, used the 265H engine.

Going back to the FL9AC... did they experience a lot of problems with the AC traction system (which, as noted throughout this thread, was still a new concept at the time)? And if so, was that the main reason why the FL9ACs were retired so quickly? Or were there other problems that contributed to the FL9ACs' early demise?

MEC407 wrote:Going back to the FL9AC... did they experience a lot of problems with the AC traction system (which, as noted throughout this thread, was still a new concept at the time)? And if so, was that the main reason why the FL9ACs were retired so quickly? Or were there other problems that contributed to the FL9ACs' early demise?

One big problem -at least for the LIRR units- was fine, powdery snow getting into the traction motors (particularly during the '95-'96 winter season) as stated in the book Diesels To Park Avenue.

It boggles the mind that this was a problem in 1995, when the problem was a severe and known headache decades before. From 1968-ish to 1980-ish, the GG1, M2 and South Shore Pullmans were notorious for traction motor snow ingestion problems.

The Demise of FL-9AC was due to unreliability of Siemens AC drive and MICAS computer.
The fact that one inverter ran two traction motors was trouble from beginning.
The snow ingestion was not in traction motor but in the 3 inverters which would short and render locomotive inoperative till snow melted.

Yet LIRR went with DE/DM units which use an almost identical electric system as the FL-8AC