Jon Gwinnett Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Two gensets on East Bank of LA River, reflecting sunset, as seen from Amtrak 4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prof Klyzlr Posted July 2, 2011 Share Posted July 2, 2011 Dear Genset Fans, Â It breaks many of the "Railfan Photog" rules, (sun on the wrong side, focal subject not "lit up", etc etc) but of the 2 shots, I prefer the first... Â Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Gwinnett Posted July 2, 2011 Author Share Posted July 2, 2011 Thanks Prof and JWB -always pleased to see more of the real thing in the concrete jungle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Gwinnett Posted July 2, 2011 Author Share Posted July 2, 2011 #2709 arrived today to join its stablemate, so I can now do a realistic pairing. Had an awful job removing the fuel tank from #2707 - it should have a curvy one. I've got a Kato GP35 tank as a donor but its going to be a bu££er to fit. I seem to recall there's somebody making etched brass fuel-tanks - they might be a better bet?  I also picked up an Athearn AC4400Cw in UP paint too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Gwinnett Posted July 2, 2011 Author Share Posted July 2, 2011 http://www.railflyermodel.com/ Â these folks make a myriad of fuel tanks - anyone know what size I need for the Genset? Â (Edit - I've found a site which lists the fuel capacity as 2900 gallons - needless to say not an immediate match to any of the kits!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Actually, regarding pairing, it's becoming much more common to see the gensets in threes in the Los Angeles area. I've been trying to find out why this is, because it seems to me as a lay person that if you need up to 6300 hp, you're beginning to defeat the purpose of the whole green-genset thingy. My suspicion is that three are needed not so much for the power as for the reliability, but nobody's talking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave1905 Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 I've been trying to find out why this is, because it seems to me as a lay person that if you need up to 6300 hp, you're beginning to defeat the purpose of the whole green-genset thingy. Why would you say that? What difference would having 3 of them as far as them being green? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigZ Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 http://www.railflyermodel.com/ Â these folks make a myriad of fuel tanks - anyone know what size I need for the Genset? Â (Edit - I've found a site which lists the fuel capacity as 2900 gallons - needless to say not an immediate match to any of the kits!) Â I'll post this handy rule from Scott Chatfield for post 1966 EMD fuel tanks with the caveat that we don't know the handrail spacing on the Gensets is the same as EMD: Â "Compare length of tank to the handrail stanchions. The tank spans the equivalent of four stanchions. Stanchion spacing on most EMDs is roughly four feet. 4x4=16 feet. 16x200 gallons/foot (for this profile EMD tank) = 3,200 gallons." In other words, 1 linear foot of fuel tank holds 200 gallons of fuel. For pre 1966 it's about 167 gallons/foot. This engine has a 1700 gallon tank http://www.pbase.com...130598857/large Handy, eh? If you have a spare tank from anything else you can simply shorten it to match the capacity needed. Athearn also sells their plastic tanks when they have them in stock though as somebody recently reported that they did. Atlas undec GP38s and GP40s came with two tank sizes as well. Railflyer's parts, from what I've seen, are quite nice, but from what other friends report I'd be certain to email him and make certain he's got what you want in stock as long waits have been reported... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Gwinnett Posted July 3, 2011 Author Share Posted July 3, 2011 Useful rule of thumb! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Gwinnett Posted July 3, 2011 Author Share Posted July 3, 2011 ... it's becoming much more common to see the gensets in threes in the Los Angeles area...  Not sure I've really got room for 2 let alone 3!  Still, IMTS* rules apply      *Its My Train Set Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Well, here's my thinking about 6300 hp green genset-sets (I've made people unhappy in Yahoo groups asking about this, though): the theoretical benefit of a genset is that you're only burning as much fuel/creating as much exhaust as you need at each level of power. So if you're pulling two cars or whatever, you probably don't need all the 2100 hp the loco's three diesels put out, so maybe you only have one engine running. Great! The other side of the coin (as is generally acknowledged) is that this costs a lot more than a single-engine GP38-2 or whatever to do the same job: you're paying for preserving the planet or something, not for efficient hauling. Â Now, if you need 6300 hp -- the equivalent of three 2100 hp gensets -- it seems to me that you're up in dual GP40 or SD40-2 territory, and probably out of the territory where you're going to save the fuel and exhaust you would have saved pulling two cars with one unit. In other words, if you're running a 60-car hauler with three gensets, you've probably got all nine diesels working most of the time -- I say this as a layman who could stand corrected on this. Thus you're not going to have the theoretical benefits of running where you may only need 700 hp or 1400 hp. Â From what I hear and read on railfan forums, the gensets are sorta-kinda in Baldwin or FM territory as far as maintainability and reliability are concerned -- the deals the various railroads have cut to run them are largely political and involve political subsidies to make them attractive, and they aren't better mousetraps in the sense that an F3 set outdid a PRR Q2 hands down. So the railroads are doing what they need to do to get reliability, and that involves running 3-unit sets in case one or two units quits, which is, shall we say, not unheard of. (This, for that matter, is why the Santa Fe ran 5 or 6 F units on the later Super Chief/El Cap, not for the horsepower.) This is almost certainly not cost-effective and quite possibly no real gain in saving the planet, either. Â I'd be interested to hear other viewpoints. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prof Klyzlr Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Well, here's my thinking about 6300 hp green genset-sets (I've made people unhappy in Yahoo groups asking about this, though): .... I'd be interested to hear other viewpoints.  Dear JWB,  Suggest you check the Tier2 (or is it Tier 3 now?) burn/fuel efficiencies of the CAT powerpacks, applied thru the high-efficiency high-adhesion drive systems of a Genset  VS  a re-conditioned 645e thru a regular -2 series "enhanced" generator/DC traction-motor system, (IE those that do _not_ comply with Tier2, let alone Tier3 specs, as perscribed by LA) as seen in the kind of re-con Geeps you're describing.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_emission_standards  http://www.epa.gov/nonroaddiesel/regulations.htm  http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/nonroad.php  This may give you the numbers you're after, on a more empirical "apples VS apples" basis.  Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr  PS will not go into the debate furthur, suffice to respectfully suggest that "green or not" may be considered to be on the ragged edge of relevance for a _modelling_ forum... (I'm sure the "Wheeltappers" section could/would handle such discourse... http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/forum/57-wheeltappers/ ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Prof, I indicated above that this was a potentially controversial topic, and my intent was to avoid controversy as well as to listen to other opinions. It appears we're in complete agreement that specs exist on these matters, and I certainly don't intend to add any controversy beyond replying to a post specifically requesting that I explain my opinions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.