Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Will UP be sending both companies trade in locomotives to be converted?

And has been thought of combining slug tech to the battery locomotives so they can be more flexable and, as Thomas would say, Useful?

No mention was made of trade-ins.  The Wabtec FLXdrive and CAT's versions are new from the wheels up, there would be virtually nothing "convertible" from a trade-in except for maybe traction motors.

The Wabtec battery locomotives are designed to work in multiple with normal diesel locomotives, making a virtual "hybrid" consist to save fuel.  Plus they can be operated individually for (an unknown to me) period/miles.

So far, CAT looks like they are building switchers, but I see MU receptacles, so apparently they can MU with diesels.

How more "useful" can they get?

Rusty

@EJN posted:

Do the diesel electric locomotive hooked in series keep the all battery wabtec loco charged up? Or is it recharged when off duty?

I would suspect while "on the road" it's pretty much like a hybrid car when the engine keeps charging the batteries as needed.  There should also be a regenerative feature used downhill.   While sitting idle on the ready track in the engine terminal is another question.  Either the UP will install charging facilities at major terminals or they'll plug in a diesel locomotive to recharge the battery locomotives.

I suspect the battery locomotives will work primarily in California for the immediate future and not wander out of state.

One thing for sure, 20 locomotives in regular service will be a good proving ground rather than test/demo trains.

Rusty

With the push to make all vehicles battery powered, it makes me wonder how many new power plants will need to be built. If you think about how many millions of vehicles are moving in America right now, and the foot pounds of energy their each creating, in the future when their all battery powered I would imagine the same foot pounds of energy would have to be created in power plants. Then it has to be delivered to all those batteries which will store it for use. So how many of those foot pounds of energy will get lost in the grid on their way to the batteries. For some reason, I'm having a hard time believing the whole battery thing is going to be better and cleaner. Heaven forbid a cyber attack that shuts down the energy grid. Everything will come to a stop. There's gotta be a way to create cleaner emissions.

@Dave Zucal posted:

With the push to make all vehicles battery powered, it makes me wonder how many new power plants will need to be built. If you think about how many millions of vehicles are moving in America right now, and the foot pounds of energy their each creating, in the future when their all battery powered I would imagine the same foot pounds of energy would have to be created in power plants. Then it has to be delivered to all those batteries which will store it for use. So how many of those foot pounds of energy will get lost in the grid on their way to the batteries. For some reason, I'm having a hard time believing the whole battery thing is going to be better and cleaner. Heaven forbid a cyber attack that shuts down the energy grid. Everything will come to a stop. There's gotta be a way to create cleaner emissions.

Plus, as more off-peak battery charging usage comes online, the off-peak load begins to shift towards daytime loads.  And the cost of generating electricity never goes down, regardless of the source.  I remember during the early days of nuclear, predictions were that electricity was going to be so cheap, it wasn't going to be metered.

I've stated before, I encourage development of alternates.  Heck, I live in an area where there's 3 solar farms and 2 windfarms within 25 miles of me, but I suspect the bulk of my power comes from the nuke plant about 40 miles away.

I personally do not view any one solution as THE solution and I don't understand why folks are willing to declare victory for any one solution.  That's where I become skeptical.  The ultimate solution will be a combination of advanced technologies.

Plus, can anyone really see the oil and gas industry saying "OK, we're done here.  It's been fun.  Time to shut down all our refineries. Adios..."

With the purchase of 20 battery locomotives, the UP will be providing the largest practical test of battery locomotion to date, whether they know it or not.

Rusty

Interesting post and moving in the direction of practicality of what it means to move to battery/electric major power use. I will keep following but will not comment as the last time I commented on a similar topic it was deleted. I will just say don't look at the topic with tunnel vision and look at all ramifications of going in this direction.

I would suspect while "on the road" it's pretty much like a hybrid car when the engine keeps charging the batteries as needed.

No, as everything I've read indicates that there is absolutely NO engine on board. The batteries must be charged from a way-side charging station.

There should also be a regenerative feature used downhill.  

Yes, i.e. dynamic braking also recharges the batteries.

While sitting idle on the ready track in the engine terminal is another question.  Either the UP will install charging facilities at major terminals or they'll plug in a diesel locomotive to recharge the battery locomotives.

How would a current diesel electric unit be able to be plugged into the battery unit? There is no HEP on freight units.

I suspect the battery locomotives will work primarily in California for the immediate future and not wander out of state.

One thing for sure, 20 locomotives in regular service will be a good proving ground rather than test/demo trains.

Rusty



I personally do not view any one solution as THE solution and I don't understand why folks are willing to declare victory for any one solution.  That's where I become skeptical.  The ultimate solution will be a combination of advanced technologies.



If I can recall correctly, I believe covering every inch of the USA in solar panels - literally - would not be able to meet our electricity requirements alone.  While there are definitely applications for solar, only a mix will get the job done. 

Plus, as more off-peak battery charging usage comes online, the off-peak load begins to shift towards daytime loads.  And the cost of generating electricity never goes down, regardless of the source.  I remember during the early days of nuclear, predictions were that electricity was going to be so cheap, it wasn't going to be metered.

I've stated before, I encourage development of alternates.  Heck, I live in an area where there's 3 solar farms and 2 windfarms within 25 miles of me, but I suspect the bulk of my power comes from the nuke plant about 40 miles away.

I personally do not view any one solution as THE solution and I don't understand why folks are willing to declare victory for any one solution.  That's where I become skeptical.  The ultimate solution will be a combination of advanced technologies.

Plus, can anyone really see the oil and gas industry saying "OK, we're done here.  It's been fun.  Time to shut down all our refineries. Adios..."

With the purchase of 20 battery locomotives, the UP will be providing the largest practical test of battery locomotion to date, whether they know it or not.

Rusty

Even - Nikoli Tesla wanted to go beyond the battery. There are estimates 2000 - 5000 dollars per vehicle over 10 years to upgrade the electrical grid for atomobiles. S0. 20.000.00 per vehicle on the low side. x 250 million autos! But, I do agree rusty - "THEY" are choosing a final winner in technology - before the game is even over. The railroads will certainly foind out fast......aas to the usefulness of this technology. As, long as their arms aren't being twisted.

@Hot Water posted:
How would a current diesel electric unit be able to be plugged into the battery unit? There is no HEP on freight units.

Hmmm...

I'll admit, I was assuming there would be connections similar to slug units which could also feed a charging circuit.  If the battery locomotive is "on it's own" as it were, that changes the equation, allowing for the possibility of the battery unit to "run out of juice" while in a consist over the road.

It will be interesting to see how these things perform in actual day to day operation.

If you read the WabTec story it seems the locomotives are primarily intended for use for yard duty. I would guess it is straightforward to keep them charged there.

The information as I understand it is the Wabtec FLXdrives will be working in consists MU'ed with diesels over the road.

Looks like the Caterpillar/Progressive Rail units will be assigned to yard duty, judging by their design, unless that changes.

We'll have to wait until UP takes delivery and any infrastructure they add to see exactly how these things will be used.

Rusty

I am always in favor of innovation, especially in the railroad sector.  However, as Rusty points out in his initial post, we don't know if this innovation will be the one or not.  Real-world testing is the only way to find out.  We sometimes forget that the steam to diesel-electric transition is littered with innovations that simply didn't work. 

Rather than pass judgment and play electrical engineer for the entire electrical infrastructure of the US, I will wait to see what the test results are and form an informed opinion on viability from there.   

Add Reply

Post
OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
330-757-3020

www.ogaugerr.com
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×