Amtrak Siemens Charger locomotive (SC44, ALC42, ALC42E) (2015 - 1Q 2024)

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
My interest in these locomotives is related to their environmental benefits. I understand they meet both the Tier IV EPA and California CARB standards. Could anyone describe in layman's terms what this means here?

I also have tried to determine how much fuel savings (and thus carbon emissions) the long distance Chargers will provide as they replace the current fleet of locomotives. The number I've found is about 10% fuel savings, but I would be curious if anyone has any other data to share here. Thanks to any who can offer input.
 
rs9 said:
My interest in these locomotives is related to their environmental benefits. I understand they meet both the Tier IV EPA and California CARB standards. Could anyone describe in layman's terms what this means here?
Click to expand...

The P42s are "Tier 0" if I remember correctly, which is really bad.

"Pre-Tier" locomotives date from before 1973 and are worse, but "Tier 0" is the second-worst.

The P42s were introduced in 1996 and the Tier regulations went into effect in 1997, and were never remanufactured to my knowledge, so I believe the P42s are in the "unremanufactured Tier 0" category for locomotives made from 1973 to 2001.

"Tier 4" is a huge jump in standards. I'm not sure it can be described in layman's terms, but you can read the actual numerical limits on emissions here:

https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/loco.php
For example:
- hydrocarbons limit goes from 1.00 to 0.14
- carbon monoxide limit goes from 5.0 to 1.5
- nitrogen oxides limit goes from 9.5 to 1.3
- particulate matter limit goes from 0.60 to 0.03

So, the pollution limits are being reduced by a factor of 5, 10, or 20 (depending on the pollutant).

I also have tried to determine how much fuel savings (and thus carbon emissions) the long distance Chargers will provide as they replace the current fleet of locomotives. The number I've found is about 10% fuel savings, but I would be curious if anyone has any other data to share here. Thanks to any who can offer input.
Click to expand...
 
Yeah I'm really excited for more Chargers to roll out so we can scrap the loud, slow, unreliable, belching P42s.
 
neroden said:
The P42s are "Tier 0" if I remember correctly, which is really bad.

"Pre-Tier" locomotives date from before 1973 and are worse, but "Tier 0" is the second-worst.

The P42s were introduced in 1996 and the Tier regulations went into effect in 1997, and were never remanufactured to my knowledge, so I believe the P42s are in the "unremanufactured Tier 0" category for locomotives made from 1973 to 2001.

"Tier 4" is a huge jump in standards. I'm not sure it can be described in layman's terms, but you can read the actual numerical limits on emissions here:

https://dieselnet.com/standards/us/loco.php
For example:
- hydrocarbons limit goes from 1.00 to 0.14
- carbon monoxide limit goes from 5.0 to 1.5
- nitrogen oxides limit goes from 9.5 to 1.3
- particulate matter limit goes from 0.60 to 0.03

So, the pollution limits are being reduced by a factor of 5, 10, or 20 (depending on the pollutant).
Click to expand...
Many years ago, when I was on a Capitol Limited that was stuck at South Bend, they let us off to walk the platform, and I did see the builder's plate for the P42, and to indicated that it was "Tier 0."

It should also be pointed out that, unlike passenger cars, EPA regulates emissions from locomotives (and other heavy-duty vehicles) on the basis of the emissions from the engines, not the vehicles. The test involves putting the engine on a dynamometer and running a load and duty cycle that is allegedly representative of the vehicle use. The results (and standards) are given in "grams per brake horsepower hour." Any attempt to relate that to more useful measures, like "grams per mile" is done by making a lot of assumptions and is strictly for planning purposes. I'm not even sure if there's any published data on fuel economy and emissions of actual trains in revenue service. I did once see a poster at the TRB meeting with some data collected from the Piedmont service. As expected, speed, grade, and acceleration all have a lot to do with the actual performance of the train on the road.
 
jis said:
ALC42 to be deployed in commercial service on the Empire Builder paired with a P42.

https://railfan.com/amtraks-new-chargers-will-debut-on-empire-builder/
Click to expand...
From the article:
Amtrak officials said the locomotives will become the “new face” of passenger railroading in America.
Click to expand...
Sounds wonderful. Amtrak needs to get rid of the old face of passenger railroading in America. Those old faces are not P42s. Those old faces are the board and executives of Amtrak. Soon to follow the P42s.
 
me_little_me said:
From the article:

Sounds wonderful. Amtrak needs to get rid of the old face of passenger railroading in America. Those old faces are not P42s. Those old faces are the board and executives of Amtrak. Soon to follow the P42s.
Click to expand...
One would fervently hope so, at least from this corner of mine.
 
I agree. We could keep the P42, the P40, the F40, and the P30CH (and add the new Chargers) if it would represent a return to the administrative values that were prevalent in the period that those older locomotives represent, sic, W. Graham Claytor Jr. et al.
 
One curious thing I saw in the Section 503 Report is that the Chargers are being delivered to Wilmington! I wonder if this means that Wilmington will be their maintenance base.Considering that the electrical side of those are pretty much the same as Sprinters, there may be some logic to it.
 
For California Chargers, Siemens is right there in Sacramento. It makes sense to have a maintenance base further east. Chicago Maintenance has a pretty bad long-term reputation, so I would've picked one of the east coast bases too...
 
Heard a rumor on another site that the first revenue service of an ALC-42 would be the eastbound Empire Builder leaving Chicago today, #7(8). That's 2:15 PM Central.
 
daybeers said:
Heard a rumor on another site that the first revenue service of an ALC-42 would be the eastbound Empire Builder leaving Chicago today, #7(8). That's 2:15 PM Central.
Click to expand...
Todays consist for 7. (Mods, if you want to delete my other thread I made you can).
 

Attachments

  • 4844925A-C8EB-45ED-B587-7C9E6980DA8C.jpeg
    4844925A-C8EB-45ED-B587-7C9E6980DA8C.jpeg
    87.5 KB · Views: 33
Trogdor said:
Train 7 was about 40 minutes late leaving Chicago today with P42 #84 in the lead, followed by two ALC42s and another P42. The original lead locomotive, #301, suffered a PTC failure on departure and so 84 had to be tacked onto the front.
Click to expand...
It won;t have any problem climbing Marias Pass at the highest allowed speed with that much power available, I suppose.

Does the entire lashup go to Seattle? Or does a part of it go to Portland?
 
iiiiiinteresting!
In a event at Chicago Union Station, Amtrak Vice President and Chief Mechanical Officer George Hull used the operating debut of the two long-distance Charger diesels to announce the company’s board of directors has authorized exercising the option to add 50 more to the 2018 production order of 75 now rolling out of Siemens Sacramento, Calif., production facility.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top