Does anyone know why the B&M purchased their GP38-2 and 40-2’s without dynamic brakes? Did this have anything to do with Guilford returning the units? The B&M wasn’t crossing the Great Divide or anything, but it certainly wasn’t a granger road either - wouldn’t they have need at least their road units to have dynamics?
Guilford is very cheap, that is why the GP38-2s, GP39-2, and GP40-2s, were returned at the end of their leases. Because these types of locomotives were in demand the leasing companies wanted higher payments to renew the leases, and the buyouts were much higher than Guilford was willing to pay.
I know why the units were returned, but I’m curious as to why they were even purchased in the first place…
First you gotta have the extra money it takes to buy them equipped with dynamic brakes , then you got to have the good track to run them on, I think Guilford has neither.
B&M purchased them though, not Guilford. Not that the B&M and MEC were in fine condition when purchased, but they certainly did deteriorate under Guilford. I’m curious as to the B&M’s rational to buy non-dynamic brake equipped units over ones with them? Was it truely a money issue?
Dynamic brakes were quite expensive, I think alot of the rationale was that we got along just fine without them for all these years , why change ? There were some very high profile train wrecks when higher capacity dynamic brakes came into use and perhaps this played a role in the decision as well . The employees would require training and qualification before getting turned loose with dynamic brakes too . One thing I learned about New England railroads is change is almost impossible… almost.
So the grades were not substantial enough to require dynamic brakes, I take it? I assumed the Berkshire Mountains would warrant the use of them. Thanks for the info though!
One very important consideration, both batches of locomotives were acquired on lease by the B&M’s Bankruptcy Receiver (Trustee). Not by an independant B&M management. He would have to justified the higher cost of the added dynamic braking to the Bankruptcy Judge.
Interestingly enough, many ST locomotives are designated and marked to be dymanic brake equipped, when in reality they are not.
For the cost, the gradient over the Hoosac Tunnel Route did not warrant dynamic brakes. I asked for the ruling grade of the HTR over on the railroad.net forums, and received a very helpful reply that the ruling grade is 1.25%, with most in the range of .5% to 1%.
B&M’s 50 GP9’s and 6 GP18’s did have dynamic brakes.
Have a good one.
Bill B
Having them and using them are two different things , the BAR engines all had dynamics also but few even knew that , I think the fact that most BAR people knew nothing about dynamics indicates that they were not used.