In a message dated 8/3/00 7:05:14 AM Central Daylight Time, karlre@r...
writes:
<< one exception as was the application of the Dash 2 trucks. F45's,
generally, had very good riding qualities, SDP40 F's did not. Even though
the locomotives are long gone it would be interesting to learn the underlying
cause(s) of the ride problems. >>
One item about the Dash-2 trucks that was different from the previous EMD C-C
trucked engines was the fact that all six traction motors hung on the axle
towards the fuel tank. Previous versions had the #3 and #4 TM's hung on the
axles opposite the fuel tank. I personally think the Dash-2 configuration
definitely ruined the ride qualities as the truck geometry was significantly
changed from what we enjoyed on the SD-7, SD-9, and SD-24 (the "Cadillacs").
The SD/F45's rode good but due to longer frames and 20 cylinder engines, the
ride fell a little short of the "Cadillacs". Of course, during the reign of
the V-20's we were treated to the "Lou Menk" track maintanance policy which
left something to be desired.
Even though the ride qualities of the Amtrak SDP-40F was always in question
at high speed, their real problems didn't surface until the rash of
derailments occurred with them (almost always on a curve). Alignment control
couplers, was singled out as the culprit, and at this time EMD had developed
the F40PH as a replacement for the 6 axle units. Interesting to note that
the first 30 F40PH's built (200-229) still had alignment control couplers;
all subsequent F40's were not equipped with them. It was a 3-way battle
between Amtrak (poor maintanence), EMD (poor design) and BN (poor track) as
to who was responsible for all the derailments with the SDP-40F. I can
personally attest to the maintanence that Amtrak performed on the units and
it far exceeded anything I've seen on the BN, leaving the last two as suspect.
Bob Campbell
|