CSX purchasing 4-axle power from UP to ease shortage.

Lady Penelope wrote:I don't think CSX will grab the NS B32-8 units, as from what I have heard, the 52 former UP B40-8 units are sufficient enough to eliminate the 4-Axle power shortage, and also the 5900-series number slots will all be filled, but again, you never know. Slots 5602 - 5899 are free, so IF (big IF) CSX decides to purchase the retired NS B32-8 units, or more former UP B40-8 units, they would be filling the 5800 series number slots. I hear CSX will be moving eight B40-8 units a week to Waycross from East St Louis, IL.

From what I've heard talking to people around the yard, Engineers absolutely HATE the B40s. On the road it's not a big deal, but they've all told me old GE power is just utter junk, especially in the yard. You'll go to notch up and instead of seeing your amperage kick up almost right away like old EMDs do, you slowly hear the engine start to rev and then the amp meter finally starts to creep up. As for going forward to reverse of visa versa, I believe the exact words of my Engineer were "You go to change directions in one of those things and you can go eat a sandwich before you start moving again."

LocoCam wrote:I hear older guys comment on the "whining" "newer" guys do about having a conventional leader. Everyone should raise hell about having a much more collision safe unit buried in the consist because mgmt doesn't want to plan ahead or take the time to spin the power (where feasible). Sorry to go off topic, just a hot button issue to me.

I've seen situations worse than that.

Sometimes (not very often, but sometimes), I'll see a train roll into Charlotte with two southbound-facing motors. Which is all well and good coming TO Charlotte... but when the mirror of that train has to go back northbound the next day, what then? Charlotte has no way to turn 6-axle locomotives. We have an industry loop nearby that we can turn things with, but only 4-axles. So what ends up happening is we have an intermodal that goes from Charlotte -> Greenwood and to get there they have to go to Monroe and run around it. So we send the pair with them since they'll only have to run long-hood-forward for the ~25 miles from Charlotte to Monroe. It's still dumb though. They should KNOW not to send motors like that to Charlotte because we can't turn them.

TotalLamer wrote: From what I've heard talking to people around the yard, Engineers absolutely HATE the B40s. On the road it's not a big deal, but they've all told me old GE power is just utter junk, especially in the yard. You'll go to notch up and instead of seeing your amperage kick up almost right away like old EMDs do, you slowly hear the engine start to rev and then the amp meter finally starts to creep up. As for going forward to reverse of visa versa, I believe the exact words of my Engineer were "You go to change directions in one of those things and you can go eat a sandwich before you start moving again."

That is what I heard as well. Very slow loading, and they hate those units on yard jobs, for the exact reasons you stated. I don't know why CSX is purchasing GE units instead of EMD units,

Backshophoss wrote:Most industry tracks in the east see very little/no track maintaince to begin with,and have tight radius curves to boot.
A 4 axle roadswitcher can travel thru tight curves and not derail most of the time,a SD-40's truck would most likely spread the
rail and go on the ground.

What he said. I've spent a lot of time in facilities served by rail. They generally have the opinion that "rail is made of steel and so we never need to repair it", nevermind the ties are rotting and the roadbed is total mud. About ten years ago my office was in a former freight car factory. The rail lines in-plant were designed for moving empty railcars around the plant, and the roadbed was pretty lightweight due to the 100% empty cars. The place was sold to a steel processing facility, and at least half the loads are gons loaded with multiple steel coils or chock full of profile steel. It's a miracle they never turned a rail over, because those tracks were a mud pit.

I'd cringe at the thought of a 8-40C or SD40 banging cars around there. You'd be on the ground once/day.

GE's are a lot cheaper and a lot more available on the resale/used market than EMD's.

What has to be changed to make the GE's load a bit quicker than their current setup?

Trade them for an EMD? They're designed that way.

BNSF just sold a batch of Santa Fe rebuilt GP35s to LTE, too bad CSX couldn't pick up those.

Here in Charlotte alone, we have a SINGLE yard job that requires THREE four-axle motors just to be worked... though sometimes they send a slug-and-mate plus another motor. For whatever reason, years past, someone decided it'd be a brilliant idea to locate a TRANSFLO terminal at the foot of a steep, curvy hill... and the tracks excess cars for it are stored in are also at the foot of that hill. So digging out empties / spot cars takes some serious power. Even with 3 locomotives, it's still only possible to pull about ~18 cars at best while you're working to dig stuff out. And that's just a single yard job. So yeah, we've got some real 4-axle needs around here.

roadster wrote:CSX mentality is that 4 xl power is better utilized for local/yard/work train assignments. So the high HP is excessive and waste fuel, and down rating is a simple matter of programing. There are no new 4 xls being produced. Unless your are referring to the many rebuilding programs and builders. So, 4 xl power is getting older and older and harder to replace. Retired units are either scraped or fodder for rebuilders. And the numbers continue to decline. When I hired on in 2000, CSX was still using -7 series GE's. B23's, B30's, B36's and the like. They have all since been retired. I had been assigned B36-7's on locals out of Rochester back then and they were not happy lugging at slow speeds and suffered from wheel slips under low speed loads. Once in a great while a 4xl GP38 or 40 is pressed into road service as a leader. The ride isn't exactly smooth, and given a bit of provocation, it isn't difficult for an engineer to find an FRA defect on these aging steeds, cripple them, remove them from lead positions or from the train all together. You should hear the crews whine when they find out they have a conventional cab as a leader.

IF CSX really wanted to spend the $ there are, in fact, brand new 4 axle roadswitchers being built by EMD...
A large order of GP22ECOs are being delivered to CP that are brand new from the trucks up (including new frame, cab, carbody)
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 6&t=117267" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Of course used B40-8s are considerably easier on the wallet.....

The second batch of former UP B40-8 units have been interchanged to the CSX this afternoon in New Orleans, LA and are currently en-route to Waycross, GA. As with the first batch, the units have the nose shield painted out, along with the 'Union Pacific' lettering on the hood. Look for more units to move East within the next two months. Unit numbers on this second move are:

UP 1839
UP 1817
UP 1849
UP 1850
UP 1834
UP 1813
UP 1848
UP 1825

Noel Weaver wrote: I would think on this route that 3 four motor locomotives would do a better job with less fuel than three six motor locomotives of the same HP.
Noel Weaver

3 12 cylinder ES40DC Gevo units would consume less fuel than 3 16 cylinder 4 axle Dash 8s on the same train.

The third batch of the 52 recently purchased GE B40-8 locomotives from Union Pacific are scheduled to be interchanged to the CSX in East St Louis, IL today Friday September 20, 2013. As usual with the two prior batches, the units have the nose shield painted out, along with the 'Union Pacific' lettering on the hood. The units are scheduled to travel on CSX Q670 from East St Louis, IL to Cincinnati, OH, and CSX Q541 from Cincinnati, OH to Waycross, GA. Look for more units to move East within the next two months. Unit numbers on this third move are:

UP 1819 to be CSXT 5900
UP 1846 to be CSXT 5901
UP 1852 to be CSXT 5904
UP 1842 to be CSXT 5908
UP 1841 to be CSXT 5909
UP 1837 to be CSXT 5911
UP 1831 to be CSXT 5914
UP 1823 to be CSXT 5917

I had heard of the GP22ECOs, but thought they were another form of rebuild program. But you and I both agree that the B40-8's are a lot cheaper.

roadster wrote:I had heard of the GP22ECOs, but thought they were another form of rebuild program. But you and I both agree that the B40-8's are a lot cheaper.

That is the main reason behind CSX's decision to purchase the 52 units. Also another reason is maintenance - CSX already has a huge fleet of six-axle Dash 8 units and the similar four-axle Dash 8 units, so employees are familiar with the units.

The forth batch of the 52 recently purchased GE B40-8 locomotives from Union Pacific has been delivered to the CSX last Saturday September 28, 2013. As usual with the three prior batches, the units have the nose shield painted out, along with the 'Union Pacific' lettering on the hood. The units traveled on CSX Q670 from East St Louis, IL to Cincinnati, OH, and CSX Q541 from Cincinnati, OH to Waycross, GA. There are three more moves scheduled before all units are delivered. All are scheduled to be delivered by the end of October, and all to be in service by early November. Units on this forth move are as follows:

UP 1822 to be CSX 5918
UP 1820 to be CSX 5919
UP 1818 to be CSX 5920
UP 1816 to be CSX 5922
UP 1811 to be CSX 5924
UP 1810 to be CSX 5925
UP 1803 to be CSX 5927
UP 1802 to be CSX 5928