Join the discussion on the following article:
BNSF converts Dash-9 to AC traction
Spindler: “Probably”? Why not do a bit of research and find the real number . Too much work? Awwww.
That is a very interesting development and I take my hat off to whoever thought of trying it. So the load adjusting bell-crank trucks of the ES44C4 units could one day become an almost ubiquitous sight on BNSF rails!
FXC in CA: “mechanically similar” does not necessarily mean same.
Did they keep the FDL or swap it with an GEVO?
DC in Fl.
What’s your definition of “same?”
Mine is “identical, unable to be mistaken for the original.”
Why Quibble?
Do you think of yourself to be an adult?/
DC in FL
Last sentence, first paragraph.
A recent article in Progressive Railroading said Norfolk Southern is considering converting their GE DC locos to AC drive. Now BN has done it. Wonder if other railroads are considering doing this,
So, the trucks of the C4s, but mechanically an AC44CW. Interesting, an AC44C4!
@CAMERON TYRE, I agree but it is a commentary that they outsource the work to Mexico where pay is probably $1/hour.
Lighten up, Francis.
Who can tell us what a “bell crank” is? Or is that just a joke?
Also, let’s see now. ES44C4. If I had to render a conjecture I’d say this all represents: Environmentally Sound (low air pollution), 4400 hp, C would indicate 6 wheel trucks and the 4 would tell us that there are only 4 traction motors rather than 6
(A-1-A) trucks. Now, how much adhesion does an A-1-A surrender vis-a-vis an A-A-A, if I can call it that? Does the AC make up for the loss? What about traction motor life? There has got to be more “insult” to 4 motors versus 6.
@ Al Dicenso, RE: Susan Spindler’s comment about $1/hr. pay
I thought so, too, Al, so I did look it up, and apparently Susan knows what she’s talking about. The typical pay for industrial jobs of that sort is around 46,200 MXN, which unfortunately converts to about $3500. Allowing two weeks off and working 5 days a week, that comes to a little over $14/day. Figure how many hours they work, and Susan just about nailed it.
I was prepared to defend BNSF, and perhaps I can’t blame them for seeking good work at low prices, even if it does seem outrageous to us US’ers. Still, something is obviously out of balance, but it’s way beyond a railroad’s scope to fix the economies of two nations at opposite extremes of the scale. We live “in interesting times,” to reference an old Chinese curse.
@ Al Dicenso, RE: Susan Spindler’s comment about $1/hr. pay
I thought so, too, Al, so I did look it up, and apparently Susan knows what she’s talking about. The typical pay for industrial jobs of that sort is around 46,200 MXN, which unfortunately converts to about $3500. Allowing two weeks off and working 5 days a week, that comes to a little over $14/day. Figure how many hours they work, and Susan just about nailed it.
I was prepared to defend BNSF, and perhaps I can’t blame them for seeking good work at low prices, even if it does seem outrageous to us US’ers. Still, something is obviously out of balance, but it’s way beyond a railroad’s scope to fix the economies of two nations at opposite extremes of the scale. We live “in interesting times,” to reference an old Chinese curse.
I think it is a great idea. We cannot get into social problems of other countries.
I seem to remember that on another forum a BNSF engineer posted that the C4 engines performed poorly on tonnage trains.
This example and the NS’s announcement are significant because up until now Class I railroads have scrapped or sold their life-expired GE’s, the only exception I can think of being the SP’s experiment with upgrading two U25B’s and having four others repowered in the late 1970’s.
Between them, BNSF and NS own almost 80% of the of the approximately 3,800 C40/C44-9 units built 1993 and 2004, and a major rebuild of these units with AC motors might be a cost-efficient way to upgrade their fleets.
I’ve said it before elsewhere. BNSF runs a fast railroad in places and needs lots of HP per axle. Since GE makes a 16 Cylinder 6000HP GEVO engine which seems to run as well as any other GE, why not use that instead of carrying around an extra useless axle. Why has BNSF been the only buyer? I just get the feeling that this is one of those “management darlings” that some guy got promoted for and is not really a good idea.
Nothing will really change. The only visible change will be the inverter cabinet spoken of in the article. Bogey wise, they will look exactly the same to 99% of people. The cab will stay the same and the long hood equipment cabs will be the same. In the end all they have done is taken a used locomotives and extended it’s service life a little longer… Sounds similar to what EMD is doing but since TRAINS seems to have a pro GE ilk to it, it only serves that we would here more about it as well as BNSF, the new PRR of the world.
I can testify to that they are a poorly designed locomotive. The wheels slip 90 percent of the time with a loaded train. Maybe its ok for Santa Fe trains but they shouldn’t be on the Burlington northern lines. I have had them frequently as a leader. When the tonnage is heavy you hope you have a EMD in the consist somewhere.