Hello Phil, just came by and saw your comment, could you explain how they control several locomotives at once? The crew is on the first one right? There's nobody on the other locos... I'm 60, and ever since I was a kid I wondered how they do it. Cheers!

@@Yosemite-George-61 Howdy! Former RR Electrician here. If you look close on the front and rear of each loco there is a pink or yellow hose. It connects between the units just below the deck plates. This is called an M.U. cable, for Multiple Unit. There are 27 circuit pins on each end that all the major control signals from the operator are sent through. These signal transmit commands to every unit in the consist that is set up to operate, such as Forward, Reverse, Notch 1 through 8, etc. I hope that simple overview helps.

@@BadlandNP Thank you! Your explanation is clear and duly appreciated!

Always wonder what is he going to think later when he is looking at all his dozens of pictures of the same thing.

Oh this is not unlike going to a nascar race and hoping for a wreck.

I would Definitely take continuous shots with my Nikon d3400 of any toasty locomotive

Hi why does the driver not shut the loco down?

only rally enthusiasts will get this

Mullay2 unburned fuel builds up in the exhaust due to long periods of idling. Causing the fuel to burn off when throttled up.

The probable issue here was likely a lack of maintenance. Either they didn't clean out the exhaust manifold of soot/creosote, or the injector stuck or broke at the tip, causing excessive fuel to dump into the cylinder - so much, that it doesn't all burn (if at all), and instead goes into the exhaust manifold, where it pools up.

@@bluegrassman3040 Agreed, you would've heard the turbo go and there would have been a ton of white smoke, not black diesel smoke.

You're all right. Everything goes wrong in Georgia.

@@tag7100 does not know that Not everything goes wrong in Georgia

Blown turbo, not getting enough air to burn all of the fuel

You're wrong!every locomotive comes with a turbocharger!and sometimes it will malfunction!if a unit is spewing black smoke and is putting up flames,the turbocharger is the problem and the engine is suffering from a lack of care!

@@terrywallace4109 Actually, most of what they wrote is correct. The problem _is_ the air-fuel ratio, but the correct fix is to repair the broken turbocharger, not adjust the mixture. This locomotive is turbocharged, as are all models in current production. However, not all locomotives in the US have turbochargers: the most common naturally aspirated locos are GP38(-2)s, which are the non-turbocharged version of the GP40(-2).

LOL

that's just to keep it warm, mister

oh yeah,....thats probably safe rite? lol again, a failure common to ge locomotives.

lets get this party started

ethanol is the active ingredient in drinking alcohol, that's why you never smoke in a bar as you could blow up the whole neighborhood. Forgot people drink in bars all the time with no explosions and unless the car is punctured the car will not catch fire as even if there was a spark igniter inside.

Stephen DiSalvo he should of cooked the bridge full throttle

Nah bridge cooking isn't cool ... it could damage the concrete on the bridge from the heat. But yes I agree, he throttled down a notch to make the fire go out :P

Give the whole train a big shove and experience a once-in-a-lifetime moment.

She needs her diaper change.Lol.

Needs some serious TLC. A new turbocharger would be a great start

Well, it would be a great oven if you fireproof the top and put a box with racks on it.

In England (UK) trainspotters call the smoke clag.

Diesel is not burning well in low pressure - There was probably blown turbocharger

Busted exhaust valves another possibility, perhaps?

@@jetstream454 would not cause that

@@bonkeydollocks1879 Why not? A blown exhaust valve means it literally is open during combustion and any forceful combustion would potentially force those flames out the pipe Of course it could just be unburned fuel, but the other theory is quite possible

So, you're saying that it "would have been really a show" if someone got burned alive?

Zombie comment revival 😉😎 … not an afterburner! … flame goes up QED force goes down! … it’s for better traction!! … can’t have a big wing on it because of the bridges! 😉😁🤣

(12-Nov-19) Hot, as in "sexy"?

Plus it's an old-ish loco from the mid/late 1980's

If they do any maintenance at all.

@@BenjaminEsposti it is old. And because of the possibility of lack of maintenance, the intake side of the turbo may be leaking oil occasionally into the engine. Which means it'll need an overhaul. As well as fresh engine oil.

All GEs are like this with this kind of maintenance. EMDs just don't work at some point. The GE will self destruct.

Someone who finally has some ducking G Damn sense, all this EMD shit this GE shit that like STFU just like your damn car you put it to work it’ll eventually break and you need to fix it again. ITS A MACHINE PPL THEY ALL DO IT

It would have to be driven under a tree!

Fires start when glowing carbon shoots out the exhaust stack from a port used to keep a vacuum on Diesel engine

Forest fires really start that way.

One of many ways a train can start a forest fire. Had one around here that was started by an axle bearing failure, it spit burning bits along the side of the track and started several small forest fires. Luckily the weather around here (Binghamton, NY) had been pretty wet as usual so it was easily brought under control.

@@44R0Ndin yes, becuase the trees grow up and make a 90 degree turn over the railway.

Steam engine exhaust is mostly ash. The carbon and other carcinogens from burning diesel fuel is a lot worse.

David Austerman Tree hugging liberals.

(12-Nov-19, 10th like) I actually like this kind of video: A toasty GE shooting flames, as the title implies.

Those oil trains always have to have a buffer car. Though the "Tank Trains" that run up the California coast do not.

That ain't a boxcar leading, it's a hopper

Tri State Railfan ProductionsTM I'm the same way.

Here in Ireland we call that a barrier car.

To supply fuel for the fire?

Sgt Luke Gonna need a turbo rehab.....

Either some overheat reminders or something go off or the engine shuts down and/or the crew look in the opposite direction

Yes!each locomotive has safety equipment already in them. An alarm bell in the lead unit should have sounded and the crew should have taken quick action to prevent the locomotive from catching fire. These units also have an emergency fuel cut off switch located right near the fuel tank. And it is painted red.it also has a cord with a pull ring that can be pulled to cut off the flow of fuel to the engine. Here are the steps you can take to save the locomotive from being destroyed. #1if you see something like this, go into the cab of the locomotive and pull the locomotive isolation switch #2bring the unit throttle back to idle.#3get outside the locomotive and pull the emergency fuel cutoff switch #4place the locomotive in the start position. #5,hold the switch until the engine sguts itself down. #6place the locomotive in neutral position. #7,get her to the shops,and write her up for reoairs.this will save the railroads thousands of dollars in repair costs. It is all about safety!and don't forget to watch out for trouble!

@@terrywallace4109 I would think a simple non technical thing like a mirror or camera that shows the top of the stacks would be sufficient. thanks for your detailed response. It's one of the very few reasons I like the comment section on KZfaq. it's like a forum where one can learn from people all over the world.

@@AffordBindEquipment A CCTV camera with some sort of data network to allow the engineer in one locomotive to view the camera on another is "a simple non technical thing", now?

@@beeble2003 something that just looks over the top of the engines from the front like a gopro on a magnet base, which is about as simple as it gets. youtubers live-stream from a gopro all the time. if they can figure it out, certainly a train engineer can. it seems whatever technical difficulties there are, it's way cheaper than burning up an engine and possibly setting fire to bridges and whatever else is in the way. If what terry wallace above says is true, then someone was asleep or shooting video for their train youtube channel and not paying attention, or the safety equipment malfunctioned or wasn't maintained correctly. It would seem to me that something so expensive would have all kinds of detection and alarms that would sound. but from the amount of vids on youtube showing this very thing, I wonder why these fires go on long enough for someone to notice and shoot a vid.

Yes, probably ethanol. It looks bad but there's basically zero chance of this thing setting the train on fire. There's a clear 150ft between the flame and the first tank car. When the train is moving, the flames are upwind of the ethanol. And, most importantly, if any of those tank cars is leaking ethanol, there is something seriously wrong with that tank car. You don't want an ethanol tank _in_ a fire because that will heat up the ethanol enough that the vapour relief vents on the tank will open, to avoid the tank rupturing. That will then vent ethanol into the fire, with obvious bad results. But having a fire 150ft away from an ethanol tank shouldn't cause anything bad to happen.

I don't think it is a turbocharger. Fuel injector issues were common on dash 8s. We had them in our consists and frankly didn't care

Try again mr smart guy!

The basic setup of GEVO components hasn't changed from the original U-Boats that had this problem too. The GEVOs will do the same thing.

(12-Nov-19, 1st like) Or as they always say, *"FIRE IN THE HOLE!!!!!"*

(12-Nov-19) *Instantly bursts out laughing hysterically*

stiltoncheesewright : Yes it would be turbo failure

@stilton, I am ignorant but I truly enjoy these rail videos and it is so educational. I really appreciate all the explanations that are posted. Thank you alles. Good on ya mates.

Probably "yes" is the answer.

Well, they do have a tendency to malfunction. Had two GE over the stove microwaves, and one had a failed magnetron, threw that one away, got another one, which had a failed circuit board *AND* interlocks, so I had to throw That one away.

yes and they don't care. fuel injector problems were common on Dash 8s

It only seems like it's working harder because you can see more. The turbo's blown, so more fuel's being put into the cylinders than can burn in the oxygen available. Partially-burnt fuel causes black smoke; completely unburnt fuel catches fire when it gets out into the atmosphere.

# The lights are turned lower than most. Let it toast, Let it toast, Let it toast. #

They need that extra 5 horsepower from the 2 working cylinders to pull the weight of the other 14.

Failed turbocharger. The way it's supposed to work is that the turbo compresses the inlet air, so you get a greater mass of air -- therefore a greater mass of oxygen -- into the cylinders. Because there's more oxygen, you can burn more fuel, so they inject a lot of fuel. But, because the turbo has failed, there isn't enough oxygen to burn all that fuel, so some of it goes into the exhaust. Once it's out of the locomotive, it mixes with the oxygen in the atmosphere and catches fire.

Woe to the engine shooting flames?

They Sound like a 2 cylinder John Deere and the Turbo thrust isn't even when the cylinder ignites

Michael Washington I mean I don't know if it is safe and I'm pretty sure it isn't supposed to do that I think it blew a turbo

@@jake-qn6zy Thanks looks scary lol 😂

Now *That* is my kind of diesel electric stove-o-motive: One that spouts decent flames out the stack.

Not gasoline or oil. Ethanol. Those tankers are not in any danger.

Especially if the lead car was filled with thermite.

The USA contains hundreds of millions of cars and only tens of thousands of railway locomotives. In other words, allowing everybody to run polluting cars is tens of thousands of times worse than allowing railroads to run polluting locomotives. Newer locomotives have to meet much more stringent emissions standards than they did when this one was built, in the late '80s. And, while it looks terrible, there is basically zero danger of that exhaust fire igniting the train. First, the fire is 150ft from the ethanol tanks. Second, it's up-wind of them whenever the train is moving (i.e., the wind is moving any ethanol away from the fire). Third, under no circumstances should those tanks be releasing any ethanol into the environment. If any of those tanks is leaking, that is already a serious safety issue, regardless of what's happening with the locomotives.

@@FranzFerdinandVIII It's not. It's filled with sand, and it's only there to distance the locomotives from the train in case of a derailment.