I have been contemplating which loco would be usefull for this branch. The loco has to run from the branch to a yard. So it has to be big enough to run on a main. And so equipped for modern operating rules. Time frame for the layout is modern. But it doesnt need to be a unit as big in terms of specs) as a gp38. it can be much smaller. Still has to be able to handle modern loaded hoppers. There is a grade between the yard and the branch. The branch has a team track and coop. SO loaded hoppers of crop seed comes in, boxcar of containers for smaller seed portions. The team track would see something for the co op or someone else.
So figure two loaded hoppers during peak spring and fall crops. random boxcar and random team track load.
So with that, thinking from the point of an actual shortline owner who needs such a unit, what suggestions meeting modern laws and operation criteria what be on the table for consideration.
I added a pic so the end of the branch is visible. The ML8 is on the siding where the boxcar goes, the shed over the track is the hopper unloading and not very clear is the team track above the boxcar.
I used to hang out with the gang at the Indiana Northeastern short line. Their mainstay power was a couple of GP7 and 9s. They have a stretch where they have trackage rights on the NS main and they can get-up and go when necessary:
If I read it correctly, you plan about a three car train, max?
Lots of good running choices:
I’d go with the Atlas ALCO S2 or S4 at only 1000 horse power.
You could use the Atlas MP15, or the Athearn SW1500, GP15, or the GP7/9. 1500 HP. Might be a bit much (the railroad would use it for something else maybe)
This shortline (Dubis County Railroad) runs on a former 16 mile SOUTHERN RR branch line using an old ALCO S2, RS-1, or a GE 44 tonner. Pics taken about 2012/2015 (from a generic Google search, uploaded by the DCRR Flickr):
They also use a 44 tonner, but the Bachmann model is a poor runner compared to the Atlas S2.
How about an ALCO RS-1 (Atlas again) pulling just one car?
But the GP units would be the most popular choice for most railroads, IMO.
While your modelled era might be modern, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the loco has to be modern, too.
Canadian National is using GMD-1s, built in the late '50s, to switch the Stuart St. Yard, in my hometown of Hamilton Ontario, and I’ve found quite a few other locations still using them, too.
The Kiski Junction, recently closed, used an Alco S-1, built in 1943. It hauled both tourist trains and empty and loaded gondolas for a steel plant.
A longtime friend ran it for several years, and considered it superior to a GP-7 (also owned by that road) as far as hauling steel was concerned.
One of my favourite locos were the SW-1200-RS locos used by both the CNR and CPR. They were used both as switchers (SW) and road switchers (RS). Many of them were re-built using some of their parts combined with others parts from early Geeps (GP7s and 9s), and were dubbed by local railfans as “Sweeps”.
There’s one of each in the photo below, with the “Sweep” leading…
If you have a favourite older loco, it might a good candidate for your branchline.
I would opt for an EMD, end cab switcher, although I am a four stroke fan. EMD’s switchers from the NW-2, to the SW-1500 were reliable, workhorses for generations. Parts ranging from cab door handles to complete rebuilt engines and generators as well as complete locomotives will be readily available for generations to come.
For what you envision, an EMD switcher, would have many times, more than enough power, to get the job done. They can be set up to MU with other, larger power or another switcher if necessary, or scoot along a main line if required. ALCos have nostalgic charm and are good solid locomotives, but have been a vanishing breed since since their builder left the market in 1969. Parts are commanding premium prices, making their upkeep more tenious. A major component failure on an ALCo today, is usually fatal, for most operators.
The Walthers Mainline NW2 is a good choice. A little low on detail but a good runner. Comes with sound too if you’re into that. They have two paint schemes that are unlettered and ready for decaling for your freelanced railroad.
Looking at the situation as a railroad operator would, I would eliminate the GP-30 because it is using a turbocharged 567 series V-16 to produce 2250 HP in a locomotive that was known to be notoriously slippery. The later, Roots blown, 645 series V-16 of the GP-38 family is a well proven engine that also in its turbocharged version, powered the iconic, “everyman’s locomotive”, the SD-40-2. The class one’s realised the versatility of the GP-38/SD-40 family early on. Retired units are available but the class ones are holding on to theirs and, treating them with the respect that they have earned since 1972–50 years.
The GP-30 only produces 250 more HP than a GP-38-2, in an operation where speed is not an issue. The added expense of a turbocharger and the increased fuel consumption of the older, more outmoded 567 powered GP-30 (1962-1964) vs. the simpler, 645 powered GP-38-2 (1972-1980 or later) make the 38 a more practical option, from a railroad operating point of view.
Based on the OP’s information, this is a low speed/low tonnage operation where the smaller V-12 powered switcher would be more practical in acquisition, maintenance, fuel consumption and, wear and tear on what could be marginal track. It is a choice between doing what a railfan would do and, what a railroad operator would opt for.
fuel consumption could be an issue, but if we work off the assumption that this is a shortline looking for cheap secondhand locomotives, the GP30 might be got at a bargain since the Class Is prefer the GP38-2s and unload the older units.
Space is tight yes. but there is a little more than appears. plenty for real world operations
With the idea being making the decision from the prototype stand point for useage verse what little money the line would have realistically. a genset isnt viabale finacially for a line like that to afford purchasing. UNless they got it dirt cheap. seeing the pressure the regionals and class 1’s are under to meet tier 4, a cheap genset not likely.
The modern hoppers of seed and fertilizer(I forgot about that) are rather heavy for a 44T small tractive effort. Especially to make the trip from the branch to the yard for interchange on trackage rights. It would nee to meet mainline regs as well.
A 70T might. be doable and should be looked at. figure two hoppers of seed and one of fertilizer as a measure of load pulling requirement.
I still remember a few short lines that used older GP7s and GP9s to run operations. These venerable workhorses have ample power for a few freight cars, and can be run in forward or reverse. Older locomotives fit the budget of short lines, and can usually handle tighter curves easier than modern road engines.
I am a sucker for the atlas mp-15’s and atlas alco s type locos. But like everyone has said the gp-7 gp-9 is the go to for that kind of stuff. maybe even a gp40?
Yep, they’ll need to be thrifty with only 136 loads a year. Here’s a link to the 2022 tariff for the Pennsylvania Southern short line. $600/car. So $81,600 yearly income plus other miscellaneous charges.
If a V-8 will fill the bill, the EMD SW-8 is one to be considered. Still a full size switcher, it has the tractive effort to spare when lugging, but can step right along with the light loads you envision. With 800 HP, and the 400-500 ton loads you envision, it desrves consideration, although a bit more rare today. Still, that 567 is a proven engine and shares the same pedigree, right up to the GP-35. Theoretically, half the fuel consumption of a V-16 as found in the full sized road units such as a geep, or CF-7. Also much easier on the track.
Gensets were mentioned, which causes me to ask, what happened? They were heralded as the answer as far as power-on-demand switchers were concerned. BNSF, UP, CSX and NS, all ordered them and now, it is all quiet on the genset front. I’ve seen pictures of them in Ohio with the names painted out and looking kind of ratty. The old geeps and SD’s are still holding down the jobs the gensets were built for. Why? Could it be something akin to the problem the class ones ran into with using SW/MP-15 type switchers as lead units in road service? No toilets?
