GO Transit Motive Power
The F59PH Development and History

MAIN GO SITE INDEX

WHY THE F59PH MODEL FOR GO TRANSIT:

In 1986, GO Transit officials vigorously needed a standardized, system-wide locomotive (and commuter car) equipment to pull-push a loaded ten car bi-level train commuter and with a tractive effort to meet and later increase schedule times. The primary rational was targeted at replacing the “oddball motive power roster” in use at this time with a more reliable and efficient engine model. Stocking and finding spare parts as well as paying interest on stocked parts for the current operating equipment was making a huge demand on the GO operational budget and taking funds away for new power and corridor expansion. Mounting mechanical breakdowns in their original purchase of the GP40TC (500-507), the F40PH (500-515), the GP40-2(W) (700-710), the second hand and modified equipment (GP40-M-2 (720-726), APU (800-2), and ACPU (900-908, 910-911)), was accelerating.After much research and consideration the 12 cylinder 710G3 engine was selected. This engine was able to operate at 3000HP.

Next, the Hotel Power supply. It was preferred that it be an independent engine and not linked to the 710G3 engine. Further, the Head-End Power (HEP) for the coaches had to generate a three phase, 575 volt, AC power supply for coach heaters, air conditioning, battery charging, and lighting. The Detroit Diesel 8V-149 twin turbocharged/intercooled series engine was the choice for the HEP.

The locomotive operating cab design had input from several sources. Canadian National and Canadian Pacific operating personnel, General Motors Diesel Division, GO Transit designers and Management, and Operating Brotherhood Representatives from both Railways were challenged about design and safety features so come up with the best and safest cab design.

The F40PH design was the initial design model. They studied mostly it's many design flaws and how they would be avoided for the F59PH. Such F40PH issues included poor accessibility into and out of the cab (especially under emergency situations), the short hood was claustrophobic and difficult to service, headlight glare obstructed the engineer's view at night, the windshields were difficult for crew visibility and hard for maintenance to clean and repair. And under the long hood, it was difficult to service, clean, walk.

General Motors solutions included: extending the underframe by two feet, a front walkway with inclined side steps, a front entrance door to a vestibule which also contained a toilet and locomotive equipment, eliminating both side cab doors, and a frontal three window windshield (some still argued against because of blind spotting with the window frames (worse in the MP40, it looks like a Lionel track in front of the hogger)).

The technical research team also examined and selected other operating features such as: an easier line of sight to the gauges, speedometer, radio and PA communications, alarm signals, an Event Recorder, an easy to use but highly effective Crew Vigilance System, Window style and passenger visibility, cab ventilation and air conditioning, cab heating, comfort and durable cab seats, cab noise, and the now familiar desk top mounted console controls for the throttle and braking.