GO Transit Fleet Equipment and other

[jordanmkasla2009]

GO regularly runs trains at 93mph - the maximum speed possible of the MP40s.

I believe that MARC is only allowed to operate at 100mph with their diesels.

I don't think that 7mph is of any major importance.

Dan

to note the MP54AC is limited to 110mph so we won't be seeing 125mph under diesel power anytime soon

 

[kaptrice]

Because they need a thrill? Or because it gets them somewhere faster? You need to calculate how much time a GO train would save if it did accelerate further before beginning to brake. The math is not supportive of your argument. Big dollars in track and fuel costs, versus a few seconds shaved off the timings.

For balance, I am a bit surprised at how low the track speed limit is on some GO lines.... but I have seen the grid that tells engineers what speed to coast from after leaving each stop. The grid is more conservative than the track construction, and that's a deliberate calculation based on time versus fuel expense. the track isn't the limiting factor.



Not a good comparison. You are asking why we don't engineer and build highways to a higher standard. The answer - it costs a lot of money, and you can already do 120 fairly safely, if you choose to. And if your gas consumption were in the same range as a MP40, you might reconsider the choice.

- Paul

I don't suppose that trying to save on traction power costs will be as big a motivator in the future as saving on fuel is today, and the faster-accelerating trains of the future will also be able to spend so much more time at maximum speeds of 140 km/h. A TRAXX platform locomotive with maximum power 5600kW may haul a 5-car train, of weight ~350 tonnes including the loco, and with a starting tractive effort of ~315kN. Today's MP40PHs may, with output 3000kW, haul 12-car trains within striking distance of 800 tonnes and with about 370kN starting tractive effort. Some quick calculations can produce ballpark figures for a stopping penalty - i.e. how much extra time it takes to reach a distant point after coming to a stop and accelerating again, ignoring the time spent dwelling while stopped. For current trains, it comes out to well in excess of 200 seconds for a MP40PH and maybe a dozen seconds less for a MP54AC. The short electric train may do it in 90 seconds. Modern EMUs could halve that again, but I understand they aren't planned in the near future for pragmatic reasons.

I was really shocked at the old Uxbridge sub speed limits though. Do we know if they've been raised following the double-tracking project?

 

[Bordercollie]

I don't suppose that trying to save on traction power costs will be as big a motivator in the future as saving on fuel is today, and the faster-accelerating trains of the future will also be able to spend so much more time at maximum speeds of 140 km/h. A TRAXX platform locomotive with maximum power 5600kW may haul a 5-car train, of weight ~350 tonnes including the loco, and with a starting tractive effort of ~315kN. Today's MP40PHs may, with output 3000kW, haul 12-car trains within striking distance of 800 tonnes and with about 370kN starting tractive effort. Some quick calculations can produce ballpark figures for a stopping penalty - i.e. how much extra time it takes to reach a distant point after coming to a stop and accelerating again, ignoring the time spent dwelling while stopped. For current trains, it comes out to well in excess of 200 seconds for a MP40PH and maybe a dozen seconds less for a MP54AC. The short electric train may do it in 90 seconds. Modern EMUs could halve that again, but I understand they aren't planned in the near future for pragmatic reasons.

I was really shocked at the old Uxbridge sub speed limits though. Do we know if they've been raised following the double-tracking project?

Unless it's an express train, is the time saved would be marginal.

 

[Bojaxs]

Has MX started repainting the MP40's in the newer livery?

 

[drum118]

Has MX started repainting the MP40's in the newer livery?

A few have been done so far, but been some time one has been repainted

Edited: 607 + 615 + 647 that I have photos of. I believe 662 and up arrived in new colours

 

[Bibi L]

A few have been done so far, but been some time one has been repainted

Edited: 607 + 615 + 647 that I have photos of. I believe 662 and up arrived in new colours

607 and 615 were repainted a while back. 647 was an MP40 and was converted to an MP54 as an experiment. The newer 662+ MP40’s arrived in the new livery already. No repaints recently.

 

[Bibi L]

Does anyone know if or when the remaining F59PH’s are going out of service entirely? And why they are still in service despite multiple being retired when the MP40PH-3C’s were ordered and delivered?
There were periods of time where I didn’t see many F59PH’s running, but I do see a lot more in service.
I love the F59PH’s!

 

[drum118]

607 and 615 were repainted a while back. 647 was an MP40 and was converted to an MP54 as an experiment. The newer 662+ MP40’s arrived in the new livery already. No repaints recently.

The first photo of 607 been repainted was September 19, 2013:

First shot of 617 along with 607 was April 19, 2014

647 came back from rebuilt in new colours with the first shot October 09/22

Does anyone know if or when the remaining F59PH’s are going out of service entirely? And why they are still in service despite multiple being retired when the MP40PH-3C’s were ordered and delivered?
There were periods of time where I didn’t see many F59PH’s running, but I do see a lot more in service.
I love the F59PH’s!

They will be hanging around for some time as there is no rush to do so and mainly used on 6-8 cars trains for the Barrie and Stouffville/Mount Pleasant line

 

[SaugeenJunction]

So this is doing the rounds on Facebook this AM. Evidently GO has purchased some F59s from California and will have them rebuilt in North Bay. Take with a grain of salt.

 

[cplchanb]

So this is doing the rounds on Facebook this AM. Evidently GO has purchased some F59s from California and will have them rebuilt in North Bay. Take with a grain of salt.

That's ghetto... at least some surplus mp40s instead of a 40 year old relic

 

[Bojaxs]

That's ghetto... at least some surplus mp40s instead of a 40 year old relic

I mean, Metrolinx is refurbishing those old cab cars. So a move like this shouldn't come as a surprise.

It's interesting how they sold some of their original F59's to EXO, only now to be buying some more back from Caltrain.

My only concern with the F59's is they're limited to moving 6 coaches. Unless the plan is to have two F59's per train. How many coaches can two F59's move? Without sacrificing speed.

 

[T3G]

That's ghetto... at least some surplus mp40s instead of a 40 year old relic

Yeah, screw GO for trying to economize and get extra motive power on the cheap. All that matters is that we appear "modern".

Level of service offered >>>>>> modernity of rolling stock.

 

[rbt]

My only concern with the F59's is they're limited to moving 6 coaches. Unless the plan is to have two F59's per train. How many coaches can two F59's move? Without sacrificing speed.

The ONxpress plan for most lines is short trains frequently: there's going to be an abundance of 4-car train runs.

 

[dowlingm]

I mean, Metrolinx is refurbishing those old cab cars. So a move like this shouldn't come as a surprise.

It's interesting how they sold some of their original F59's to EXO, only now to be buying some more back from Caltrain.

My only concern with the F59's is they're limited to moving 6 coaches. Unless the plan is to have two F59's per train. How many coaches can two F59's move? Without sacrificing speed.

You have your Californian transit agencies mixed up - Caltrain (San Francisco area) is disposing Tier 0 F40s and it seems that they cannot be sold in operable condition under condition of the grant to buy EMUs.

Metrolink is a diesel only operation in the Los Angeles area, operating EMD F125s, F59s and MotivePower MP36s.

 

[dowlingm]

So this is doing the rounds on Facebook this AM. Evidently GO has purchased some F59s from California and will have them rebuilt in North Bay. Take with a grain of salt.

View attachment 605778

855 is noted in Wikipedia as written off after Chatsworth, so that’s… odd.
The remainder appear to have been already disposed to San Luis Potosí Locomotive Works - SLPX.

Could be that there is some sort of face saving involving exporting old locos to Mexico rather than reselling within US/Canada direct from Metrolink?