 |
Re: Siemens to build 35 new passenger locomotives in Sacramento
Author: mook
Date: 12-20-2013 - 17:48
Some random observations:
Bombardier (S' nearest competitor in the US market) recently "built" (mostly in Germany) some dual-power (AC electric/Cat diesel) locomotives for NJ Transit. Some probably were remodeled by Sandy ... but how are the rest working?
S does build diesels in Europe, and I think the Sprinter diesel LRVs in San Diego (Escondido line) are Siemens. The problems haven't been with the engines.
This seems to be kind of a coup for S. The initial run looks small enough that it won't tax Siemens' capacity at Sacramento, and the prospect of a longer series of contracts is probably attractive for keeping base workload and staffing going. As long as they concentrate on small batches of specialty vehicles, they will remain 'boutique' - this might change matters.
Metrolink recently signed up for a set of ugly (in the renderings anyway) "EMD" boxcabs for Tier 4 deliveries, and I suspect EMD/Progressive Rail/Cat expected to get the Amtrak/multi-state contract too. Could this change the EMD approach and leave Metrolink with a batch of orphans?
The commuter lines have to commit now to Tier 4 now for political and emission reasons - their Tier-0 and 1 engines have to go, with Tier 2's not far behind. So they need to buy what's proven to work at Tier 4: engines (often truck-like) with SCR catalysts. SCR is well-proven (though maybe not well-liked) in on-road and stationary applications.
Note the applications where Tier 4 (SCR) is going for now, outside of a few experiments: relatively short-distance work in a limited geographic area with bad air where all the equipment gets together in at most a couple of places (often just one) for service every day. Public money, if not fully involved (e.g. the commuter lines), is often used to cover some of the extra inital cost (e.g. short lines & switchers in bad-air areas), too. Real Railroads have different priorities - like fuel economy and reliability over a very long term (not just 5-10 years) and long distance trips - so I suspect they will wait until they really have to get new stuff to jump on the catalyst bandwagon (if they and GE/EMD can't find an alternative).
Bombardier (S' nearest competitor in the US market) recently "built" (mostly in Germany) some dual-power (AC electric/Cat diesel) locomotives for NJ Transit. Some probably were remodeled by Sandy ... but how are the rest working?
S does build diesels in Europe, and I think the Sprinter diesel LRVs in San Diego (Escondido line) are Siemens. The problems haven't been with the engines.
This seems to be kind of a coup for S. The initial run looks small enough that it won't tax Siemens' capacity at Sacramento, and the prospect of a longer series of contracts is probably attractive for keeping base workload and staffing going. As long as they concentrate on small batches of specialty vehicles, they will remain 'boutique' - this might change matters.
Metrolink recently signed up for a set of ugly (in the renderings anyway) "EMD" boxcabs for Tier 4 deliveries, and I suspect EMD/Progressive Rail/Cat expected to get the Amtrak/multi-state contract too. Could this change the EMD approach and leave Metrolink with a batch of orphans?
The commuter lines have to commit now to Tier 4 now for political and emission reasons - their Tier-0 and 1 engines have to go, with Tier 2's not far behind. So they need to buy what's proven to work at Tier 4: engines (often truck-like) with SCR catalysts. SCR is well-proven (though maybe not well-liked) in on-road and stationary applications.
Note the applications where Tier 4 (SCR) is going for now, outside of a few experiments: relatively short-distance work in a limited geographic area with bad air where all the equipment gets together in at most a couple of places (often just one) for service every day. Public money, if not fully involved (e.g. the commuter lines), is often used to cover some of the extra inital cost (e.g. short lines & switchers in bad-air areas), too. Real Railroads have different priorities - like fuel economy and reliability over a very long term (not just 5-10 years) and long distance trips - so I suspect they will wait until they really have to get new stuff to jump on the catalyst bandwagon (if they and GE/EMD can't find an alternative).
