GP-30 questions

[C855B]

120 B30-7As, and the A signified they were powered by a 12 cylinder FDL versus the 16 cylinder version FDL in the B30-7.  MP had B30-7As with cabs.  BN also had 8 standard B30-7s of Frisco heritage, powered by the 16FDL.

I should've checked... 120... no wonder I kept seeing 'em on "just any" train. I only thought they were special.

Your reminder of the 'A' thing is a  . I'm now recalling heated debates "back then" about whether they were "B30-7ABs" or something to that effect, and the answer was no, there was no specific model distinction, at least not from GE.

Yes, one of the stories I heard may well have been from the same engineer or somebody who knew him, or the situation... I remember "Denver" in the recollection.

UP had similar issues, but at least their old computer system carried the 'B' number suffix, so there were no mysteries, and Bs were a known quantity across the system. Didn't always prevent dispatching issues when too many of 'em accumulated. L.A. especially had problems since the next closest major power terminal was Ogden. If a train came in with a single A and a string of Bs - common in the late '60s - and the lead unit arrived down due to an on-road failure, they sometimes didn't have enough cab-equipped power around the facility to assign to eastbounds. I remember hearing a specific dilemma over the radio ("PBX", if you remember that) where the plan was to grab another B to add to the consist, and sent the bad A back east unfixed just so they had something to run the train from.

[Missaberoad]

Mike,

Don't forget ATSF's SD45-2b's which if I remember correct were ordered from EMD in that configuration...

Edit I stand corrected 

[C855B]

Don't forget ATSF's SD45-2b's which if I remember correct were ordered from EMD in that configuration...

They were rebuilds not originally purchased as Bs. They were diverted from the rebuild program in late '87, apparently chosen for conversion due to wreck or other damage making not rebuilding the cab an opportunity for cost savings. The original numbers for 5510-5517 as A units were 5651, 5676, 5703, 5626, 5701, 5633, 5684 and 5700 (5700 being one of the Bicentennial-scheme units).

Here's an insanely-detailed article on Santa Fe's SD45-2s: http://old.atsfrr.org/resources/BackRalph/Santa%20Fe%20SD45-2.pdf

[JMaurer1]

As we ramble hopelessly off the subject, when the Southern Pacific ordered B units (back in the '50s) they ordered them with drawbars and not couplers to be attached to an A unit. AS-S616 A and Bs and TR-6 A and Bs were permanently connected together so this wouldn't become a problem...until they removed the drawbars and installed couplers  On paper, drawbars seems to the the answer until management 'improved' the idea...

Of course this only solved half the problem when the cab ends up on the 'right' side of the train.

[C855B]

As we ramble hopelessly off the subject, ...

It's what we do.

The argument against drawbar-connected units was usually around maintenance and running failures - when one went down, it took both out of service. Supposedly the same problem with doubles, but my understanding of UP's fleet of doubles was this assessment was not true under reasonable maintenance programs, which minimized on-road failures. OTOH, SP was renown for deferred maintenance, so it would make perfect sense management would be unhappy with drawbar-connected Bs. I know they weren't enamored with their six doubles for this reason.

Of course this only solved half the problem when the cab ends up on the 'right' side of the train.

Makes me think of this Howard Fogg work portraying heavy plowing operations:



What's wrong with this picture? If they had to retreat, a normal occurrence, the engineer has no choice but to operate backwards sighting down all those hoods. In reality they would use a rearward-facing cab at the other end of the consist.

[davefoxx]

...until they removed the drawbars and installed couplers  On paper, drawbars seems to the the answer until management 'improved' the idea...

Yes, but those drawbars also made it difficult to put power efficiently on a train.  It could be either underpowered or significantly overpowered and inefficient.  I recall reading that the Atlantic Coast Line bought F3s to run with their drawbarred FTs, i.e., they could have FTA+FTB-F3A, rather than FTA+FTB or FTA+FTB-FTB+FTA.  But, that must not have solved the problem, because the ACL figured out how to replace those drawbars on the FTs, and, eventually, those sets were broken up for more flexibility in assignment.

DFF

[C855B]

That must have been later in the game. FT pairs (and triples, IIRC) were sold as a "one" locomotive equivalent to a small to medium road-going steam engine. It was only in the realization there was the opportunity to better tailor the power to the need that a new power management philosophy was adopted.

[unittrain]

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/32482215/n-scale-gp30-phase-1-the-atlas-model-railroad-co/2

Just sayin...


Edit: Good God! Just realized I wrote that 10 years ago...

Mic Drop

[jmlaboda]

What's wrong with this picture? If they had to retreat, a normal occurrence, the engineer has no choice but to operate backwards sighting down all those hoods. In reality they would use a rearward-facing cab at the other end of the consist.

Tell that to Southern Railway who sent Cabs and Boosters to run on the Interstate when they took over that line with few wyes left from the steam era.  Real inconvenient to say the least and enough problems were faced with a B-unit being forward half the time they were running (and it wasn't the only time SR used a single B with a single A, the same crap was done down in Florida on the Live Oak Perry & Gulf/South Georgia line)...

I recall reading that the Atlantic Coast Line bought F3s to run with their drawbarred FTs, i.e., they could have FTA+FTB-F3A, rather than FTA+FTB or FTA+FTB-FTB+FTA.  But, that must not have solved the problem, because the ACL figured out how to replace those drawbars on the FTs, and, eventually, those sets were broken up for more flexibility in assignment.

It was F2As that ACL bought, not F3As.  And the drawbar replacement option was developed early on by EMD (for some reason I am thinking Santa Fe chose couplers early on but would need the Railfan articles to confirm this).  Heck, Southern ordered one set of five FTAs with couplers to help break up their sets... a real oddity for the time but it accomplished what they sought to do in the short term.

[Ike the BN Freak]

I'm now recalling heated debates "back then" about whether they were "B30-7ABs" or something to that effect, and the answer was no, there was no specific model distinction, at least not from GE.

The debate is still going on, see it all the time on a BN group I admin. That or if calling these units slugs is/was correct. BN never added the second B to their designation either.

[Nato]

               :|Santa Fe Did Choose Couplers for all their FT's the only road I believe to do so. They did operate them when first received as EMC intended either as four unit A-B-B-A locomotives or two unit A-B locomotives. Nate Goodman (Nato).