https://midhudsonnews.com/2024/03/28/ca ... e_vignette

Congratulations for the $4+ Mio. !

but what mean - quote:
"$2.3 million for a clean diesel upgrade to the railroad’s present locomotive"
The railroads present locomotive is an Alco RS-1 with an original Alco 539T diesel,
maybe destroying the historic artifact for money?
For that amount you can buy a brand new zero emission (battery) lokie in europe.

Just a reminder we living in the 21st century and there are some very nice cheap solutions
to make that as clean as possible:
Install a real or reproduction Vapor Heater (pic) for the cooling water. Remove the kerosin
burner for an electric heating element. Heat the cooling water and the fuel tank to 150 F.
Now use vegetable oil (waste or pure) as fuel whatever you get easy to and finished is the
almost zero emmision lokomotive. (I prefer Jathropa Oil - lowest ignition temperature -
highest cetan rating).

And for the ones who real did not want to do anything to the locomotive:
In 2024 you can buy HVO100 = 100% green diesel -> google it.
Just use it as your regular diesel.
For 2.3 Mio $$$ you can buy maybe 1 Mio. gallon wholesale direct at the refinery, more
then this RS-1 burned in their lifetime.

According to the article, it sounds like upgrading to green power is a requirement for an extension of the 5 year lease from the county. Considering how contentious their relations with the county have been, to put it mildly, they really have no choice but to comply.

Now, it doesn't say which RS-1 is being slated for this upgrade. While they have the operational ex-GM&O/GMRC RS-1, no. 400, they also have an ex-Soo RS-1 that is not operational but has been "evaluated for reactivation". Potentially they could convert the non-runner to green power and hold onto the original, operational RS-1 for special occasions or reserve power.

Catskill Mountain does have a representative who posts on here, so hopefully he can expound on the situation.

Someone with distinctive competence in 539 injection might comment in detail, but I see no particular issue with burning desulfurized B100 in one of these. Thermal barrier coatings in the chambers to get better vaporization on any 'dead' surfaces in the combustion space. Does this engine require any 'additives' in the fuel for internal lubrication of injection equipment.

That budget is a shining opportunity for someone in the Alco engine 'space' to finally work out and construct an electric motor/generator setup for Alco engines -- 539T, 244, and 251. Use a rightsized battery bank to support it, which could be scaled if some battery assist (e.g. to permit slow loading of the engine but extremely rapid loading of the TMs in service) were desired -- and it certainly would be by me!

Drawback: no black smoke for the foamers. I personally wouldn't miss it. And at least in theory most, if not all, the 'historic fabric' of the 539 would either be preserved unmodified in storage or minimally modified for the new drive and the packaging of the new components.

You're overlooking several major issues here....

Catskill was the front line in dealing with rails vs. trails and a hardfought, expensive, and rather bloody battle to find middle ground that everyone could unite behind. Getting to Basin Road means that the very toughest spot, the original fill coming up to there- is in railroad hands. And the shop has been a battle now for over 10 years.

We'd all still like to see them actually get into the parking lot inside NYDEC property at the trallhead, getting a 'clean diesel' may help.

And you really, really, need to celebrate this. They have worked so hard.
"The railroad has been named the best attraction in the county by the Ulster County Regional Chamber of Commerce and has brought a record ridership of 51,610 people in 2023."

As being on the front line for that project, I was personally surprised by how the community viewed the railroad within Kingston. I'll never forget the survey responses criticizing the smoke put out by the 'steam engine' when the shop was inside the city. Steam engine? They meant the RS1. Residents thought it was a steam engine because of that, and the black smoke cloud it could emit was creating more trouble than I ever imagined. It was the #1 criticism, you had to pay attention.

We might love the stuff, and respect that it's one of the few operational RS1's out there, but I'm tellin' ya, this was really a problem within the community. Don't get hung up on this when the real news is Basin Road and the Shop. If it still looks like an RS1 when it's done and doesn't smoke like you sanded the flues, take the deal.

If you look at this topic viewtopic.php?p=340387#p340387 Napa Valley Wine train received a bit over $2m for three low-emission diesels from Knoxville. They had to disable several FPAs in return, but that is in California. Would seem a better choice to just bring in updated units without butchering the RS-1, if the county would accept moving it to a museum outside the county. Some of these clean air subsidies seem really vindictive to me.

Yes, and you only need to buy enough to make the next trip, or whatever your supplier's minimum order is...

Story at Trains.com:

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... ine-house/




More at the link.

More links here:

Press release:

https://catskillmountainrailroad.com/wp ... 032724.pdf


Freeman Article:

https://catskillmountainrailroad.com/wp ... 9-2024.pdf

Our current operating RS1 locomotive no. 401 (former Green Mountain) is now running partially on biodiesel. We will be experimenting on using this with an increasing percent of biodiesel this year. This engine was formerly GM&O 1052/Illinois Terminal 756/1056.

The Clean diesel upgrade is for RS1 No. 400 (former Alter Scrap/Soo 2361) which has been out of service due to a cracked block for many years but has been partially maintained. It has been a parts source for the 401.

We also have former LIRR S1 407 that is in storage in Phoenicia.

We will keep everyone posted on the upgrade process which I understand is the first for an RS1.

EH

We are also putting a pre-heater on the 401 to eliminate the excess smoke on startup. EH

Good News EH! Thanks for clearing that up on which engine gets an upgrade.

"Mio" is NOT an abbreviation for million. What would heating the cooling water doe for emissions?

You heat the cooling water and circulate it through the block before starting, so the cylinder walls come up to 'operating' temperature and don't quench the injected fuel as compression further heats the wall metal. Lower amounts of white smoke at starting; you can further reduce it by crabking the engine a few revolutions with the fuel rack shut off.

You heat the oil for the usual reasons we use pan heaters on diesel trucks. Just as with a coolant heater, the oil heater is recirculating or on the 'bypass' circuit with controlled heat rise in a pass, so the oil isn't coked or degraded even though brought to and then kept at close to operating temperature. This could be done with a diesel-fired burner, if you use a 'flutter' principle to modulate the combustion plume.

And while we're on the subject of hot oil, you want a starting preluber, even if that is Cat-style on the end of the starter motor so that can double as the pressurizer before the engine is barred over and then cranked. The actual 'pressure' is best done with a reservoir and diaphragm arrangement that is pumped up to line pressure as the oil galleries are also pressurized, and holds the pressure until the engine oil pump brings things up to full operating pressure. I believe there have been discussions about 539T prelubing systems here before.

I continue to think that a reversible electric drive on the turbo impeller represents a very significant approach to reducing the usual smoke. We can learn gainfully what some of the details here should be by looking at what was tried -- unsuccessfully -- to boost turbo performance during the development of the 251.

CMRR Goes Green!

https://catskillmountainrailroad.com/wp ... 6-4-24.pdf

EH