Russia's newest loco: the most powerful loco in the world with 4 sections

[Densha]

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/13-mw-electric-locomotive-to-tackle-siberian-gradients.html

 

That's quite amazing with the four sections. Three sections is already very rarely seen, the only I can think of are the Swedish Dm3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SJ_Dm3), but so far I know four sections is unseen until now.

[Nick_Burman]

Countdown for torn couplers...3...2...1...

 

Cheers NB

[miyakoji]

13.12 megawatts is 17594.2 hp, if I've got the unit correct.  US freight trains break couplers with less total hp than that, I think.

[Densha]

The Swedish IORE locos (previously the most powerful on earth) are 10,8 MW and pull 8600 tons of iron ore. Interesting is this quote from the wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmbanan#Heavier_trains):

 

The first twin unit locomotive was delivered in 2000, and serial delivery was made from 2002 to 2004. In March 2004, LKAB decided to not purchase the option for additional hopper cars from Transnet, and instead purchase 750 heavier cars from K-Industrier. Since 1969 the ore trains have been using the Soviet SA3 coupler. However, LKAB wanted to try Janney couplers (also known as AAR coupler, used in much heavier trains in USA and South Africa), as the SA3 couplers were not much tested with the new weights. Later LKAB went back to SA3 couplers which now are used on all ore trains. In 2003, the Iron Ore Line from Kiruna to Riksgränsen and the Ofoten Line were finished upgraded to 30 tonne axle load, allowing half the trains to operate with maximum capacity.

So I assume they went back because the US couplers didn't hold the forces of the weight.

 

This list is also pretty interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_coupling_by_country

[miyakoji]

Here's a good animation of the SA3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sa3.gif

[Davo Dentetsu]

Imagine the electrical fires that could produce...  :O

[disturbman]

Noob question, why not used 4 different locs sparsed into the consist?

[kvp]

Noob question, why not used 4 different locs sparsed into the consist?

This locomotive doesn't need remote control equipment, only has two cabs and most of its systems are shared. No shunting required, just connect up to the train and go. It's essentially a normal 2 section locomotive, with two cow-calf booster units added between them. Double traction force and power with very litte cost increase. Each unit has a 3.25 MW hourly rating. This is half of a single siemens es64 taurus, but of course double the traction force. The power required by this locomotive is roughly the same as for a double railjet set, that is very common is Austria. I'm sure Russia could produce a two section locomotive with the same power ratings, but making it 4 section with twice as many axels is better for low speed freight on steep grades. Overall it's a nice and simple design.

[Nick_Burman]

Noob question, why not used 4 different locs sparsed into the consist?

 

As kvp said, because it's much simpler to use one 4-unit loco.

 

Distributed Power (DP) only really works well on unit trains, where the locos stay in situ for a long time. For general merchandise trains it's not a very good option, because of the need to break down and assemble trains along the line, with attending hassle.

 

 

Cheers NB

[Sacto1985]

I don't know--I see a LOT of use of distributed power on trains here in California in recent years. Maybe Locotrol equipment technology has finally caught up with what is needed for remote operation on a single consist? (I see DP used a lot on doublestack container trains in recent years.)

 

I believe that in Japan, JR Freight trains are short enough they don't need DP. Even going east on the Senohachi grade on the San'yō Main LIne between Seno and Saijo Stations only need a single banking locomotive to help push the freight consist uphill.

[kvp]

The Japanese way seems to be similar to the Russian. There are videos of double headed freight trains with the standard two section locomotives on the front. This gives the exact axle count and similar power as the Russian single unit. The main problem with distributed power is that you have to shunt the middle locomotives into and out of the consists, which is only worth it for long runs. Also you have to use radio control which is fine if your lines don't have a lot of long crooked tunnels or resort to control lines across the cars, which is more expensive and requires modification to your cars. All of this is only to get lower forces on the couplers. But if the couplers and the cars are strong enough, then using a single powerful locomotive is much easer and cheaper. Not to mention the Russian locomotive is only 4 units, while a US freight train with distributed power might have as much as 6 on the front, and 4+4 as helper units in the middle. That's 14 engines versus 4, which is completly different.

[HantuBlauLOL]

Here's a good animation of the SA3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sa3.gif

Tomix TN knuckle coupler in 1:1?

 

Btw have this locomotive entered service yet?

[kvp]

Not yet, this is a prototype, so it's still up in the air if it will be mass produced:

http://www.akm.ru/eng/news/2014/november/25/ns5015254.htm