I am curious how these units will work in comparison to the NRE units WP&Y is picking up, the WP&Y units have a single 710 while D&SNG's are apparently gensets, which have been problematic to say the least even without steep grades. Is a heritage line like D&SNG required to meet the NOx requirements of say a Class I on new units? WP&Y would only need to meet the laws of Canada which are generally more lenient I believe.

I'm not sure about that.

Skagway is located in Alaska which is part of the USA

You're right, so I wonder if heritage lines isolated from the general system are required to be Tier 4 compliant, my guess would be yes. EMD managed, with a great deal of difficulty, to produce a Tier 4 710 without using DEF for marine, power generation and the like and that may be what NRE will be using. https://s7d2.scene7.com/is/content/Cate ... 2832-51137

No, that uses DEF. It's the fluid used for Selective Catalytic Reduction.

Plus, I believe Trains Magazine made a mistake saying they'd use a EMD 710 for power. The interview I read recently with the WP&YR president had him specifically stating it would use a 16-645E, which is in line with what these are said to be based off of (NRE's E-3000E3B for the Australian market). So I'm quite sure they won't be Tier 4 compliant.

This sounds like a rebuild from an old GP40 though. So why would it have to meet Tier 4?

The only story I have seen on the WP&Y units (that Trains story) didn't mention using cores, it just said "new", though they may try to skirt the law that way, I'm not sure what percentage must be incorporated in the new unit for it to actually count as a rebuild though. Australian laws are far less strict than the USA, which they will be operating in unless they keep them across the border in Canada somehow:

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/20 ... co-diesels
"Officials at the three-foot gauge White Pass & Yukon Railway have hired National Railway Equipment, Mt. Vernon, Ill., to build two new diesel locomotives to be delivered in time for the 2020 operating season.

John Gray, president of Rail Management Services, which operates the WP&Y, says the the railroad will buy two units at a cost of $2.5 million each and lease of four additional units. They are similar to NRE 1100-class end-cab units built recently for use in Australia.

Gray says they are 3,300 h.p. units with EMD 710-series engines and six-axle trucks using GE 764 D.C. traction motors. The D.C. motors are necessary because modern A.C. motors will not fit inside the truck frames, Gray notes."

The White Pass units are brand new and according to their president, Bob Berto, are powered by the same 645 engine as the Australian locomotives are utilizing. I don't know what tier they'll meet, but at least until recently (And perhaps even now), meeting US emission standards was voluntary in Canada, not compulsory.

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/co ... ass-yukon/

It's a direct quote here, which the Trains article isn't. Plus he's the president of the line and more likely to be intimately familiar with the finer details that apply specifically to the White Pass than is the corporate president that leads a company with a multitude of rail ventures that the WP&Y is just one component of. And lastly, they both say they're based off what NRE produced for Australia and those were powered by a EMD 16-645E developing 3,300 hp.

And it's the subject of this thread that isn't brand new. They're rebuilds of power that originally started as GP40's. If they end up meeting Tier 4, it's presumably going to be voluntary since very little has to be used to qualify as rebuilt under EPA rules (Like CPR's GP20C-ECO's that met EPA standards for rebuilt power, despite only reusing the air compressor and Blomberg truck frames from GP7's and 9's).

The CPR GP20C-ECO didn't come close to meeting the EPA requirements for remanufactured:

They're 'remanufactured' like many early EMDs were - on paper - with new frames, bodies, and prime movers; and reconditioned peripherals. I've no idea why they are regularly called 'remanufactured' except possibly a Canadian tax credit!
As for DEF, the railroads refused to consider it for some time - which resulted in creative ways to meet EPA emissions standards. Now, they're experimenting with it, so we'll see what happens long-term.

CD

No, enough was reused to qualify as rebuilt power to skirt emissions regulations for new power. Had they not, they'd of had to have met Tier 3 standards. It's not like the old days of the late 50's and early 60's when FT's were getting "rebuilt" into GP30's and such to save on taxes by purchasing rebuilt equipment rather than new. Still a loophole here, but this time it was an emissions standard one rather than a tax one.

They routinely operate in the US such as on the D&H. Had they not been EPA compliant, they legally couldn't operate here such as some post Tier 4 implementation construction of Tier 3 power from EMD and GE for Mexican users that are in captive service south of the border since they weren't built with emission credits (and thus aren't categorized as Tier 4 Credit Units). And come to think of it, didn't Canadian National fairly recently accept an order of Tier 3 ES44AC's after Tier 4 implementation that are barred from US rails since they weren't built with emission credits, which CNR keeps well away from the border in the Pacific Northwest?

As for the "rebuilt" GP20C-ECO's, I believe they're capable of easily meeting Tier 2 and being reclassified as GP22ECO's if CPR ever decides to, but are certified as Tier 0 + for slightly improved fuel economy and maintenance reasons since that's all they had to meet for US/Canada service, despite for all intents and purposes being brand new 4 axle EMD GP's that should've had to meet Tier 3.

so these are rebuilds of F40PHL-2 units - interesting, but they probably won't be good lookers

Why will D&S change the full car body back to a narrow hood while retaining the wide cab?

Two reasons: better vision toward the 'rear', and easier access for maintenance of the Caterpillar engine. (Particularly if this is a 3516, as I seem to remember, rather than a C175)

If I remember correctly, the Cat 35xx is somewhat sensitive to proper maintenance, and can cause some of the 'wrong' kinds of trouble if it does not receive it timely. Someone here can comment on the fire danger posed by crankcase explosions, for example. I believe it will be easier to do the necessary work through 'a plurality of doors' in a hood structure rather than inside a cowl carbody.

While I'd think a better roll center might result from the 'inboard' hood structure vs. wide carbody on this rather severe narrow gauge (about as much less than metre-gauge as that gauge is less than Cape gauge), I haven't done any calculations or know anything firsthand.

When I first heard about the D&S plan to buy diesels, I imagined them to be standard models from a production manufacturer. So I am rather surprised to learn that the actual plan is for building customized re-manufactured locomotives from a blend of used parts and components, and new components. It seems like this would require a significant amount of R&D and experimentation. Are there any other examples of 3-foot-gage diesel electric locomotives, such as those used by WP&Y, that are nearly identical to these new D&S locomotives?

I rode D&S for the first time just the other day.

The damage from last years fire is prevalent everywhere, and its impressive to see the amount of damage.

...but on the flip side, Literally, all over the place along the tracks are small round piles of burned brush. I am not sure if these are fires from campers ( I assume so), or if it is some sort of brush control method they are using (I doubt, since they are random in the woods). Either way, there is a large number of them. Lots of dry underbrush all along the ROW. Also, several piles of burned ties. In all honesty, it does not exactly paint a pretty picture for the RR to an average outsider. It appears that they are bulldozing a fire break as well, atleast they are starting too, in the lower elevations.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see either, that Silverton would die without the railroad. There is just nothing there, outside of a few gift shops and a handful of restaurants.

The Smoky Mountains looked terrible a few years after the big fire too.... I mean that’s part of reality. Life isn’t all picture perfect Mountain View’s is it?

If Durango wants to get rid of the railroad, I’m sure Silverton would welcome them with open arms. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the operation move there if the town decides to go through with the lawsuits.

I told everyone this would happen way back in 2008 on NGDF and I got yelled at. This was/is inevitable, steam doesn't help their bottom line, its hurts it, a lot! They could still have steam fan runs that will be more profitable for them, but cost a lot more. That regular steam service will go away, so if you want to ride D&S steam and not pay $400 a ticket, you better go soon. JMHO



Mike[/quote]