BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

[CBQ] Re:U23C's

To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CBQ] Re:U23C's
From: "bigbearoak" <jonathanharris@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 00:12:53 -0000
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; d=yahoogroups.com; b=QJ37Zd2JTmFKebduSipGXPWgFnGfEnAJfNIph5+Fdmtswr/yFOZREUEMsg2dV9HJSYGUaavzeWuEbYh3S6jBf3ARGiblUKU20m1RYUNLkhIN6CdbygKDhI21BBtU8rVg;
In-reply-to: <D034982B-0186-41BB-9C76-B1C9C3B3D7B7@pixelspublishing.com>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
User-agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
Ed - 

Thank you for a very cogent and interesting explanation. 

Could you elaborate on your statement that "...many roads were fed up with the 
tactics 
and products of EMD..."? Not too hard to guess about "tactics," but what were 
the 
substantive complaints about their "motors?" Knowing little about the history 
of diesels, I 
guess I'd assumed EMD was the standard - if not the gold standard, then at 
least by 
reputation more reliable than its competitors. Is that just a myth? Did they 
get lazy and 
arrogant after crushing BLH, FM and ALCO? Or were there basic problems with 
their 
designs?

Grateful for any further clarification (however brief or long you wish).
Jonathan Harris

--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, Ed DeRouin <Ed@...> wrote:
>
> Brad and Others:
> 
> The U23C locomotives. like the U25Cs, were purchased as replacement  
> power for SD9s. In the case of the U23C locomotives, the horsepower  
> was not of primary interest; attainable tractive effort with a  
> smaller prime mover was. Regardless of the alleged better deal from  
> GE, in that era, many roads were fed up with the tactics and products  
> of EMD and GE was the only other player. Forget Alco, they were in a  
> death spiral. By providing opportunity for GE by purchasing their  
> products, GE was able to improve, compete, and eventually outsell  
> EMD. That era is definitely outside that of the CB&Q, but the  
> purchases or leases of U25B and C locos, and later models, may not  
> have given the engineers the locomotive of choice, but sent a loud  
> message into the now empty offices in LaGrange. If you are unsure of  
> the impact of GE on the locomotive market, look at how Alco and EMD  
> responded when GE introduced the Universal line in 1961.
> 
> Brad, your email caused me to smile because I never thought of the  
> Alliance or Sheridan Divisions as locations for speed runs. Recall  
> that in those days, the territory was a far cry from what is seen  
> today. IIRC, the line was single track, protected by ABS, and had  
> some controlled sidings with a low traffic density.  Tractive effort  
> was what was needed to conquer the hills.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ed DeRouin
>



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com 
    mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> 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>