Talk:MÁV Class V43

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

This article lacks references.

High utilisation

The article says: "[T]he Hungarian series produced V43 examples are two tons overweight compared the German prototype owing to steel frame manufacturing differences. This requires the locomotives to constantly work near the edge of their power reserve." It doesn't make sense that working near the limit of their power/tractive effort is caused by their being a modest 2 tons overweight. It might be the power electrics were downscaled by 2 tons to compensate, but I couldn't find any reference to prototypes with higher power. Does anyone know what the real story is? A 2 tons weight saving on a 80 tons locomotive would only lead to significant power deficiencies when executed very poorly. 82.139.114.136 (talk) 14:07, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Future replacement

The article says the locomotives will be replaced with Siemens Taurus locomotives. It would seem unlikely all locomotives will be replaced with locomotives with twice the speed capability and three times their power (and worth about 4m euros each). I expect there too be more to this story than just simple replacement, especially because modern (and cheaper) Bombardier TRAXX P160 AC2 locomotives have been introduced since 2011. 82.139.114.136 (talk) 14:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was heavy lobbying for more Taurus, but very high-speed and quick braking locos have a tendency to "head-check" destroy the rails, ever since the use of coal-gas has been banned from the hungarian heath industry and they must rely on pure hydrogen to make the rails (Something to do with micro-bubbles making steel weaker).

Therefore speeds over 160km/h remain mostly a dream in Hungary. Anyhow, the cheaper, max. 160km/h TRAXX type loco was indeed purchased by MAV, instead of the Taurus, but in practice the promised energy savings, that are a reality with the Taurus, have not yet been realized by TRAXXes in service. 87.97.52.178 (talk) 22:38, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, that's a clear answer, makes sense (even though I don't understand the micro bubble thing, but I'll just take that as a given). I found a (partial) explanation for preferring Tauri here: [1] and [2]. Makes for some interesting reading, the comments are worth reading too! It explains why it is still usefull to have 230km/h locomotives in a country struggling to get its infrastructure usable at 160km/h. 92.109.129.63 (talk) 21:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

V43 electric loco energy consumption data

V43 electric loco energy consumption data for a typical run from Kelenfold to Szekesfehervar (a distance of 63 kilometers over flat land)

Pulling a 600 metric tons freight train, Max. speed 90 km/h, Travel includes just one stop mid-route, Traction energy consumption: 900 kiloWatt-hours

Commuter passenger train of 6 waggons (app. 240 metric tons) Max. speed 100 km/h, Travel includes 14 platform stops Traction energy consumption: 1300 kiloWatt-hours

In case of using a modern, regenerative-braking "Traxx" electric loco, theoretical savings of up to 30% can be realized in the above roles, but only if the machinist is well trained and really disciplined in his use of the ampere-voltage controls. 87.97.52.178 (talk) 22:42, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]