Does anyone know of a source of modern (i.e. reliable, maintainable) under-the-railroad-car-floor liquid-propane-powered 3-phase electrical generators?

Thanks! - Doug Debs
Niles Canyon Railway
cell 650-704-1487

Try Stadco at http://stadcogen.com/. I believe however that there are issues with having bottled gas on a rail car in interchange.

At a glance, it appears that the Stadco generators are all diesel, but they look to be well suited for that application. Is there a reason you specifically wanted propane?

Was there ever a big problem with Ice Engines and Enginators® and their fuel bottles? I think they were banned from long tunnels but I don't know if it was for cause.

Yes, "Enginator" is still a registered trademark.

Our application is for passenger cars operated only on Niles Canyon Railway (a museum railroad, not part of the nationwide freight network), so Amtrak prohibitions on propane tanks do not apply.

Golden Gate RR Museum's experience with Waukesha "Enginators" (32V DC generators, driven by a 4-cylinder propane-powered engine) and Waukesha "Ice Engines" (air conditioning compressors, driven by a 4-cylinder propane-powered engine) is that they can be made to function for a while.... but the lack of spare parts and nonexistent factory support results in poor reliability.

Non-functional A/C is a public relations nightmare when you've already sold a carload of first-class tickets. We need a reliable source of electrical power and a reliable (and modern-refrigerant-compatible) air conditioning compressor.

The Stadco website only lists diesel-powered generators. I will call them to check if they also offer a LP-powered option.

- Doug Debs

Cummins/Onan makes reliable LP generators in 3 phase designs, I have used both their diesel and propane generators under railcars and they are very quiet.
http://powertohomes.com/Quiet-Connect-Series

Mike Tillger

Again, why propane?

Propane is a heavier-than-air flammable gas.

In the 1970s, Amtrak had a number of Waukesha-equipped cars, which generally were kept on, or close to, their "home roads" in the Midwest (and a few, in the West).

Propane was prohibited in the NY tunnels; any cars so equipped had to have their cylinders REMOVED.

If propane's flammable properties are a concern (as I believe they should be), then Diesel would be the preferred alternative.

We have a stadco genset that runs four cars plus a caboose. We just had it overhauled after 20+ years of service. I would recommend diesel over propane. Less headaches in the long run. It will be more efficient and last longer. All of our cars are single phase, with modern central hvac systems.

Perhaps because the car or cars are already configured for propane, have been operated successfully for many years on propane, and the economics of a full electrical retrofit of onboard systems (including installation of a diesel fuel tank) does not pencil out for the museum.

Having ridden several GGRM excursions, I can say that they are a squared away, business savvy group. If they're looking for propane, they've probably thought this through.

I would totally agree that GGRM is a well run group and they probably have some very valid reasons. However, your reply confuses me. You mention "the economics of a full electrical retrofit of onboard systems". Why would any retrofit of the electrical system be needed? Isn't a 3 phase generator a 3 phase generator no matter whether it's powered by propane, diesel, or a very small nuclear reactor? How does the electrical side "know" what's turning the shaft? Could be squirrels, as long as the output is correct. What have I overlooked?

The problem with squirrels is that they want to chew on the insulation when not on duty! On the other hand, they're locally sourced, organic, free-range, and a native species. That could be a major selling point in the future.

GGRM and NCRy both have chosen Stadco diesel-powered generators on all new under-the-car-floor installations to date.

I'm the hazmat manager for both groups. One of my jobs is to eliminate as many fire hazards as possible from our parts storage area. Dining car kitchen stoves are good users users of Waukesha LP tanks. But we don't need 40 Waukesha tanks for a couple of stove. Hence my offer in rypn "Classifieds" to give many of these to any group that can use one or more.

I agree that diesel-powered generators are easier to refuel, and should have lower maintenance.

Thanks for all the info; mission accomplished!
- Doug Debs

"Propane is a heavier-than-air flammable gas. "

Well, yes it is, and under EXACTLY the right conditions it can concentrate and cause a fireball after ignition.

But, Diesel fuel is also a heavier than air flammable substance, there are clear examples of a diesel fuel tank on railroad equipment being ruptured after a wreck and the fuel being ignited by a source of sparks. Not pretty. Didn't a MARC train sideswipe the Amtrak Capitol Limited in Maryland about 20 years ago and the diesel fuel fed fires caused many fatalities ?

So the basic question remains; is Propane (LPG) much more dangerous than Diesel ?

Consider this, there are millions of RV campers traveling all over the Interstates of the US with 20-30 gallon propane fuel tanks on board used for hot water, stoves, ovens, room heaters and the refrigerators (just like the steam powered AC units that the AT&SF used). If this was a huge risk would the insurance companies that write polices for these vehicles even bother to be in the business ? And if the danger was that great how could anybody sell these "home away from home" vehicles if you risked being burnt to a crisp on your first camping trip ?? My family had a Pickup truck camper back in the 1960's with propane tanks (50 pounds total) barely 10 feet from the sleeping quarters. We took that unit from the East coast of the US all the way to the Pacific Ocean, and back, and I'm still alive.

I have a 400 gallon LPG tank about 50 feet outside the wall of my residence, it provides reliable and inexpensive (most of the time) energy to heat my house and warm my water. I do not consider it anymore dangerous that having a 400 gallon diesel fuel tank in the same spot. Sure, some manic could take a pot shot at either one with a high powered rifle and cause my house to quickly burn down, but the chances of that happening are thankfully quite low.

I think propane and diesel present about the same level of danger when used in a railroad environment. The fact that only propane is "prohibited" from tunnels is simply because nobody saw the effects of a big diesel fuel fire inside a tunnel yet. Once a big accident happens inside a tunnel with a great loss of life from a diesel fuel fire they will want to ban that next. A bunch of people (100+) died in a railroad tunnel fire in the Swiss Alps from a defective electric heater in the control cab, no propane or diesel fuel needed. Tunnels are not good places to host a fire of any kind.

I think if the OP can find modern LPG equipment that suits his needs it is about the same risk as modern Diesel fueled equipment.

Note that almost all common "propane" fueled devices actually burn Propane Vapor, not Propane Liquid. The vapor is the gas that boils off the top of the liquid propane stored in a propane tank. This is why a propane tank has to be held "upright" when in operation, if you turn it upside down you get a "slug" of liquid propane and your burner belches and goes out. The boiling temperature for liquid propane is well below the freezing temperature of water, this is why an LPG tank stuck in a snowbank will still produce plenty of boiled off vapor to burn and keep a cabin in Alaska quite comfy when it's 30 below.

Also note that my discussion so far does not consider the BLEVE (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion) problem. This occurs when a large tank of propane is exposed for a long time to a direct fire. These are the massive explosions you see after a train derailment with burning LPG tank cars. It is essentially the combination of an old fashioned boiler (pressure vessel) failure due to over pressure (fire/heat induced loss of structural strength) with flammable LPG in place of the steam, quite nasty, like an boiler explosion on steroids... But these require large quantities of LPG that cannot be vented/burnt off quickly enough to reduce the risk. This is not a likely scenario for under car LPG fueled generators.

Disclaimer: I do not work for the LPG industry or the Diesel fuel industry. Just trying to clear up some misconceptions. I think either choice is acceptable from a risk standpoint.

Also, almost all internal combustion engines (gasoline or diesel) can be converted to burn LPG vapor since they all really just burn an air/flammable vapor mix. I restored an 1919 Plymouth Locomotive with a 4 cylinder Buda Engine that was originally gasoline powered back to gasoline operation. It was converted to run on non-rationed LPG (like many forklifts) during the fuel rationing during WWII. They added a LPG tank, a "vaporizer" (basically a heat exchanger that took hot water from the engine cooling system to "boil" the LPG) and a propane carburetor which is basically just a pressure regulating valve (with no vaporizing jets like a gasoline carburetor) with a throttle plate (butterfly plate).

Cheers, KevinK.

Propane is also banned in many highway tunnels. Random example, first one I found via Google.

Another advantage of propane is that it has a long shelf life.

Modern Diesel (and Gasoline) have so many additives and the like, that they start to degrade fairly quickly.

-Hudson