[Manage]

[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message
File
Embed   (paste a YouTube URL)
Password   (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are JPG, PNG and GIF.
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5 MB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 269 unique user posts.

File: 1581476409727.jpg–(58.28KB, 600x450, 51F27926-E44D-4839-A235-F1BEE67DC81C.jpeg)
1312
No.1312
>class 40 thread
¨ No.1313
1581493507459.jpg–(384.83KB, 1400x788, 266800.jpg)
>8 axles on a British loco

>A BRITISH LOCO
>of all things

HEHE I'M IN DANGER


By the way, offtopically, do you guys like the livery on this TEM7A?
¨ No.1331
1581772847531.jpg–(205.64KB, 1704x1104, D200.jpg)
>>1313
Those 8 axles were needed to hold up the considerable weight of the 16SVT prime mover.
It's interesting to compare the Class 40 with the later Class 50, which used an intercooled version of the same lump. More power, less weight and on a Co-Co chassis.
Similarly compare the "Peaks" (1Co-Co1`) with the Class 47 (Co-Co). They again used the same prime mover (a 12-cylinder Sulzer 12LDA28), but the Class 47 was lighter.
¨ No.1336
>>1313
The livery’s ok.
¨ No.1337
1581936579823.jpg–(220.61KB, 1500x839, 2ТЭ126-0001.jpg)
>>1336
Man, Russian railfans for some reason are just drooling over black liveries. Europeans like them too as far as I know.

>>1331
Yes I noticed these are runners. Still looks kinda wonky that a Co-Co loco made in the 50s would still need conventional runners. But good thing they managed to decrease the weight in the future version. Which reminds me of a much more cheeky, much more distinctly Soviet use of runners...

Some might remember me ranting on it at some point. Cue 2TE126, 2-unit 20-axle diesel locomotive with two V16 320/320 mm type 4D56 diesels making a combined 16000 (SIXTEEN THOUSAND) horsepower. Yes, twenty axles. The axle formula of each unit is 1+Bo+Bo-Bo+Bo+1, the diesel was so massive that with 8 axles per unit the locomotive would have exceeded maximum axle load of 25 tons, so they had to add runners. But they weren't ordinary runners, by the finalized project these were variable load runners, which through a system of pneumatic cylinders should have been able to transfer part of their load to the motorized axles increasing the axle load to 27 tf on low speeds, which is still safe for the tracks but noticeably increases maximum tractive effort (in theory up to 10 tf of boost) exactly when you need it the most.
The prototype built was actually tested with unboosted version of the 4D56 making 6000 HP (if finished successfully there were plans to introduce a V12 making 6000 HP on smaller locomotives such as 2TE136). But...
It all was just before the collapse of USSR which almost literally shattered our diesel locomotive engineering and set it decades back. [thank you, Reagan] Just think of this. If this project would have been completed...

This is an absolute, unchallenged, pinnacle of diesel locomotive engineering. It's over 30 years since its creation yet nothing can even remotely rival it, there is nothing even similar to this, not even on paper. Imagine if only this project survived... I guess now I know how it feels to loose something like an Apollo program. Something so ancient yet so advanced.
¨ No.1338
1581938376717.jpg–(465.66KB, 1200x788, 267056.jpg)
>>1337
AAAAND I accidentally took yet another get. But oh don't worry, 2TE126 sure is some L33T loco...
¨ No.1339
1581988572212.jpg–(17.92KB, 327x245, DSC04638gallery.jpg)
>>1338

If there's one thing I love about Russian trains, it's that you guys put ribs down the side of everything. reminds me very much of Milwaukee Road awesomeness.
¨ No.1340
>>1337
It's nice to know that we weren't the only ones that got fucked by Reagan.
¨ No.1343
1582196985710.jpg–(329.27KB, 1191x813, showimage.jpg)
>>1340

Yay trickle down economics!!
¨ No.1350
1582378133385.jpg–(344.67KB, 1280x720, imma_naymfaggin_on_yer_eemagebborsd.jpg)
>>1343
Just a 'soft spot'
>>1338
Crazy pantographs (do not determine direction)
Also, электри́чка
¨ No.1353
1582384843381.jpg–(760.58KB, 1200x800, 1-28.jpg)
>>1350
More crazy is the fact that this pic was made some days ago. Moscow railway, and especially its commuter fleet, is so enormous that after all these years of steady rolling stock upgrade they still got a few of these rust buckets rolling around. Granted, if CPPK weren't such dickheads (i. e. a private entity running a major branch of one of the biggest municipal transit systems on the continent - and no, I am not a complete and utter leftie but in this situation it is applicable) the whole fleet of multiple hundreds of EMUs would have been not older than a maximum of, say, 15 years. But I digress.

BTW if you wanna hear more about Moscow railway's suburban rolling stock click here: >>1120


What's so crazy about it anyways? Just a normal transitional design between dem old funky looking "cube" pantographs to the modern single-arm ones, just I assume by that time the manufacturing technology was not able to provide enough strength for a single arm so they designed a dual-arm support but still lighter and more compact than these stupid cubes (which are still plentiful on the older DC locos).

BTW as a funny bonus, heres a high-end metro rolling stock by Метровагонмаш with that kind of dual-arm pantograph literally strapped on top of it. Feel free to guess why and under which circumstances it was done.
¨ No.1354
1582386540927.jpg–(733.32KB, 1300x816, 264865.jpg)
>>1339
To be fair we don't "put them down the side of everything", it all depends on the particular manufacturing plant (not even the manufacturing entity, which there are two in Russia - TransMashHolding - TMH, also having presence in Africa and EU, - and Sinara Group) and even the particular batch of the product. And we never even did frankly, like if you look at all the older products of Kolomna works, such as TEP60, TEP70, especially the first one which was very sleek and European-looking for its time.

Right now it's mostly NEVZ here who is notorious for refusing to update their body assembling technique to hot side panel mounting - although you can understand their logic: it's additional expenses which would amount NOTHING to the actual specs or quality of the product, and nobody pays much attention to the locomotive appearance anyways. So it is responsible for all the wafer-looking electric locomotives coming to our fleet today. They tried to go with sleek sides for their flagship EP20 series >>294 but due to lack of proper mounting technique for smooth panels if you looks along the side of an EP20 you can see it all kinda wobbly and gross looking. So previous year they controversially switched it to being a regular old waffle, somehow managing to make it look even worse...
¨ No.1356
1582389207459.jpg–(786.50KB, 1400x787, 261894.jpg)
>>1354
BTW pic above is a rather unrelated RA3 rail bus, by the same Метровагонмаш as >>1353 . I guess as an example of smooth body panels done right.

As for the EP20, spoiler: the ribs as you can see didn't help with the smoothness issue at all, only adding an unnecessary and very out of place design element. As much as I adore its top-tier locomotives technically, that's just typical NEVZ for ya...
¨ No.1389
1582712352969.jpg–(1.10MB, 2560x1714, sbb_domino.jpg)
>>1353
>the whole fleet of multiple hundreds of EMUs would have been not older than a maximum of, say, 15 years.
EMUs have a useful life of at least 20-30 years tho, 40 is not uncommon if they're durable.
Switzerland has one of the best train systems in the world, yet it's not uncommon to find some older rolling stock. The EMUs like pic related were built in the late 80s and early 90s and are still commonplace. They were completely overhauled around 2009 when they were about 20 years old, as is common practice, and they're expected to last at least 20 more years after that, so until 2030 more or less. 40 years in all. Zurich also has some 40 year old trams still in service that are just going to be taken out of service around this year or next year (although they should have been retired about 2 years ago).
¨ No.1405
1582970884805.jpg–(225.63KB, 1300x956, K737D0.jpg)
Wow, this thread got derailed fast.

Delete Post