New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby Backshophoss » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:52 am

You would think by now, GE fixed the design flaw or replaced the supplier of the turbos,
so that curse of turbo failures continues........ :( :P
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4433
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby MEC407 » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:05 am

Interesting.

As the builder/assembler of the locomotives, I would have assumed that it was MPI's job to proactively replace the defective turbos.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
User avatar
MEC407
 
Posts: 10630
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby jaymac » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:17 pm

With GE shutting down its Latham turbo plant and new power orders in contraction, the sharp-pencils-and-even-sharper-knives boys and girls may earlier have decided that they won't be bringing good railway products to life.
GE has an unfortunate history of leaving messes -- sometimes figurative, sometimes literal, sometimes both -- in communities that hosted it. Pittsfield, MA comes to mind. Fitchburg does, as well.
With GE's corporate relocation to Boston underway, perhaps the Baker administration will see whether a Commonwealth agency can be made whole.
"A white SUV with a roof antenna just might not be a company van."
jaymac
 
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:08 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby MEC407 » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:50 am

Just for clarification: GE FDL/HDL/GEVO turbos are manufactured at the engine plant in Grove City, PA. The Latham plant was used to (re)manufacture aftermarket replacement turbos for EMD locos, and was formerly owned by Wabtec/MPI.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
User avatar
MEC407
 
Posts: 10630
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby jaymac » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:10 pm

Thanks!
"A white SUV with a roof antenna just might not be a company van."
jaymac
 
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:08 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby BandA » Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:24 pm

When a turbocharger fails, does the shrapnel damage the engine?
User avatar
BandA
 
Posts: 1759
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:47 am

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby Backshophoss » Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:40 pm

It can,just depends on how the turbo "self destructs" where the debris "flies" into.
If you get debris in the heads and then in the crankcase due to piston failure,you better off replacing the Prime Mover.
Could also wind up in the Main Altenator/Aux Altenator, shorting them out.
Then there's the oil fire that will happen as the turbo "explodes".....

The biggest "Failure Point" tends to be on the shaft on the exhaust side with the bearing exposed to the heat
from the exhaust,pumping oil thru that bearing is supposed to keep the bearing cool enough,but oil passages do clog up
from "burnt" oil along with the possibilty of some metal shards that get past the oil filter.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4433
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby johnpbarlow » Sat Apr 08, 2017 7:08 am

MBTA/Keolis still have problems with HSP engines per headline article in today's Boston Globe:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/04/07/locomotives-plagued-gear-failure/4wywO2H1EfUpqwiER7kltL/story.html
johnpbarlow
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:50 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby BandA » Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:25 pm

Commuter rail locomotives plagued by gear failure

Pesaturo said Keolis crews “are making progress every day.” The operation began with five more locomotives on Friday morning than on Thursday morning, he said. The company was still five locomotives short of the 67 locomotives required by its contract, however.
The more progress they make, the further they fall behind.
Image
Officials said on Monday that only 27 of 40 of the MBTA’s newest locomotives were in service, partly because of problems with an engine part that must now be replaced on all of the newest locomotives.
You can tell the Globe put their most technical writer on this story.
User avatar
BandA
 
Posts: 1759
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:47 am

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby Backshophoss » Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:35 pm

Wonder how many HSP's need to be sent to GE Erie for repairs? :P :P :P
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4433
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby scrook » Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:43 pm

Connaughton said she worries that Keolis may not have done “adequate due diligence” when assessing the condition of the MBTA’s trains during the bidding process...

That's got to be the understatement of the year.
It was a fool's errand they signed up for, made worse by unreliable prime movers in the brand new hardware.
No one wins. So it goes...
scrook
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:19 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby RenegadeMonster » Sun Apr 09, 2017 6:57 am

So if we are down 8 year to date for turbo failures (could be more now who knows), how many are we down due to gear failures?

Also, is it a total of 8 out of service due to turbo failures, or are there more who went out of service last year that are still waiting for warranty repairs?


It all most sounds like the MBTA is past due on leasing or acquiring more backup locomotives to be able to make all the schedule runs.
RenegadeMonster
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 9:19 am

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Sun Apr 09, 2017 2:01 pm

They haven't got the RFP issued for repairing any of the 16(!!!) dead -2C's sitting in storage, because the last one was pulled for wording so incoherent on what repairs they actually wanted that no one was capable of submitting bid information for it. Not even the other MassDOT paint unit that was repaired by Pan Am 2 years ago has gone through prep-for-service testing because BET is so hopelessly far behind.

Yeah, I'd say it's past time for some leasers. Unfortunately things got all lawyered-up with Rail World over the return of 2015's Screamer rent-a-wrecks, so they may not be a vendor option this time. RW has since scooped up a few of NJT's F40PH-2CAT's, which have advantage over those AMT pieces of crap by having the separate HEP generator (-2CAT = Caterpillar generator; -2C = Cummins) preventing constant notch 8 operation from grinding them down. And also being cab signal equipped so they only need to borrow an ACSES unit from one of the dead -2C's to be portable systemwide. Though they're still very worn-out beaters, so you get what you pay for just like last time.

Don't think there's many passenger GP40's available at all from the brokers. The MARC units are long gone, and most of NJT's dispersals it sold along with their F40's when they cleaned out the last of their dead line in 2015 got de-HEP'ed and re-geared for freight service where the aftermarket is lots more lucrative for Geeps. I don't see any of VRE's old Geeps still kicking around either, but it's now been 7 years since that fleet was totally replaced so nearly all those units have likely flushed their way through to new freight owners by now.

Supposedly Amtrak's 13 stored Genesis P40DC non-rebuilds are still in full-operable condition. With the Charger corridor options now being exercised for a total of 61 units and reports circulating of a decision imminent by summer on starting to drain some of the 150 national orders, they no longer have any need for keeping the P40's stored strictly in-house for a rainy day. Those would need more up-front elbow grease and $$$ for prep-for-service (even in original form, without the P42-spec rebuilds that the 15 in-service AMTK units and all CDOT units got) since they've been idle for 15+ years. But if the T needs something that'll last for 2-5 years instead of week-to-week basis these Gennies are in such extremely good condition at very low lifetime odometer readings to be worth a look-see Keolis phone call. Too bad the T is coming so recently off a lawyer-on-lawyer spat with AMTK, too, so that phone call may not be returned. :(


So given the dodgy quality control on the F40 rent-a-wrecks and other unlikelihoods re: AMTK's reserves, the easiest option may be dipping into the pool of fresher F59PH dispersals now a bit more numerous on the aftermarket. RB Railway Group has a roster of 12 ex-GO units, some of which are currently on-loan to Metrolink while they rotate out their native F59PHI fleet for PTC installs. The full-funded Detroit-Ann Arbor SEMCOG/MiTrain commuter rail has a lease option on an undisclosed number of those same RB F59 units for its start of service, but since their A-Day has now been pushed back to 2022 those rebuilds will be in circulation with other carriers awhile. They have to be in pretty good condition if SEMCOG's already settled on those light refreshes for its fleet, so RB leasers might be worth exploring. So far no operator south of AMT, north of NCDOT/Amtrak Piedmont, and east of Metra has ever historically run F59's; they're almost entirely a west-of-Mississippi and Canadian phenomenon. So this would be their first regular-service appearance ever in the Northeast, meaning zero units have ever run with cab signals. Also not sure either if their taller-than-F40 height poses a clearance problem at Cove precluding any southside running outside of Old Colony & Fairmount. But even if the only roam north like the AMT junkers did they might be the best option on the market given their better numbers and fresher condition.
Last edited by CRail on Wed Apr 12, 2017 12:22 am, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Unnecessary quote removed. Repeating the previous post in its entirety serves no purpose and wastes space.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7003
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby jmar896 » Sun Apr 09, 2017 6:23 pm

I think that if rentals keep being used it will just become a continuous cycle. It might be time to start looking into investing into some new (or used) power that the T could own.
None of the current locomotives are getting any younger. The Geeps have been in service for 20 years since their last major rebuild. The 2Cs are not far behind, however it is justifiable that they go for another major rebuild. When the HSPs were ordered they were intended to replace some Geeps and 2Cs, but have they really replaced many of the ones they were intended to? From how it sounds right now the fleet isn't exactly fit enough to permanently replace the units that are out, even once the HSPs are fully in service. Also, service isn't decreasing and the system isn't getting any smaller.

There are plenty of options on the table. The OOS 2Cs could be rebuilt, but that would take a considerable amount of time (years, as seen with the MassDOT unit). I think that it might be worth looking the P40s and seeing about getting a few units. Although they have been stored, if stored right they wont require much more work than what it is to get a rent-a-wreck into operable condition. Plus, we already know that they are compatible with most lines on the system, although a few upgrades may be required. I don't think the recent dispute with Amtrak will cause major problems. Also, call me crazy but I think it may be worth looking into obtaining a few ABB-44s for service to Providence. I believe that NJT will only lease them at this time, but considering most of them only have 15 years of service on them and the minimal work needed to bring them back into service they could be worth it. Although an agreement would need to be made with Amtrak for use of their electrification infrastructure (and presumably maintenance too), the benefits they could bring are immense.

Really though, its time for the state and fiscal control board to smarten up. In the long run having proper investment in rolling stock will cost us less, and attract more people. I think an order to fully phase out the Geeps should be placed by 2020, but that wishful thinking. There are plenty of new, as well as tried options available. It might be time to look into them.

I wonder, is it possible for MassDOT to obtain rolling stock and lease them as they see fit? With rail activity in Western Mass picking up maybe its worth a look.
jmar896
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 4:02 pm

Re: New MBTA Locomotive Order Discussion (MPI HSP-46)

Postby Backshophoss » Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:07 pm

Those stored P-40's were sent to Beech Grove to give up their trucks to keep the P-42's up and running,
reported to be faulty maintaince instructions from GE on truck repair procedures.
Unknown if they are on shop trucks/became part sources at Beech Grove.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4433
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rmccown and 8 guests