Mr Barber,
Thanks very much for taking the time to write out that informative reply! I hope the list will indulge us a little longer as we veer a little further away from the Q and closer to BN territory.
Thank you also for the explanation on EMD's re-engining work. A question came up on the NP list as to what sort of changes in the hood would have been done to early NP Alco switchers when re-engined with EMD 567s, so it popped to mind. I don't think I have any further questions about that at this time.
Regarding the Nixon price freeze, I'd forgotten about that, or at least, how it might have impacted EMD. I'd never heard of the EMD escalation clause -- good thing to know!
...The GEs were favored in coal service because they were considered to pull better under heavy load...
I had not heard this before! If Sheridan Engineer Al Krug is lurking on the list, I wonder what he would have to say about this. As I recall, he wound up in the coal fields ca. 1974 after leaving the PC and indulging his fetish for Cascade green. I've never heard anything but compliments about the SD40-2, and quite a few complaints about the GE U-series, especially their sixteen-notch throttles. Nor did I realize that BN bought 600 SD40-2s in the 1977-9 period -- far more than I'd give them credit for. There was certainly still a lot of first generation power rolling around the Pacific Northwest at that time.
A somewhat unrelated question that may be out of your field of expertise, but what drove the UP's massive SD70 purchase? The need to replace the down-on-its-luck SP/DRGW fleet, or the need to keep compliant with ever-more-stringent California emissions policies?
...During those same years, BN was spending huge amounts to improve the Powder River basin trackage, including the addition of the Orin Cutoff which greatly improved access. At the same time, coal traffic was increasing rapidly...
In a note more related to the Q, I've heard repeatedly from an NP civil engineer that the BN spent far more than they anticipated on the former Q physical plant in the PRB, but system-wide, as the Q's management had never really upgraded the plant for the coming of the 100-ton car back in the early 1960s. (I imagine the flood of PRB coal trains only exacerbated this problem.) The engineer's point of view was that the Q's masters wouldn't spring for the work, preferring higher dividends. As the Q was beholden to St Paul, I kicked this around with a GN/BN exec, another civil engineer who was clear that the Q management never brought it up. I get the feeling his point of view was that no reasonable request would have been refused, and upgrading rail to handle heavier loads was certainly reasonable. Anyone know for sure?
Thanks again!
John Phillips
Seattle