|
I was in Lincoln at the oil lab when the test train was run. Dale Propp came down from Como Lab and along with two or three FRA/DOT staffers rode the dyno car. One aspect of the test was checking the fuel usage of the EMD power; EMD claimed the new unit's fuel consumption was on par with the GE's. Residential water meters were installed on the test units and the fuel usage was then checked. They rode the trains for a week or two and then came back to Lincoln. Wyhog nailed it when he mentioned Locotrol. GE's were favored early on because of their low speed control while loading at the mines. This topic has brought back lots of memories of my early career with the "Q" and BN.
From: Winton <wyhog@yahoo.com> To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 8, 2012 3:42 PM Subject: [CBQ] Re: BN GP 20s Not exactly CB&Q but since the subject has already been started please permit me to ramble on a while... I hired out as an engineer at Alliance in 1974. Of course at that time the Belmont (Crawford Hill) tunnel was still in use and CTC from Ravenna ended at 3rd Street in Alliance with dark territory from there west to Huntley, MT. Worked Alliance for a year then moved to Sheridan in late 1975 for 34 years. While at Alliance I worked the extra board mostly and ran most jobs. Alliance to Ravenna, to Edgemont, to Guernsey. to Sterling. Also the Deadwood branch and Crawford helpers which were at that time ran light from Alliance to Crawford to shove trains back to Alliance. The coal trains were 100% GE U30C powered using Locotrol. Usually 4 on the point and either 3 or 4 placed 65 cars deep depending upon what train and its route. The slaves were put into the empty trains and taken out of the loaded trains at Alliance yard. We had outside hostlers to do that. The U30Cs were mostly built 1973-1974 if I recall correctly. The 5800s were the Locotrol masters and the 5900s were the Locotrol slaves. The 5300s were plain U30Cs. In late Summer or Fall of '75 I had a coal train that had all SD40-2 power, the first I'd ever seen on a coal train. It was a test train with 5 SD40-2s (6700-6704 or 6701-6705, without checking my records I can't be sure) and a dynamometer car right behind the power. We had manned helpers on the rear out of Crawford. When I moved to Sheridan all coal trains there were also GE. The eastbound coal trains had U30Cs like Alliance but the westbound coal trains had older U25C/U28C. Those were TERRIBLE. They were the ones with the 16 notch long handled throttle. They had very poor wheelslip control and were prone to spin in place and burn the rail. Everything in the cab rattled loudly and with those drop equalizer trucks they rode even rougher than the U30Cs. Every system on them was unreliable from the electrical to the cooling to the engines. The reason I had any good feelings at all towards them was because I had a "childhood connection" with them, and they sounded terrific when 4 or 5 of them were phasing in and out of sync! I used to open the cab window on nice days and hang my head out of it just to listen to them chugging. By 1976 we were getting more and more SD40-2s on coal trains and by 1981 they were as frequent or more so than the U30Cs. As was stated earlier the BN had 600 SD40-2; the 6700-6900s, 7000-7200s, 7800-8100s. Plus the older 6300s. Not all all of the above numbers were completely filled. Ten or so brand new SD40-2s were assigned to Sheridan helper service, usually 7200s. I had worked for the Penn Central and for it ran on the L&N, C&O, SOU, DT&I, and E-L and in all of my RR experiences had never seen any RR use brand new units in helper service but the BN did. Thoughts on GEs. Most engineers hated them, I didn't mind the U30C and C30-7s. Yes they were much harder to get on and off of with those almost vertical steps and the catwalks and doors were narrow. Most things in the cabs rattled but even so there was much less engine noise so they were far quieter than the EMDs. The U boat engine noise that was heard was of a lower pitch than the EMDs and not as annoying to me. An SD40/45 in number 8 for a few hours can really wear you down just from the noise. The GEs did not have that effect on me. The SDs were definitely easier riders than the U boats. I never understood how 420,000 lbs of iron slamming violently from side to side like the GEs did could stay on the rail or not turn rails over but they did. However the EMD SD45s (and F45s) always seemed top heavy to me and rolled to the outside of curves and when diverging thru switches. Often it felt as if they would just roll right on over on its side. Never did of course. Some SD45s had problems where they would sort of "back fire" which would somehow almost stall the turbo. That was accompanied by a severe body roll to the side as the turbo's torque was arrested and a loud WHOOMP! and nasty noises as the overrunning clutch grabbed. EMDs were not perfect by any means. They had their share of water and ground relay problems. Our freights in the '70s were powered mostly by the older lighter SD40s, SD45s, U33Cs, and 4 axle GEs. Many still in predecessor colors including a lot of Chinese Red. To be fair we had our share of problems with SD40s (not -2s), SD45s, and SD9s. GE haters seem to overlook those problems. Still I did have several GEs gutted by fire and I never had an EMD do that. As for the GP20CATs, I had several of them. One blew up on me on a freight climbing Parkman Hill. We got alarm bells at the east switch and looked back to see roiling black smoke and flames shooting 15-20 feet into the air. It was only about 3/4ths mile to the top of the hill, we were barely moving and if I stopped would probably have to double the hill. So I decided to heck with it let it burn and I'll check it over the hill. But rounding the curve I saw and was reminded of the old Q wooden county road overpass and decided it probably would not be a good idea to take a flame thrower GP20CAT under that. So I stopped short of the bridge. I walked alongside the flaming CAT loco and pulled the emergency fuel cutoff ring. The fire went out but oil flowed down the sides of the hood from the roof and smoke continued for quite some time. I definitely was NOT pleased with Cat engined locos that day. I also several times had the Cat engined SD40, the BN 6330 or 6333 whatever it was. I called it Ol' Buzz Butt because in number 8 it had a nasty high frequency buzz vibration that made it thru the cab seats and numbed your butt and back. I hated it. The only good thing about that unit was the sound you could make by goosing the throttle from idle or number one to number 4 or so. That Cat engine really grumbled and rumbled as it revved up. Wyhog __._,_.___
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___ |