MANAGING TECHNOLOGY NINE MISCONCEPTIONS

摘要

A significant part of my multi-decade railroad (now post-retirement consulting) career has involved managing or participating in many technology experiments and "first-customer launches" of new locomotive models. The "experiments," which had varying degrees of success, included improving wet-weather adhesion of high-adhesion o six-axle units in the 1990s; operating the lli first 150-car Western coal trains with end-of-train units controlled by Loco-tror" (now known as Distributed Power); equipping the first non-turbocharged switcher with Diesel Particulate Filters and road units with exhaust aftertreat-ment, well before Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations would have required DPFs or aftertreatment on locomotives; and creating the first turbo-charged road units equipped with Exhaust Gas Recirculation to reduce oxides of nitrogen (NOx) before EGR became the technology choice of most locomotive builders for achieving EPA Tier 4 emissions. The "new locomotive launches" (first customer railroad) included the first EMD GP50s; the first GE Dash-9s; the first GE AC4400s in Western coal service; two models of 6,000-hp units (GE's AC6000CW and EMD's SD90MAC); the largest fleet of Green Goat™ diesel-battery hybrid switchers; development of the first and largest fleet of Genset multi-engine switchers meeting EPA Tiers 2, 3 and 4; the first single-diesel-engine Tier 4 switchers from multiple manufacturers; and now a new zero-emissions battery-electric switcher. The list of "new technology projects" includes integrating LOCOTROL" and electronic air brakes; identifying braking deficiencies with the earliest double-stack container cars; effectively using remote locomotive diagnostics; field testing Electronically Controlled Pneumatic (ECP) brakes; developing and implementing networked trackside detectors to statistically predict roller bearing failures before they could overheat; installing Positive Train Control (PTC) on locomotives when PTC itself, overall, was still a "work in progress." I don't have space here to detail each and every locomotive, project or technology attempt, but the outcomes ranged from "very successful" to "troublesome" to "not good," which sounds like a random distribution of outcomes. But I've learned over time that randomness was not at play; that some new locomotive models and new technologies could and should have been managed differently (or, unfortunately, maybe not even started). Here is a quotation from 72 years ago that can describe the mixed outcome of those projects: "The road of discovery, in whatever field, can always be recognized by the 'bleached bones' of those who failed to make the grade, for it takes not only courage, but extraordinary endurance to sustain the voyager." Based on that statement, "courage and endurance" are important attributes in managing new technologies, and new locomotives. But is that all you need? In my opinion, no.