BNSF has ordered the storing of virtually their entire fleet of AC4400CWs due to the traffic downturn. The only exceptions are due to their differing ownership, the three test leocomotives, 5600 - 5602, and the three “Warranty protection units” 5840 - 5842.
Wow, that’s interesting. Although, I’m sure there’s plenty of ES44AC’s now that they really aren’t needed as much. Come to think of it, I don’t see many AC44’s on the BNSF as it is; occationally leading/trailing units on coal trains, and I saw a pair of them on a manifest once. They’re not near as common as SD70MAC’s I don’t think.
Interesting. I wonder if it’s a fuel related issue and if so, what about the -9W units? Do they get better mileage? Or is it a question of tonnage that the -9W can haul w/o the ‘trouble’ of the AC4400?
Wow, I wonder how many units are they storing? Does anyone know where do they store excess locomotives?
Obviously it is a financial reason. My guess is that the size of the fleet, ownership, parts and maintenance ply into it. I think that the AC4400CW fleet is about the number of locomotives they wanted to store, they have parts such as inverters that the much larger Dash-9 fleet doesn’t have, and the SD70MAC fleet has much larger numbers of units. In some way these factors caused the AC4400CW fleet to be chosen. I doubt it is fuel related, since GE’s are fairly good on fuel. Most of the storage decisions seem to be the biggest advantage if you can sideline all of a model, which must be related to parts and maintenance based, although obviously reliability must count too.