Hello, I’m a newer railfan and I have 2 questions.
How are engines assigned their numbers and is there any system to it?
Why does an engine go by a different number than the one painted on it, or at least I think they do, esp. when the talk with the dispatcher?
Thank you in advance for your help (and pls be gentle, I’m new [:)])
However the owner (or lessee) wants to assign the numbers.
Sometimes. I have noticed that it is fairly common for shortlines to assign the numbers base on the horsepower. For example the Kyle Railways family of shortlines numbered their GP9s (1750 HP) starting at 1750. Railroads will also generally try to keep like models in one number series. For example UP renumbered many of its older locomotives so all of its SD70Ms would be in one number series, with the exception of UP 3985 being a steam locomotive. However, neither of these are true for all railroads or lease fleets.
Can you give an example of this? I know some railroads have numbers for their trains (CSXT for example is a letter followed by a three digit number followed by a dash and a two digit number). Could that be what you are hearing?
I suspcet that he is confusing the train number, with the cab number, which sometimes can be the same, but not always. A UP train can leave Omaha, headed for Portland, OR, and be assinged a “Train Number” that will remain the same for the journey, even if locomotives are changed enroute.
Doug
Each railroad will attempt to have some sort of a system for numbering their locomotives, but mergers, fleet size increases, poor planning and unforeseen changes to the fleet can mess with these plans. Conrail, for example, had a general scheme to start out. 0xxx was for commuter MUs, low 1xxx was for slugs, hight 1xxx, 2xxx and 3xxx was for 4 axle road power, 4xxx was for passenger and electric locomotives, 5xxx, 7xxx and low 8xxx was for road switchers, high 8xxx and 9xxx was for switchers, 6xxx was for six axle road power. They tried to keep things in blocks of numbers by manufacturer and model, but, at the same time, try to minimize the amount of renumbering that would have to be done when blending the fleets from all the predeccessors, while allowing room for new locomotives to fit into the existing scheme. It worked pretty well until they ran out of room in the 6000 range. The fleet had changed from mostly four axle road power to six axles and there wasn’t enough space without doing quite a bit of renumbering - which is a big headache to do. So, they started the SD80MACs in the 4100 series.
They railroad decides on a numbering plan, which may or may not be obvious to the railfan. Most railroads put similar engines in a series.
The engine always goes by the same number, and the train is always granted authority by its engine number. However the train may have a schedule number and the dispatcher may talk to the train by its schedule number, but generally will not grant authority by the schedule number.
Authority can only be granted by engine number, in the modern era of track warrants. In former times (train orders) authority to occupy the main track could be granted by time table (first, second and third class trains), or by train order (Eng 1234 run extra Wishram to Bend). Even with timetable rights, a regular train was identified by it’s timetable number and engine number (No 3 ENG 234). Of course, in CTC, then and now, authority for trains and engs is conferred by signal indication.
[#welcome] to the Forum ! I see that your ‘screen name’ is a little unusual - do you care to share anything about how you came to select that one ? It’s OK if you don’t, though. [:)]
In response to your questions:
Something you may hear occasionally that ties in with all of the above is “class engine.” Much as the Navy often does with ships, you will find the first engine number in a group of a specific type of locomotives referred to as the “class engine”. Thus if a railroad buys 50 GP??'s and numbers them from 6800 to 6849, 6800 will be the ‘class engine.’
You’ll occasionally hear references to such groups by their number - “Those 6800’s sure are good runners!”
In my experience, this has more relevance when a railroad buys a quantity of a given locomotive new than if the locomotives in the series are an amalgamation of other series that have been renumbered.
Another source of numbers for short line locomotives is the year built/purchased/delivered. Obviously this only works if a railroad has very few locomotives.
For more of an answer to your question 2., see also this thread, esp. the replies by the professional railroaders - zugmann and jeffhergert - there:
“How do you determine train symbols in the field?” at -
http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/167365.aspx
Careful tossing around that “p” word, paul. People may talk.
Hopefully this one will be different than previous ones…
In Britain they generally assign a five-digit number, with the first two designating the “type” or “class” of engine. So you might have an engine no. 47123 indicating it’s type 47, no.123. Kinda handy for the railfans over there, you don’t have to scramble to determine if it was an SD-40 or an SD-40-2 or whatever since the number tells you.
But we don’t do that here, each railroad or company does what it wants.
BTW working railroaders over the years have been more like to refer to an engine class by it’s number than it’s type or wheel arrangement. “Is that a Mountain or a Northern?” “What, you meant that 4000 over there??”
Then there’s the ‘unprofessional’ ones, the amateurs, the ‘wanna-be’s’, etc. So let 'em talk - they will anyway, you know. [swg] ‘Professional’ to me is more of a mind-set or attitude about accomplishing the mission, than a title, wearing a suit to work, inked sheepskins on an office wall, or a collection of cryptic of letters after a name. [tup]
Its a fine point, but one thing I always find odd, is when a RR orders a group of locomotives, lets say 50, they’re usually numbered starting w/ 00 - 49 (i.e. 5000 - 5049.)
Seems like it would make more sense to number them 5001 - 5050.
Just an observation.
I prefer starting with 0. If they started at 4951 and ordered 50, the last locomotive would be 5000. That seems weird to me.
The other day I heard a MOW foreman wanting to get some Track and Time. The dispatcher asked if a certain train had gone past. The foreman said a coal train had gone past them. The DS asked if it was the UP 0000 (don’t remember the number). The foreman said he didn’t know. The DS said they have these things painted on the side of the cab called numbers. The foreman said they didn’t see the head end as they were driving up to the crossing at the time. The DS then called the train to verify it’s location.
Which brings up a point for us. We can no longer identify a train by visually seeing it’s engine number alone. If we have a track warrant to occupy the main track after the arrival of UP 1234 and we see UP 1234 go by with a marker on the end, we still must talk to the crew by radio and verify that they are the UP 1234.
A little ancient (trivia) history. Back in the mid 1970s the Rock Island ordered 56 GP38-2 numbered 4300 to 4355. A second order for 12 more that were to be numbered 4356 to 4367 got hung up when the financing fell through. When new financing was arranged and the engines delivered, they had to use a new block of numbers, 4368 to 4379. (These weren’t those that eventually ended up on the CNW. That was a third order) I just heard a few years that had the Rock Island survived, there were preliminary plans to renumber engines into a horsepower based system. At the very end there was a rebuild program for GP-40. The few that were completed or nearly so, were being renumbered into a 3000 series, so the renumbering seems plausible.
Jeff