GE evolution with 4 traction motors instead of 6

minesweeper Nov 28, 2017

  1. ddechamp71

    ddechamp71 TrainBoard Member

    Hytec I understand your concern. But as a Trains (Kalmbach) subscriber I read every month articles about such or such shortline reopening a closed line in order to switch again to rail customers that were relying on trucking. And BTW, the last figures I have in mind about freight traffic in the US are about 50/50 for rail vs highway... ;)

  2. minesweeper

    minesweeper TrainBoard Member

    Guys, I jump in even if we are off topic, in Italy is being worse than in France, Italy had always been the #1 in Europe for trucking freight, something around 90%, for a series of reasons like Dom just told, plus
    the truckers' lobby is very powerful and a good basket of consensus (2 train enigineers = at least 50 truckers), if anything they do not like happens they got on the highways at 10 mph, and the day after all politicians fall in line
    until some time ago FIAT, the car and trcuk maker also was pushing for trucks, together with the comapnies that run the highways.....
    Anyway, here trains mean ususally passenger trains, the former state railway took off most of the spurs and got up to illegal ways to prevent private freight operators to take over, they scrapped more than 1000 freight locos in the last 10 years, just to buy some new 250 now....
    By the way no more single carload service since 2000, just bulk trains...
    .. and remenber that trucking (and bussing for passengers) vs trains increase GDP
    Back to the topic,
    I still do not understand why, being all things equal (the GE evos in the end have the same weight and power) someone would use a A1A A1A loco instead of a C C.
    ddechamp71 likes this.
  3. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    All things are not equal. The engine with four motors costs less. When they're AC motors, significantly less.
  4. minesweeper

    minesweeper TrainBoard Member

    Then the answer is: the A1A is cheaper.
  5. mmi16

    mmi16 TrainBoard Member

    To go fast takes Horsepower. To haul tonnage takes tractive effort.

    The AC traction motored A-1-A's supply 1100 HP to each traction motor. The 6 axle AC's supply 733 HP to each traction motor.

    The operational characteristics of the AC form of traction provides provides superior wheel slip control when compared to the DC form of traction, and AC traction motors are not subject to the short time overheating restrictions that DC traction motors are nor do the AC traction motors have a 'minimum continuous speed' to keep from overheating the DC traction motors.

    What I believe BNSF has found is that the weight of the A-1-A locomotives with the 1 axle retracted has tamed the slipperiness that was found with the 6000 HP AC's on both CSX & UP and has made them good performers on all the Intermodal trains BNSF operate on their Northern and Southern Transcon's as they can haul at speed with the 1100 HP per powered axle.

    The 6 axle AC's with their 733 HP per powered axle will haul tonnage day and night around the clock.
  6. YoHo

    YoHo TrainBoard Supporter

    Yes, as mmi16 reiterated and I said before the A1A is cheaper and faster than the standard GEVO. The standard GEVO though can get a heavier train moving and maintain speed on that heavier train.
    This is the basic fundamental of how a Diesel electric (or for that matter an electric) work. The more HP to the Traction motor, the fast that motor can spin. The more wheels with a traction motor, the more adhesion to the rails and thus more tractive effort.

Share This Page