Bill Barber expands on my comments:
<<The car bodies and
frame structure of the "F" model locomotives was unusable on GP type
locomotives. The "F" carbody was sort of a bridge structure. The
frame was not self supporting. The framework of the carbody and the frame was
one integral structural assembly. The outside covering was strictly a non
structural enclosure. For GP and SD locomotives, on the other hand, the frame
was a self supporting stand alone structure. The complete carbody was simply an
enclosure with no structural function. >>
<<The trade in program
that began with the GP20 model, salvaged usable and rebuildable components. The
rest was scrapped. Components included truck frames, traction motor frames and
armature cores, generator frames and armature cores, engine crankshafts, cams,
pumps, gears plus other sundry items. Customers could trade a four axle
locomotive for a six axle and still get credit for components such as truck
frames which then went into a pool. In some case, EMD even took non EMD
locomotives in trade. In most cases, nothing was used from those locomotives,
but some GP30s and GP35s were equipped with rebuilt Alco trucks if the customer
requested the reuse. The customer still received some credit for the non
EMD locomotive. If a trade in piece could not be salvaged, such as a broken
crankshaft, the customer did not receive credit for that item and was billed
for new. They could ship another qualified crankshaft in if they so desired. As
locomotive design evolved, fewer components were reusable and the program gradually
faded. The development of the AR10 alternator eliminated the generator trade in
from older locomotives. The introduction of the 710 model diesel engine
eliminated most of the salvageable engine components.>>
<<From EMD's
standpoint, it was a complicated book keeping process in the days before
computers. For the customer, it proved to be an outstanding opportunity to
upgrade their motive power, reduce locomotive fleets and gain significant
financial benefit from their old trade in power. The Q was an early and
frequent participant in the trade in program up through the 40 series models.
GE, of course, offered a similar program, but could reuse most of the
components. Government accounting procedure changes in the early stage of the
program helped facilitate the process.>>
Bill,
Thanks for expanding on and providing
additional information that reinforces the point I was attempting to make, that
those GP20’s _weren’t_
rebuilt from FTs, because of differences in the frame and other parts of the
structure. Much of the published roster information on GN FTs
states these units were “rebuilt” into GP9m or GP20 units, when in
fact, they were traded in for credit as you state above. Having
credits from recoverable components applied against the purchase price of a new
unit is one thing – rebuilding a covered wagon with its truss
architecture into a Geep with it’s I beam frame construction is something
else entirely.
Best regards,
Steve Haas
Snoqualmie, WA
__._,_.___
![]()
__,_._,___
|
|