P42DC vs Charger

[CSXfoamer1997]

Why build two different versions of the Chargers. Probably the only differences will be HEP capacity, fuel tank capacity, PTC installations. To not build all Chargers the same increases parts. Not having the greater HEP is just not very smart ( dumb ? ) Of course keeping the SD locos will tend to keep them from getting lost in the greater Amtrak system. But who knows what the Passenger system will be like in 10 years ?

Think of it. Building one version for regional services, AND another for Long Distance services. Even though these locomotives are said to be very fuel-efficient, the long distance locomotives would need more fuel to last the entire trip [hint: it would have a larger fuel tank (2,200 gallons on the long distance locos vs 1,800 gallons on the regional locos)] AND would also need to supply more HEP (Head-End Power) to the cars, because the long distance trains could possibly be longer than the regional trains [hint: feeding 1000kw of HEP from the long distance locos vs feeding 800 kw of HEP from the regional locos].

 

[jis]

Is it really worth tinkering around with two different alternator for HEP modules that occupy the same physical space but differ in capacity by 200kw? Just wondering.

It seems to that the fuel tank must be the significant issue requiring more physical space.

 

[cirdan]

Is it really worth tinkering around with two different alternator for HEP modules that occupy the same physical space but differ in capacity by 200kw? Just wondering.

It seems to that the fuel tank must be the significant issue requiring more physical space.

The alternator? I can sort of see the point.

But the fuel tank? This is not a hi-tech part that's going to need regular replacement. Neither can I imagine that fuel tanks are extremely costly to design. I don't think having two different types is going to break anybody's neck or blow their budget.

These days everything is about platform. Ultimately you can even argue the Charger and the Sprinter are the same platform with localization. Platforms are about stadardizing the costly and engineering-intensive bits while allowing customization on the comparatively low tech stuff.

 

[jis]

There is definite need for two different fuel tanks if that is what the customer desires. I suppose the HEP alternator module will just be either strap configurable or software configurable to be 800kw or 1Mw. No need to create two separate pieces of hardware.

 

[west point]

A point about the ACS-64s. The 64s have two transformer - rectifier - inverter systems. Each inverter supplies 2 traction motors and one of the 2 HEP 1000kw supplies. If the sprinters could use the same inverter then parts compatibility would be the same for that system. .Also the 1000Kw HEP. As well each AC traction motor could be the same as the -64s but power normally spread between the 4 axels. Then if one or more traction motors became inop the other 2 or 3 could provide the same HP. Of course starting train from stop would need to be slower to prevent wheel slip.

But it is probably too late to implement such a design ?

 

[CSXfoamer1997]

I guess you use the term AC traction to refer to how the power is delivered to the engine. I think the point being made earlier in the thread was about the difference between AC or DC traction referring to the nature of the motors that drive the wheel. In that sense both the Sprinter and the Charger are AC traction and almost apples to apples as far as adhesion and tractive efficiency - the hallmark of AC traction goes. Indeed their trucks are possibly quite similar too if not identical.

The Chargers will use the same trucks as the ACS-64's: The Siemens SF4 Bogies (or trucks).