Hubbry Logo
Co-Co locomotiveCo-Co locomotiveMain
Open search
Co-Co locomotive
Community hub
Co-Co locomotive
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Co-Co locomotive
Co-Co locomotive
Co-Co locomotive
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
A New Zealand DFT class Co-Co diesel-electric locomotive
Co-Co wheel arrangement

Co-Co is the wheel arrangement for diesel and electric locomotives with two six-wheeled bogies with all axles powered, with a separate traction motor per axle. The equivalent UIC classification (Europe) for this arrangement is Co′Co′, or C-C for AAR (North America).

Use

[edit]

Co-Cos are most suited to freight work as the extra wheels give them good traction. They are also popular because the greater number of axles results in a lower axle load to the track.[1]

History

[edit]
LMS 10000 of 1947

The first mainline diesel-electric locomotives were of Bo-Bo arrangement. As they grew in power and weight, from 1937 the EMD E-units used an A1A-A1A layout with six axles to reduce axle load. After WWII, the British LMS ordered two prototype locomotives with some of the first Co-Co arrangements.

The 1903 Hornsby locomotive

The first C-C design recorded was a narrow-gauge Hornsby opposed-piston Hornsby-Akroyd-engined locomotive of 1903 for the Chattenden and Upnor Railway. There was a two-speed mechanical transmission with drive shafts to the bogies and the axles on each bogie were linked by coupling rods.[2]

Variants

[edit]

Electric locomotives

[edit]
DRG E 93 class 3,355 hp heavy-freight electric loco of 1933

There were initially few electric locomotives with this wheel arrangement, as they are usually lighter than diesel-electrics of similar power and so could manage a similar axle loading with a simpler Bo-Bo arrangement. Some of the few early examples were the French CC 7100 of 1949 and the British Railways EM2 of 1953.

British Rail Class 89 25 kV electric

As high-speed electric locomotives in the 1980s began to achieve powers in the 6,000 hp range, new Co-Co designs appeared, as more axles were needed to distribute this high power. The BR class 92 was a predominantly freight locomotive of this arrangement for the Channel Tunnel, although the passenger Eurotunnel Class 9 instead use a Bo-Bo-Bo arrangement. This provides the same number of axles for traction, although with shorter bogie wheelbases and so gives a smoother ride.

C-C

[edit]
British Railways class 52 Western

In C-C (Commonwealth) or C′C′ (UIC) arrangements, the axles of each bogie are coupled together. This may be for either a diesel-hydraulic transmission with a mechanical drive shaft to the bogie and final drives to each axle. Otherwise a monomotor bogie with a single traction motor. These are used for both electrics and diesel-electrics.

Co+Co

[edit]
South African class 3E of 1947, showing the Co+Co arrangement of the bogies with the drawgear below the body frame

Co+Co is the code for a similar wheel arrangement but with an articulated connection between the bogies. The buffer and drawbar forces are taken between the bogies rather than through the frame. These were mostly popular in South Africa.

1Co-Co1

[edit]
British Rail Class 40 1Co-Co1

The 1Co-Co1 wheel arrangement is an alternative to the Co-Co arrangement which has been used where it was desired to reduce axle load. Each 'Co' bogie has an additional non-powered axle in an integral pony truck to spread the load. As the pony truck is articulated within the bogie,[3] the arrangement is (1′Co)(Co1′) in UIC notation.

This rare arrangement was used primarily in Britain with the development of the Bollen bogie; on the Southern Railways' first three prototype mainline diesel-electric designs, 10201–10203,[4] and then on production vehicles in British Rail's Class 40 and "Peaks" (BR classes 44, 45, and 46).[3][5]

1Co+Co1

[edit]
Further information: 1Co+Co1
Japanese EF10 in 1938

1Co+Co1, like Co+Co, is an articulated variant where the drawbar forces are taken between the bogies rather than through the frame. These were used in South Africa, for lighter loadings on the lightly laid 3 ft 6 in (1,067 mm) Cape gauge. A number of Japanese electrics from the 1930s, also on Cape gauge, such as the EF10 also used this arrangement.

2Co-Co2

[edit]
New Zealand DF class

The New Zealand DF class were built in the mid-1950s by English Electric in Britain, as the first diesels for the 3 ft 6 in (1,067 mm) New Zealand railways. They were derived from the earlier English Electric 1Co-Co1 bogie design, but to provide increased flexibility for the long wheelbase bogie they used a four-wheeled bogie with more side play, rather than a pony truck.

See also

[edit]
  • Co-Bo, which has two uncoupled bogies

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Co-Co locomotive

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A Co-Co locomotive is a type of diesel-electric or electric rail traction vehicle characterized by the axle classification system, denoting two s each with three consecutive powered s, resulting in six driven axles total for enhanced stability and traction on heavy loads. This arrangement, where "C" represents three axles and "o" indicates a rigid within each swiveling bogie, distributes weight evenly to achieve lower axle loads compared to equivalent four-axle designs while maximizing through all-wheel drive. The Co-Co configuration emerged in the mid-20th century as diesel and electric locomotives grew in power and size, transitioning from earlier (four-axle) arrangements that proved insufficient for demanding freight services. The first mainline examples were the two prototype 1,600 hp diesel-electric locomotives built for the London, Midland and Scottish Railway (LMS) in Britain—numbers 10000 and 10001—unveiled in 1947 and 1948, respectively, and designed by H.G. Ivatt in collaboration with English Electric using 16SVT Mk 1 engines. These pioneers, with a 21-ton suited to British gauge constraints, tested on express passenger routes like the Royal Scot and signified the shift from steam to diesel traction in . Co-Co locomotives became widely adopted for heavy freight and mixed-traffic duties due to their superior hauling capacity, with starting tractive efforts often exceeding 500 kN, and their ability to navigate routes with speed restrictions while maintaining high power at the rail (typically 2,000–6,000 kW in modern variants). Notable examples include the (1Co-Co1, introduced 1958, 200 built) and Class 58 (Co-Co, 1983–1990 for coal traffic), as well as international designs like the French CC 7100 series (1949) and contemporary multi-system models such as Stadler's EuroDual bi-mode Co-Co locomotives, rated at 6,170 kW for European freight networks with reduced emissions. Variants like 1Co-Co1 incorporate leading and trailing axles for higher speeds, while the design's flexibility supports both AC and DC electrification, ensuring its ongoing relevance in global rail freight operations.

Wheel Arrangement Notation

UIC and AAR Systems

The UIC classification system, developed by the , employs letters to represent powered s and numbers for unpowered axles, with additional symbols to denote configurations and powering methods in diesel and electric . In this notation, "Co" signifies three consecutively powered axles on a , where the lowercase "o" specifically indicates that each is driven independently by its own , without leading or trailing unpowered wheels. Consequently, the Co-Co arrangement describes a equipped with two such bogies, providing six powered axles in total for enhanced traction and power distribution. A prime symbol (′) is appended to the letters in UIC notation to denote that the axles are mounted on a swiveling bogie frame, separate from the locomotive's main frame, which allows for better curve negotiation; thus, the complete designation is often rendered as Co′Co′. This system originated in Europe during the early 20th century to standardize descriptions for increasingly complex rail vehicles, facilitating interoperability across international borders. The equivalent AAR wheel arrangement notation, established by the Association of American Railroads, simplifies the classification for North American locomotives by using uppercase letters to count powered axles per , omitting some UIC symbols like the lowercase "o" and prime. Here, "C" represents three powered axles in a single , making C-C the direct counterpart to Co-Co, emphasizing all six axles as powered for heavy freight duties. This notation was standardized to promote uniformity in design and maintenance for freight compatibility across U.S. and Canadian railroads. Unlike the , which counts wheelsets for steam locomotives, both UIC and AAR systems focus on axle powering and structures suited to electric and diesel traction.

Comparison with Other Arrangements

The , denoting two three-axle s with all six axles powered, differs from the configuration, which features two two-axle s with four powered axles, making the latter lighter and more suitable for higher-speed passenger services due to reduced mass and simpler dynamics. In contrast, the B-B-B arrangement also provides six powered axles but distributes them across three separate two-axle s, resulting in more complex steering mechanisms and greater overall structural intricacy compared to the Co-Co's paired design. A primary advantage of the Co-Co lies in its axle load distribution, spreading the locomotive's total weight across 12 wheels (six axles), which typically yields a lower per-axle load of 20-25 tonnes in European networks, enabling heavier overall locomotive masses while adhering to track limits there. In , where higher s (around 32-36 tonnes) are permitted, the configuration still provides relative benefits in . This contrasts with the , where the same total weight concentrates on eight wheels (four axles), often resulting in higher per-axle loads that restrict maximum tonnage on weight-sensitive routes. The Co-Co's configuration excels in heavy freight applications due to enhanced from the additional powered axles, allowing a single unit to handle loads that might require multiple , while providing balanced stability for long-haul operations. The following table summarizes key comparisons (axle loads in metric tonnes; European values unless noted):
ArrangementPowered AxlesTypical UseMax Speed (km/h)Typical Axle Load (tonnes)
Co-Co6Heavy freight100-12020-25 (Europe); 32-36 ()
Bo-Bo4Passenger/light freight140-16022.5-25 (Europe); ~30 ()
B-B-B6Heavy/mixed (rare)100-12020-25 (Europe)
Power transmission in Co-Co designs supports equivalent total output to but distributes it across more s for superior in low-speed, high-load scenarios. This arrangement evolved alongside the shift from steam-era , which emphasized coupled driving wheels, to the UIC and AAR systems tailored for diesel and electric locomotives with individual traction motors per .

Design and Technical Features

Bogie Configuration

The Co-Co locomotive employs two s, each featuring three powered axles for a total of six wheels per bogie and twelve wheels overall, providing enhanced traction and stability for heavy-duty operations. This configuration, denoted as "Co" for each three-axle bogie in the UIC system, utilizes a rigidly framed structure connected to the body via a center pivot, often through bolsterless designs with floating center pivots to facilitate better negotiation of curves by allowing controlled lateral movement. Axle suspension in Co-Co bogies typically incorporates quill drive or nose-suspended mounted directly to the , minimizing unsprung weight while ensuring efficient power transfer, with a common two-stage vertical suspension using helical coil springs in the primary stage (between axle boxes and frame) and rubber compression springs in the secondary stage. The per generally ranges from 3.8 to 4.5 meters, optimizing load distribution and ride quality across the three axles. The twelve-wheel arrangement distributes the locomotive's weight—often exceeding 100 tons, such as 113 tons in examples like the —more evenly across the rails, reducing track stress and loads to around 18-20 tons per axle for improved on standard gauge tracks. frames are constructed from durable materials like cast in traditional designs or fabricated plates (e.g., to IS 2062 Grade C standards) in modern variants, forming a box-type structure capable of withstanding high static and dynamic loads. Safety features integral to Co-Co bogie frames include anti-climbing devices, such as safety links and lateral stops that limit side-to-side movement to prevent or separation, and yaw dampers—often spring-loaded hydraulic pistons (two per )—to control oscillations and enhance stability at higher speeds. These elements ensure reliable performance under demanding freight and passenger service conditions.

Traction and Power Delivery

In Co-Co locomotives, power is delivered to the rails through six individual traction motors, one mounted to drive each of the six powered axles across the two bogies. These motors typically consist of either DC series-wound types in older designs or modern three-phase AC induction motors, enabling efficient conversion of electrical or generated power into mechanical torque for . For instance, in high-power electric Co-Co locomotives like the WAG-9 class, each AC induction motor is rated at approximately 750 kW, contributing to a total output of around 4,500 kW. Similarly, DC series motors in classic designs, such as those in GE's 5,400 hp electrics, provide per-motor ratings of approximately 670 kW under continuous operation at 1,500 volts. The drive system employs individual axle drives, where torque from each is transmitted directly to its respective via cardan shafts or integrated gear units, ensuring independent control and flexibility in articulation without axle-to-axle . This configuration, common in both diesel-electric and electric Co-Co variants, uses cardan shafts to connect the motor output to axle-hung gearboxes, minimizing unsprung weight and allowing for radial movement on curves. Gear ratios typically range from 60:17 to 80:19 to balance speed and . Control of power delivery relies on advanced electronic systems, including thyristor-based choppers in legacy setups or (IGBT) inverters in contemporary models, which enable precise variable-speed operation by modulating voltage and frequency to the motors. These inverters facilitate smooth and control, with IGBT technology offering higher efficiency and faster switching compared to earlier thyristors. control systems integrate sensors to monitor wheel slip, adjusting output in real-time to maintain optimal rail grip; for example, under high starting conditions corresponding to tractive efforts up to 500 kN total, slip detection via wheel velocity and prevents loss of traction by reducing power to slipping wheels. Efficiency in power delivery is enhanced by a typical of 20-25 kW per in diesel Co-Co locomotives, such as the Class 66 with 2,500 kW output on 123 s, while electric variants achieve higher ratios up to 50 kW/ due to denser power sources. Electric Co-Co locomotives further incorporate , where traction motors act as generators during deceleration, converting back to electrical power for return to the overhead supply or onboard storage, improving overall utilization by 20-30% in demanding routes.

Applications

Diesel Locomotives

Co-Co diesel locomotives integrate high-power diesel engines, typically in the range of 2,000 to 4,000 horsepower, with electric generators that supply power to traction on each for . These engines, such as the EMD 16-645 series, feature a V-16 configuration with a 645 cubic-inch displacement per , enabling reliable power output for heavy freight duties through a diesel-electric transmission system. The generator converts from the into electrical power, which is then distributed to the six traction , one per powered , ensuring even distribution across the bogies. Another key instance is the South African Railways Class 34-000, entering service in 1971 built to the General Electric U26C design with a producing 2,750 horsepower, designed specifically for heavy-haul freight operations on Cape gauge tracks. These locomotives deliver high starting , typically 300 to 400 kN, which provides superior and pulling power on steep gradients and heavy loads, making them ideal for freight applications. in such designs averages 200 to 250 grams per , reflecting optimized combustion in two-stroke engines under varying load conditions. Maintenance in diesel Co-Co locomotives benefits from modular construction, where the engine compartment is separated from the bogie assemblies, allowing independent servicing of power units without disrupting underframe components and reducing downtime during overhauls. This separation facilitates quicker access to traction motors and suspension elements, enhancing overall reliability in demanding freight environments.

Electric Locomotives

Co-Co electric locomotives draw electrical power from overhead systems, typically at 25 kV 50 Hz AC or 1.5/3 kV DC, collected via pantographs on the roof. This high-voltage supply is then fed to onboard transformers that step down the voltage to levels suitable for traction motors, enabling efficient power conversion and distribution across the six powered axles. In many designs, the Co-Co arrangement supports body-mounted traction motors connected to axles via cardan shafts, optimizing and in high-power applications. One seminal example is the French Class CC 7100, introduced in 1949 as the first mainline , delivering 3,490 kW of power for heavy express and freight services on 1.5 kV DC lines. These locomotives featured monomotor bogies with all axles powered, marking a shift toward more stable high-speed operation compared to earlier rigid-frame designs. A more modern instance is the , entering service in 1995 with 5,040 kW output under 25 kV AC, specifically engineered for freight through the Eurotunnel with dual-voltage capability (25 kV AC overhead and 750 V DC third rail). This class exemplifies Co-Co suitability for international heavy-haul corridors requiring robust traction and compatibility with varied electrification. Performance-wise, Co-Co electric locomotives achieve higher overall of 85-90% in converting to , surpassing diesel-electric counterparts that hover around 30-35% due to losses in onboard generation. This efficiency supports sustained high-power output for heavy loads, with top speeds reaching up to 160 km/h in mixed-traffic scenarios, balancing freight hauling with occasional passenger duties. In , Co-Co configurations saw widespread adoption for electric freight, particularly in where resolved debates between lighter (BB) classes for passenger services and heavier Co-Co (CC) types for demanding freight routes, favoring the latter for superior adhesion and power on electrified networks. This preference extended across the continent, with similar designs proliferating in countries like and the for infrastructure-intensive operations.

History

Early Development

The early development of the , featuring two three-axle bogies for improved weight distribution and stability, originated with experimental internal combustion locomotives in the opening years of the . The first prototype incorporating this configuration was the Hornsby-Akroyd oil-engined locomotive, works number 6234, delivered in January 1903 to the Chattenden and Upnor Railway, a narrow-gauge line. Built by Richard Hornsby & Sons of , , this 20 hp compression-ignition (semi-diesel) machine operated on 2 ft 6 in (762 mm) gauge and utilized two basic three-axle s with all wheels coupled via a drive system, representing an initial attempt to apply multi-axle bogie technology to powered rail vehicles. Pre-World War II trials of Co-Co designs remained confined primarily to industrial and narrow-gauge settings, as the arrangement's inherent high axle loads—often exceeding 20 tons per axle in early prototypes—posed challenges for standard-gauge mainlines with weight restrictions typically under 18 tons per axle. In the late 1930s, German engineers developed prototypes like the DRG Class E 93, a six-axle for heavy freight applications and better adhesion on steep gradients. These efforts highlighted the arrangement's potential for power-intensive duties but underscored limitations in track compatibility and transmission efficiency. Significant technical hurdles were addressed in the 1930s through advancements in traction motor reliability, enabling a pivotal shift from coupled axles and jackshaft drives to individual electric motors per axle, which improved torque distribution and reduced mechanical complexity in bogied designs. This evolution allowed Co-Co locomotives to achieve higher tractive efforts without excessive unsprung weight, as seen in emerging electric prototypes.

Post-War Adoption and Evolution

Following , the Co-Co wheel arrangement saw significant adoption as railways worldwide transitioned from steam to diesel and electric traction for heavier mainline duties. In the , the London, Midland and Scottish Railway (LMS) ordered two prototype diesel-electric Co-Co locomotives in 1947, numbered 10000 and 10001, built by English Electric at Works to test high-power mainline capabilities with 1,600 hp engines. These prototypes paved the way for production models, including the British Railways Class 40, with the first entering service in 1958 as part of the 1955 Modernisation Plan, eventually totaling 200 units for mixed freight and passenger work. In , the Société Nationale des Chemins de fer Français () introduced the CC 7100 class in 1949 with prototype locomotives CC 7001 and 7002, marking the first production electric Co-Co design for 1,500 V DC electrification, optimized for heavy express traffic at speeds up to 150 km/h. The arrangement spread globally during the 1950s, reflecting post-war reconstruction and electrification efforts. South African Railways placed 28 Class 3E electric locomotives with into service between 1947 and 1948, built by for 3 kV DC lines to handle mainline freight on the Cape Town-Johannesburg route. In , the New Zealand Railways introduced the DF class in 1954, with 10 English Electric-built diesel-electrics featuring Co-Co bogies and 1,500 hp engines, designed as the first mainline diesels to replace steam on heavy goods trains in the . These early adoptions highlighted the Co-Co's suitability for distributing weight and power across six driven s, enabling higher tractive efforts on upgraded without excessive axle loading. Technological evolution in the and shifted Co-Co designs toward (AC) traction motors, improving efficiency and adhesion for heavy-haul operations. This transition began with prototypes like the EMD SD60MAC in in 1991, a 4,000 hp Co-Co equivalent using AC motors for enhanced low-speed in freight service. By the , modern examples included India's WAG-9 class, introduced in 1996 but entering full production around 2000, with 6,000 hp AC electric units built by for 25 kV AC lines, often operated in twin formations to haul 5,000-tonne freight trains at 100 km/h. While Co-Co locomotives declined in some regions by the 2000s—replaced by lighter designs for passenger services due to better ride quality and lower weight—the arrangement persisted for heavy freight. In the , classes like the BR Class 40 were phased out by the 1980s in favor of types for lighter duties, but globally, Co-Co remained dominant in demanding applications. In , HXD2 series electric Co-Cos, rated at 7,200 kW, continued heavy freight operations into the 2020s on and routes, supporting multi-locomotive consists for loads exceeding 10,000 tonnes.

Variants

C-C

The C-C wheel arrangement refers to a locomotive configuration with two s, each featuring three rigidly coupled axles powered collectively, distinct from the independently driven axles in the modern Co-Co notation. In UIC classification, C-C often denotes coupled axles in diesel-hydraulic designs without individual motors. In this design, the axles within each bogie are linked by coupling rods, enabling a single drive mechanism—typically a hydraulic transmission connected to the —to power all three axles per bogie, thereby reducing the overall number of motors to one per bogie. This approach was commonly employed in early diesel-hydraulic locomotives, where the hydraulic system efficiently transferred torque from the engine to the coupled axles via cardan shafts and gearboxes, simplifying the power delivery for medium-power applications. A prominent example is the (Western), developed in the early 1960s at for mixed-traffic services, delivering a total power output of approximately 2,010 kW (2,700 hp) from two Paxman Ventura 16RP200 engines and utilizing C-C bogies with coupled axles for express passenger and freight duties. This locomotive's design was largely confined to British networks owing to the engineering complexity of the coupling rods and hydraulic components, which proved challenging for maintenance outside specialized systems. The C-C configuration offered advantages in diesel-hydraulic contexts, such as a streamlined transmission suited to lower-speed operations and heavy hauling, while maintaining axle loads similar to those in Co-Co setups around 16-18 tons per for balanced track loading. However, the rigid reduced flexibility on sharp curves, limiting maneuverability compared to designs with independent axle control. By the , the C-C variant had become largely obsolete, phased out in favor of individual axle drives that provided superior traction control, reliability, and adaptability in evolving diesel-hydraulic and diesel-electric technologies.

Co+Co

The Co+Co variant of the Co-Co locomotive configuration features two three-axle bogies, typically in standard Co-Co notation without distinct inter-bogie articulation in common examples. In UIC classification, the + may indicate articulation in rare designs for enhanced curve negotiation, but this is not standard. The individual traction motors on all six powered axles provide high , distributing drawbar forces to reduce stress on the structure during tight curves (radii as low as 150-200 m in some applications). A representative example is the South African Class 9E , introduced in the late with a power output of approximately 3,840 kW, deployed on heavy-haul mining lines such as the Sishen-Saldanha route where tight curves demand superior handling. These locomotives, built for 50 kV AC operation, exemplify the variant's application in resource extraction, hauling massive ore trains over undulating terrain with minimum curve radii around 195 m. The design contributes to operational reliability in such environments by permitting smoother passage through horizontal bends without excessive lateral forces on the rails. This configuration has found prominence in and , regions characterized by operations on networks with sharp curves and variable gradients, where the flexibility lowers risks compared to rigid designs. In , it supports high-tonnage freight on Cape gauge lines, while Australian examples like the Queensland Railways 1250 class Co-Co diesels (adapted for similar flexibility in and mineral haulage) highlight its suitability for isolated, curve-heavy mining branches. The design's emphasis on independent movement enhances overall stability at higher speeds, up to 80 km/h on loaded trains, making it ideal for these demanding applications. Despite these benefits, the joints require higher maintenance due to wear from constant pivoting and exposure to dust-laden environments, though this is offset by improved high-speed stability and reduced track damage over long-term operations. Regular and of the joints are essential to prevent binding, but the system's has proven effective in reducing overall lifecycle costs in curve-intensive routes.

1Co-Co1

The 1Co-Co1 features two central Co-Co bogies, each with three powered axles, flanked by leading and trailing unpowered single-axle pony trucks for guidance and load distribution, resulting in a total of 14 wheels on the . These pony trucks, typically articulated to allow flexibility over uneven track, are positioned at the front and rear to support the 's weight without contributing to traction, thereby reducing axle loading on the powered wheels compared to a pure Co-Co design. In UIC classification, the 1 denotes the unpowered pony axles. This configuration emerged as a way to balance high power output with track-friendly , particularly on routes with speed restrictions or lighter . The primary purpose of the 1Co-Co1 design is to enhance high-speed stability and improve overall weight distribution, making it suitable for mixed-traffic operations that include both freight and services. By incorporating unpowered trucks, the arrangement mitigates the risk of excessive axle loads from heavy diesel engines, allowing locomotives to operate at speeds up to 90 mph while maintaining curve negotiation and ride quality. This setup was particularly advantageous in Britain, where modernization efforts prioritized versatile locomotives capable of handling diverse duties without overloading aging rail networks. Notable examples include the diesel locomotives, built between 1958 and 1962 with a 2,000 hp English Electric engine, which utilized the 1Co-Co1 arrangement on cast-frame bogies to achieve a maximum of around 17 tons. Earlier prototypes, such as the Southern Railway's Bulleid 1Co-Co1 locomotives (10201–10203) introduced in 1950–1954, demonstrated the design's potential with 1,750–2,000 hp ratings and articulated pony trucks for added stability. Derived from experimental designs in the late , the 1Co-Co1 arrangement peaked in adoption during the as British Railways expanded its diesel fleet, but it was largely simplified to the more straightforward Co-Co by the early due to maintenance complexities and evolving technologies.

1Co+Co1

The 1Co+Co1 wheel arrangement is an articulated variant of the Co-Co configuration, featuring two bogies each with three powered axles (Co) and an unpowered pony axle (1) at the outer end for load distribution and stability. The pony axles are articulated relative to the powered bogies to enhance flexibility on curved tracks, while the "+" denotes articulation between the two main bogies, allowing the locomotive to negotiate tighter radii than rigid-frame designs. This setup provides improved for heavy loads by spreading weight across six powered axles and two unpowered axles, totaling eight axles or 16 wheels. In UIC classification, the + indicates inter-bogie articulation. One early example is the (JNR) Class EF10 , introduced in 1938 for freight services on 1,500 V DC lines. Built domestically by Kawasaki and , the EF10 featured the 1-C+C-1 (equivalent to 1Co+Co1) arrangement to handle Japan's narrow-gauge (1,067 mm) tracks with frequent curves, using six DT22 traction motors for reliable pulling power in mountainous regions. In , the South African Railways Class 4E s, placed in service between 1952 and 1954, adopted the 1Co+Co1 arrangement for 3 kV DC mainline operations. Designed by and built under license, these 40 units were optimized for heavy freight on the curvy Natal mainline, offering better curve performance and compared to standard Co-Co types, though their complexity limited further adoption. This variant found primary use in heavy freight applications on routes with sharp curves, where the articulated pony trucks and inter-bogie flexibility reduced flange wear and improved stability at speed. The design's enhanced over rigid alternatives made it suitable for steep gradients, but its mechanical intricacy led to limited production, with most examples dating from before the and few surviving into modern service.

2Co-Co2

The denotes an configuration comprising two Co bogies linked by a central pivot, enabling high power delivery while maintaining flexibility on curved tracks. In UIC , the 2 prefix indicates leading/trailing elements, with the typically featuring six powered axles total across the articulated bogies, distributing over 12 wheels to adhere to limits on lighter rail networks. The often incorporates twin cabs for bidirectional operation and double-ended , making it suitable for high horsepower requirements. A seminal example of the 2Co-Co2 in diesel form is the New Zealand DF class, introduced in the 1950s and derived from the earlier 1Co-Co1 DC class to provide greater adhesion for mainline duties. Built by English Electric with a 1,500 hp V12 turbocharged engine, the DF featured a length of 58 feet and a service weight of 235,200 pounds, optimized for hauling heavy freight on New Zealand's 3 ft 6 in gauge network in the North Island. Its articulated structure allowed for a low axle load of approximately 25,760 pounds while delivering a starting tractive effort of 38,500 lbf, facilitating long-haul operations without excessive track stress. In electric applications, the Japanese National Railways (JNR) EF58 class exemplifies the 2Co-Co2 for post-war reconstruction, with 172 units produced between 1946 and 1958 for both passenger expresses and fast freight in urban corridors. These 1,500 V DC locomotives weighed 253,531 pounds, with all six axles powered to achieve 1,900 kW continuous output and a top speed of 100 km/h on 1,067 mm gauge lines. The design's central articulation and streamlined body (in later variants) enhanced stability for heavy loads, serving as a reliable workhorse until electrification expanded in the 1980s. The primary purpose of 2Co-Co2 locomotives lies in delivering high power for long-haul freight without the need for multiple units, reducing operational complexity and fuel consumption compared to non-articulated equivalents. By scaling the base Co arrangement through articulation, these locomotives achieve superior haulage capacity—such as the EF58's role in towing dense urban freights—while prioritizing adhesion and route compatibility on standard infrastructure. Although less common in recent decades, the 2Co-Co2 concept influences modern twin-unit high-power designs, such as India's WAG-12B class electric locomotives from the , which combine two 6,000 hp sections for a total of 12,000 hp in freight service, echoing the articulated power scaling for emission-efficient heavy .

Advantages and Disadvantages

Benefits

Co-Co locomotives excel in traction performance due to their six powered s, delivering high starting efforts, often exceeding 500 kN, which enables them to haul trains exceeding 2,000 tons effectively on moderate gradients of 1-2%. This configuration maximizes by distributing the locomotive's full weight across all axles for , providing superior starting power for heavy freight duties compared to four- arrangements. The also facilitates lower loads of 20-22 tons, even for total locomotive weights of 120-150 tons, in contrast to locomotives that often exceed 25 tons per for comparable power outputs. This reduction in per- loading minimizes stress on , extending track life by decreasing wear rates. As a result, Co-Co designs allow operators to deploy heavier locomotives without necessitating costly track upgrades, enhancing overall route capacity. In terms of versatility, Co-Co locomotives strike an optimal balance between robust freight-hauling capability and moderate top speeds over 100 km/h, supporting efficient operations across mixed traffic scenarios. Their adaptability makes them particularly cost-effective for upgrade programs, where the and motor setups can accommodate both diesel and electric powertrains with minimal modifications. benefits arise from the even power distribution across six axles, which reduces uneven wear on traction motors, wheels, and bearings while improving overall utilization. In heavy-haul contexts, such as South African lines, this leads to more reliable under demanding conditions, optimizing use and intervals.

Limitations

Despite their widespread use, Co-Co locomotives face several inherent limitations stemming from the three-axle configuration. The design's complexity arises from the need for inter-axle connections and additional components to manage the powered middle axle, which can increase manufacturing costs by up to 25% for motorized variants and complicate integration of traction motors. This added intricacy also elevates requirements, as the six traction motors and associated linkages demand more frequent inspections and repairs compared to simpler arrangements, potentially raising lifecycle costs. A primary operational drawback is the compromised curving performance on tight radii. Conventional Co-Co bogies often rely on wheel flange contact for guidance in curves below 200 meters, leading to higher angles of attack (up to 0.4° on the center in extreme cases) and increased wheel-rail contact forces. Without self-steering mechanisms, this results in elevated wear on wheels and tracks, as well as potential , particularly in jammed positions on sharp turnouts or sidings. Furthermore, the three-axle structure can adversely impact overall running performance and frame strength due to the distributed load and dynamic forces across the additional . High wheelset and conicity in these setups may also necessitate supplementary yaw dampers to maintain stability at elevated speeds, adding to challenges. These factors have historically limited adoption in applications requiring frequent tight maneuvers or high-speed operations, favoring alternatives like for lighter or more agile duties.

References

  1. http://www.railway-technical.com/trains/rolling-stock-index-l/wheel-notation.html
  2. https://davidheyscollection.com/pages/david-heys-steam-diesel-photo-collection-14-pioneer-main-line-diesels
  3. https://www.railwaygazette.com/news/freightliner-powerhaul-loco-design-on-show/33367.article
  4. https://www.cfps.co.uk/history
  5. https://www.railwaygazette.com/in-depth/traction-the-rise-of-the-go-anywhere-locomotive/68488.article
  6. https://www.svrwiki.com/UIC_classification
  7. http://www.okthepk.ca/foamerFiles/clasDiesel.htm
  8. https://www.railwaygazette.com/news/alstom-unveils-modular-diesel-family/30087.article
  9. https://rskr.irimee.in/sites/default/files/Locomotive%E2%80%99s%20bogies.pdf
  10. https://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol4_Issue4/Version-1/A044010114.pdf
  11. https://www.steamlocomotive.com/GG1/quill.php
  12. https://st2.indiarailinfo.com/kjfdsuiemjvcya0/0/7/3/4/466734/0/technicaldetailsregardingaclocomotivesonindianrail.pdf
  13. https://milwaukeeroadarchives.com/Electrification/Specification5400hpElectric110069.pdf
  14. http://www.westernchampion.co.uk/loco-d1015-technical.php
  15. https://digital-library.theiet.org/doi/pdf/10.1049/pi-1.1954.0078
  16. https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/a-history-of-ac-traction/
  17. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8894148
  18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544221013451
  19. https://www.stadlerrail.com/solutions/rolling-stock/locomotive-euro9000
  20. http://www.epi-eng.com/aircraft_engine_products/2-stroke_diesel_power.htm
  21. https://www.loco-info.com/view.aspx?id=-919
  22. https://www.loco-info.com/view.aspx?id=16893
  23. https://www.railpictures.net/photo/832468/
  24. https://www.loco-info.com/view.aspx?id=13335
  25. https://ro.dbcargo.com/rail-ro-en/db-cargo-romania-fleet/locomotives/class-92-locomotives
  26. https://www.nap.edu/read/22083/chapter/4
  27. https://www.loco-info.com/view.aspx?id=-874
  28. https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Richard_Hornsby_and_Sons:_Hornsby-Akroyd
  29. https://www.wargm.org/WASC/Files/wasc_2350_00.pdf
  30. https://www.siemens.com/global/en/company/about/history/technology/transportation-technology/rail-transportation.html
  31. https://www.railwaymagazine.co.uk/8143/re-creating-ivatts-lms-diesel-pioneer/
  32. http://grela.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2093695
  33. https://nzrailphotos.co.nz/locomotives
  34. https://blw.indianrailways.gov.in/uploads/WAG-9H.pdf
  35. https://www.hitachienergy.com/us/en/news-and-events/customer-stories/powering-china-s-heavy-load-freight-trains
  36. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/diesel-wheel-arrangements.36760/
  37. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/trackside-classic/trackside-classic-the-vw-bus-2200-hp-big-brother-and-it-had-four-mechanical-gears-too/
  38. https://www.loco-info.com/view.aspx?id=-894&type=Country
  39. https://www.facebook.com/groups/narrowgauge/posts/29460819036836744/
  40. https://theengineeringblog.com/railway-locomotive-bogie/
  41. https://www.railway-technical.com/trains/rolling-stock-index-l/wheel-notation.html
  42. https://sremg.org.uk/diesel/bull_1coco1.shtml
  43. https://www.modelraildatabase.com/classes/details/559/english-electric-type-4/
  44. https://davidheyscollection.com/pages/david-heys-steam-diesel-photo-collection-93-br-type-4-diesels-1960s
  45. https://www.keymodelworld.com/article/reality-check-pioneering-peaks-class-44
  46. https://bulleidlocos.org.uk/_oth/10201.aspx
  47. https://locomotive.fandom.com/wiki/JNR_Class_EF10
  48. http://www.rogersonw.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1511861
  49. https://www.loco-info.com/view.aspx?id=10829
  50. https://www.loco-info.com/view.aspx?id=10529
  51. https://www.dtg.co.nz/our-fleet
  52. https://www.railpost.in/wag-12-alstoms-new-12000-hp-locomotive-enters-service-on-indian-railways-see-specifications-features-and-more-inside/
  53. https://www.bitre.gov.au/sites/default/files/op_035.pdf
  54. https://commons.princeton.edu/josephhenry/wp-content/uploads/sites/71/2022/05/Flam-Unconventional-Bogie-Designs-Their-Practical-Basis-and-Historical-Background.pdf
  55. https://www.ejrcf.or.jp/jrtr/jrtr18/f52_technology.html
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.