Tier 4 EMD and she is a beauty

That's their passenger F125 for MetroLink, and if I'm not mistaken thier new tier 4 passenger locomotive.

I guess this is a classic case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Compared to the classic lines of an Alco PA or an EMD E-unit, that thing is just plain UGLY.

So a Genesis and a Cities Sprinter walk out of a bar....

I totally agree  ITS UGLY  YOU"LE never see it on THE HIGHLAND PARK & ELDORADO R/R  Gary Clare

OGR Webmaster posted:

I guess this is a classic case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Compared to the classic lines of an Alco PA or an EMD E-unit, that thing is just plain UGLY.

Well she's a dog compared to any steamer too. But hey, I doubt we will see that again.  As far as modern goes (and I run none on my layout) I like it.

I like the E-Series, but was never a fan of the PA.   I actually like this in the grand scheme of things - need to go look up the performance stats.....

It looks like a type of Preparation H on 'droids, and place on a set of trucks!

I'm with Rich. If they wanted to do something impressive, they could have done a modernized F-unit carbody. At least they didn't mimic the design of that ghastly Hyundai-Rotem cab car (decorum prevents me from exposing people to the photos).

It's a drastic improvement over these (the front looks like there's a chunk missing or they put a 70-foot loco on a 65-foot frame):

But lacks the character of these:

Lacks the intimidation factor of these (that's a look that says "get outta my way or I'll drive right through you", which one of these did to a loaded dump truck):

Nothing prettier than PRR  E-8"s  Tuscan red w/gold stripes !!! OR PRR PA"S in tuscan w/gold stripes !!!

cain't tell if the dern thing is comin' er goin'!

I'm with you Rich

It looks like the nose of a jet liner attached to a toaster. I would call it a . . . 

Toasterliner

I'm tellin you guys, it's the "New Breed" that doin this, to us old guys!

Yuck!

Does this engine still use urea for exhaust aftertreatment, as Trains mag stated it would? Or will the F125 use EMD's 1010 engine? 

BTW, in my opinion, it looks OK, but not great. But just like the F40PH, the MP36, the F59PHI, and the ACS64, we'll get used to it...I think. 

What has happened to quality industrial designs for passenger locos??? I've seen more style at a pinewood derby race!

Gentlemen,

    There are some people that think a GG1 is Ugly also, each to his own!

PCRR/Dave

Pine Creek Railroad posted:

Gentlemen,

    There are some people that think a GG1 is Ugly also, each to his own!

PCRR/Dave

And any electric would be better than any Diesel.  They need to electrify the district just like the Pennsy did in the 1920s and be done with this diesel emissions malarkey.

Good looking chooch is absolutely a lost art....but then why be surprised; try finding a good looking  automobile !

pittsburghrailfan posted:

Does this engine still use urea for exhaust aftertreatment, as Trains mag stated it would? Or will the F125 use EMD's 1010 engine? 

 

BTW, in my opinion, it looks OK, but not great. But just like the F40PH, the MP36, the F59PHI, and the ACS64, we'll get used to it...I think. 

Dan,

These locomotives will be using the Caterpillar C175 4-stroke, 20-cylinder high-speed (~1800 rpm) engine with urea aftertreatment.

These are just my opinion,

Thanks,

Naveen Rajan

rdunniii posted:

Pine Creek Railroad posted:

Gentlemen,

    There are some people that think a GG1 is Ugly also, each to his own!

PCRR/Dave

And any electric would be better than any Diesel.  They need to electrify the district just like the Pennsy did in the 1920s and be done with this diesel emissions malarkey.

And who is going to pay for that?

There's a reason the PRR never electrified any further than Harrisburg- it's EXTREMELY expensive to build the necessary infrastructure.

I work for Caterpillar & I was unsure about the looks at first but it is growing on me. But then again, I felt the same way about the Amtrak Genesis locomotives & the EMD SD70ACe but they are now my favorite locomotives. But it could be that I just like modern trains. No matter how long I look at the obsolete steam locomotives, GG1, EMD F# or EMD E#, I still dislike their looks a lot.

These are just my opinion,

Thanks,

Naveen Rajan

OGR Webmaster posted:

I guess this is a classic case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Compared to the classic lines of an Alco PA or an EMD E-unit, that thing is just plain UGLY.

It sure does seem to be beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  In this case I think the pain scheme and photo don't do this engine justice.  The black on the bottom seems to go on forever and make it look odd.  You would need much better light to get a good shot of it.

Trains are like the opposite sex, there is something out there for everyone and we all have our preferences.  For me, later steam EMD E and F's.  I collect primarily PRR but an E or F painted Santa Fe War Bonnet is the gold standard IMHO.

Tony

naveenrajan posted:

pittsburghrailfan posted:

Does this engine still use urea for exhaust aftertreatment, as Trains mag stated it would? Or will the F125 use EMD's 1010 engine? 

 

BTW, in my opinion, it looks OK, but not great. But just like the F40PH, the MP36, the F59PHI, and the ACS64, we'll get used to it...I think. 

Dan,

These locomotives will be using the Caterpillar C175 4-stroke, 20-cylinder high-speed (~1800 rpm) engine with urea aftertreatment.

These are just my opinion,

Thanks,

Naveen Rajan

Well the Cat C175 doesn't have a very good history in the mining world. Roll in new bearings at 6,000 hours with a engine swap to the 2 generation at 10,000 hours. As a matter of fact Cat never had any success with the large bore diesel market. Not like EMD or GE had.

The 1,800 rpm screamer does have one thing going in it's favor, That is it'll be "close to home" when it breaks down and under constant watch by the mechanical dept.

OGR Webmaster posted:

I guess this is a classic case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Compared to the classic lines of an Alco PA or an EMD E-unit, that thing is just plain UGLY.

I'll take the E unit's smaller relative, the F/FP!   The E's, to me, just look "too long", the f's "just right.  But the only E's I have seen were Amtrak's and the present UP engines.  (Can UP's run?)  Did see SP's units in Houston in the 1960's, and ATSF's on the TX CHIEF on SP rights along US 90A on Gliddeen Sub.

That's so funny, I have always thought the F's looked too short.    I guess as far as modern power goes it's kind of...meh to my eyes anyway. 

Much better looking than the Ge product! That wedge nose contradicts that square cab side windows!

Seems to me that if you painted a Genesis and this F125 in the same paint scheme, you'd have to look closely to tell the difference. Nothing new here - it looks pretty much like a Genesis.

N&W Class J posted:

That's so funny, I have always thought the F's looked too short.    I guess as far as modern power goes it's kind of...meh to my eyes anyway. 

I am in agreement. Although the elongated F's for passenger service look a little better.  Nothing to me beats an E3/E5/E6 with the slant nose in Santa Fe Colors (Obviously Burlington for the E5). I think this new engine is ugly, and confused looking.  The lines just don't make since.  It think the GG-1's are ugly too, but are super models compared to this.

I would love to see some retro styled passenger engines.  Guess that's why I like some of the Japanese trains as the incorporate the sleek lines of old.  Still love the original Japanese Boeing 737 nosed bullets.

I actually like the new unit as the modern designs have grown on me. As much as I'm a fan of classic units such as the PAs and Es, it's now a different era. Railroading is a business, time marches on and this is the look of contemporary passenger power. The bottom line is most people who will ride the trains powered by these locomotives won't give a rat's butt what they look like as long as they're reliable and they get them to their destinations on time.

Bob

Oscar-Meyer would have loved it.

mlavender480 posted:

rdunniii posted:

Pine Creek Railroad posted:

Gentlemen,

    There are some people that think a GG1 is Ugly also, each to his own!

PCRR/Dave

And any electric would be better than any Diesel.  They need to electrify the district just like the Pennsy did in the 1920s and be done with this diesel emissions malarkey.

And who is going to pay for that?

There's a reason the PRR never electrified any further than Harrisburg- it's EXTREMELY expensive to build the necessary infrastructure.

Gonna happen sooner or later anyway.  The CARB is requiring it.  These may be interim to clean things up in the nearer future.  The Northern California version between San Jose and San Francisco is already in the planning stages.   More expensive to build but cheaper to operate and maintain over the long term.

Me, I like FP45s, SDP40Fs and F40s.  F59s not so much.  P40s and 42s and DM32s even less.  But I prefer all of them to steam anything.

Where will California obtain all the need additional electrical power for electric powered passenger trains?

Hot Water posted:

Where will California obtain all the need additional electrical power for electric powered passenger trains?

I'll tell you if you promise not to tell anyone else.  There are folks on other forums who live outside of California that are ticked off because of this costing them higher electrical rates. 

From the Palo Verdi nuclear plant in Arizona. 

But again, mums the word, or the Southern California anti nuke contingent will also be up in arms.

Well, that answers the question of "who's going to pay for it?"

Everyone else, as usual.

Most juice is generated in France by the atom. Hence the Bullet Train is powered by the "N" word!

Now, the power for the CA train is coming from an AZ plant.  But how are the people in AZ paying for power usage in CA?

Now a kicker:  Except for Texas, most of the western US power grid is interconnected to each other.  The actual electrons for the the train could come from a COAL FIRED plant!

rdunniii posted:

Me, I like FP45s, SDP40Fs and F40s.  F59s not so much.  P40s and 42s and DM32s even less.  But I prefer all of them to steam anything.

I grew up with SDP40F's.  Interesting power provided they stayed on the rails!

Dominic Mazoch posted:

rdunniii posted:

Me, I like FP45s, SDP40Fs and F40s.  F59s not so much.  P40s and 42s and DM32s even less.  But I prefer all of them to steam anything.

I grew up with SDP40F's.  Interesting power provided they stayed on the rails!

That DID stay on the rails where proper track maintenance was performed, not to mention those lightweight Amtrak baggage cars, that hadn't been maintained in many, many years, that were coupled right behind the units.

I rode  Amtrak trains with SDP's in the 1970's  I clocked one mile in 36 seconds  That is the century mark.  But that was on the ATSF and UP.  Of course they did maintain track!  I did not have an employee timetable, so I did know if the engineer was pushing the "legal speed".

I did ride the BROADWAY LIMITED during the PC ban.  the BW ran with a PC GP, either a 38 or 40 and three Amtrak E units.  The PC unit was needed for cab signals on the old PRR trackage.  Interesting combo.