BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CBQ] Re: Burlington Locomotives

To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Re: Burlington Locomotives
From: "East Pass" <EastPass@19main.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:57:39 -0600
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
References: <crrla3+jk34@eGroups.com>
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Tim,

Don't understand you statement. Until the arrival of
the SD24's the F units would have to be in the lead
anyway. At that point they had already started to be
traded in so no reason to modify. F units were not
purchased to be run as single units but to be kept in
sets.

Russ
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tim VanMersbergen 
  To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, 09 January, 2005 10:14
  Subject: [CBQ] Re: Burlington Locomotives




  In passenger service they may have figured it out quickly, but in 
  freight operations, they never did.  It is ironic that almost none 
  all the freight cab units had nose MU connections, so the freight 
  department never enjoyed the same flexibility.  One would think the 
  advantages that were clear in passenger operations could also be 
  applied to freight.
  Tim VanMersbergen



  --- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, Bob Webber <rswebber@c...> wrote:
  > Which is why you always see them running Elephant style.  Here is 
  another 
  > example of the Q being smarter in using their money.  B units for 
  this 
  > application for a railroad like the CB&Q just didn't make sense - 
  it made 
  > for too inflexible arrangements.  If you look at the consists 
  published 
  > with the Zephyrs, you';ll note that the locomotive consists 
  fluctuated 
  > often with the trains.  Being able to pull a unit off easily 
  regardless of 
  > which one made for increased efficiency.  And, when it came time to 
  be 
  > bumped to the commuter trains, they didn't have to add cabs to B 
  units the 
  > way that the C&NW did.  Say what you will about the Q - it usually 
  didn't 
  > take them long to figure out the way to run things that would be 
  the most 
  > efficient for the long term.  Whether that be using unpainted 
  stainless 
  > (that cut down on maintenance costs) or not using cabless power - 
  they 
  > figured it out fairly quickly.
  > 
  > At 10:41 AM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
  > 
  > >While some of the Burlington E7's carried a "B" suffix in their 
  number, the
  > >were in fact "A" Units, in other words they had a cab. The 
  Burlington didn't
  > >own any E7,E8,or E9 "B" Units. The only E "B" Units they owned 
  were the E5 
  > >B's.
  > >
  > >Hope this helps you,
  > >
  > >Loren Johnson






   
  Yahoo! Groups Links



   






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EpW3eD/3MnJAA/cosFAA/8ZCslB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>