For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
User avatar
By Popeye
#1697011
I was Marine Superintendent of a research vessel which had two 125 "marinised" engines which failed spectacularly. Apparently the engines were designed to start up, move at full power for many hours then stop. We were running the eigines at low load for days on end and unburned diesel was dropping into the sump diluting the LO which resulted in big end failures.

The engine builders were horrified when they found out that we'd been using these (second hand) engines in a way for which they'd never been designed.

Thus I doubt that they'd be much use for freight use unless non-stop very high speed (Mail?).
rikur_ liked this
User avatar
By rikur_
#1697021
Popeye wrote:I was Marine Superintendent of a research vessel which had two 125 "marinised" engines which failed spectacularly. Apparently the engines were designed to start up, move at full power for many hours then stop. We were running the eigines at low load for days on end and unburned diesel was dropping into the sump diluting the LO which resulted in big end failures.

The engine builders were horrified when they found out that we'd been using these (second hand) engines in a way for which they'd never been designed.

Thus I doubt that they'd be much use for freight use unless non-stop very high speed (Mail?).

BR had similar issues with the original Valenta engines .... they used 8 of them in 1987 as driving van trailers (aka cabs) for the newly introduced mk4/class 90 combo. Originally they were used idling but this caused no end of problems like you describe.
They have however been re-engined about 10 years ago, so no longer an issue.
NB: The proposed freight use is 125mph Amazon parcels from Doncaster warehouse to a north London distribution point, not shipping heavy sea containers.... so no real reason why it shouldn't work .... just a minor change from self-loading freight to boxed freight.