In the thread and other reports about CP 2816 it was mentioned the other PTC system wasn't compatible with the F7 helper units which was a trigger to develop PTC for the steam locomotive(s).

Perhaps I'm making connections where there aren't any, but can PTC systems be installed in the earlier EMD units? We know Bennett Levin has declined to deal with PTC and that NS sold off their executive F's.

Does this mean the end of mainline operation of F and E units?

If this is the case, that makes the Reading and Northern operation even more interesting. This weekend, I rode behind a 4-8-4 with a 15 car train, in an open window coach, without helpers, on tough grades to a destination where we watched F7A and F7B units depart and return with a passenger train before boarding the steam train for our return to Outer Reading station.

Bob

Why would it be impossible to outfit an older EMD with PTC? They have air brakes and electric throttles, at least on road units. I think someone fed the OP some bad info.

I think the meaning was that the steam installation was not compatible with the specific PTC on the selected diesel.

Could be a problem if different diesels have different installations from different vendors, and the joining of two locomotives is vendor specific.

I think it just hasn't been done yet. I have very little knowledge of the required equipment However some things to think about;

1) Where does the substantial antenna array go on an F unit? No flat roof top surface.

2) What interior space is available for the control unit, GPS battery system, etc?

Judging by the recent photos of what was installed on the Big Boy it seems like it could be a tough fit in an F-7 or the like. An E unit my have a bit more space?

Who has the dollars to spend on fitting a new system for several hundred thousand dollars per locomotive and how long will it take to re-coup those funds?

According to the FP9 locomotive history on the CPKC website, their units are in fact equipped with PTC. I believe the issue was that the LEAP PTC system considered for 2816 that utilizes a trailing diesel was not compatible with the system on the FP9's. I have no idea if this alludes to a software compatibility issue, mechanical connection issue or what.

A little bit of topic drift but I'm one of those vintage public domain Railroad films They gave an example of PTC I think it was somewhere on the northeast corridor. I remember the engineer demonstrating it and then dispatcher coming on asking what happened and the engineer saying they were demonstrating the system stating "we have motion picture folk with us." If anybody remember what this film was?

I understand that PTC can have issues with some dynamic brake control systems. Is it possible that this was the issue (noting early E units did not have dynamic brakes available as an option)

I don't think 'real estate', interior or exterior, is an issue with putting PTC on an E or F unit. I'm more familiar with Alco FAs than with E or F units, but have been in a more than few EMD cab units.

If the unit isn't boiler equipped, (are there any left?), there should be space on the counterweight for the electronics. There also might be room between the electrical cabinet and the compressor, at least on an F unit. The antenna array can go on a flat plate on top of the SG hatch on the roof. (I will admit that an FL-9 interior is packed, though.)

As far as integration goes, and I'm speaking as a control systems guy, you would need access to the brake system and some of the 27 wire MU control system. Maybe oversimplified, but this would give brake application and power knockdown, if needed. There should be little difference between an early EMD and one of the current big 6 axle EMDs or GEs, assuming 27 pin MU and 24 or 26 air.

I think the biggest thing is the cost. Most cab units are privately owned, owned by museum groups or owned by smaller railroads. They just don't have the big bucks to spend that UP or KCS has.

This above statement is really just railfan dribble.

For the Juniata Terminal E8's, the ends need to justify the means. The sheer nature of having the E8's making an outing on todays railroads is a lot different than it was 20 years ago when those units were initially restored. (Wow. Yes, it really has been 20 years since they were restored to PRR cosmetic specs!) Its not really feasible, or worth it, for their to be a justifiable reason to have 5711 & 5809 equipped with PTC.

The NS "F Units" weren't really F-units as you would think of them in a traditional sense. They were GP38-2's with an F-unit body. The units were as modern of a diesel as possible. NS sold them because they didn't fit their business model, no because of PTC.

If the 2816 and 4014 have "stand-alone" PTC, then the only issue I could see is the lack of PC knockdown control with any trailing diesel locomotive without some type of MU connection to that circuit.

.