Back in the days when steam engines rode the rails, I heard that hogheads had “favorite” engines which they enjoyed being assigned to; they thought that a particular engine had more pep, or was easier to control, or whatever else they thought about how the specific engine performed. I’m wondering if engineers of today have favorite diesel units, or think they’re all the same.
Junior Yardmaster
I like anything pre-computer screens. As for modern engines - any widebody -9 or Gevo will do.
Why pre-computer?
…and no longer 20% cooler?
I like analog gauges. Also having a computer screen shining in your eyes all night gets tiring.
Loads when you ask it to, not when some camel programmed by a bunch of wannabee automotive engineers decides the EPA would let it.
I’ve had enough older engines not want to load as well. I just like how the older engines feel, if you will. You seem more connected to them for lack of better description.
All of our locomotives are antiques - some moreso than others…
I do kinda like driving our “stick shift” from time to time (RS3 - manual transition).
I’d be like a kid with a new toy in something modern…
On Class 1 carriers - only those enginemen that work locals and/or yard jobs normally have the opportunity to work with the same locomotive for more than a trip. Enginemen will normally like a class of engine, not necessarily a particular example. However, some may develop a liking for a particular engine number.
While all engines of a class may be constructed to the same standards, many have their own ‘personality’.
I think all engineers have a particular favorite type. They likely base part of that on the fact that they can rely on a particular locomotive.
During the steam Era, personally, I would have chosen a K27. Just partial to them and from what I have read, they were loved by the engineers that ran them.
As far as diesels. I just like the DD40AX. I know it’s not the most efficient locomotive or even the most practical, but by God she is truly amazing to see running out west. Whether it was a favorite among Union Pacific engineers, I cannot attest to, but something tells me, they were indeed very popular among the men who shared time on them. Just a big, beautiful powerful diesel locomotive.
I agree with your analysis. Especially the word…connected. With all this technology today, the engineer likely feels like a part of the affair versus the man in charge.
I love technology. Especially anything that can save lives and keep railroads safe, but there is a fine line between that of safety…for example…and real honest to goodness railroading.
You know. Like running a GP9 in the yard for 8 hours or more. All that beautiful whining engine sounds and stuff going on makes you feel alive, but get out on the main line with a Gevo and you feel like there is no substance to the whole thing.
I’d rather be on the GE, or EMD, working on the road rather than switching in the yard any day.
Jeff
One of my favorite locomotives is EMD’s SD9. I’ve always liked the looks of them—those big three-axle Flexicoil trucks squeezed in under a loco that isn’t much longer that a Geep make them look “all power.” By comparison, the Geeps (or any four-axle loco) looked more like powered boxcars than real locomotives. The SD’s higher walkway and built-out radiators also added to the brawny look.
After I hired out on the BN as a switchman at Northtown (Minneapolis) in 1989 I spent plenty of time on SD9s as the BN used a number of them in yard service there. There were three hump sets with a SD9 one each end spliced by a GP9B: BN 6101, 602, 6123 (the “123” set); 6110, 600, 6117 (the “007” set); and 6118, 601, 6119 (the bad set); the 6118 set was normally used on transfer runs to the CNW and Soo Line as it did not work as well on the hump (it had a tendency to gain speed rather than hold the speed selected by the hump foreman). The hump sets had some ballast added so they were good pullers, and like all SD9s, rode well, not that we ever attained any speed with them in yard service.
As a new-hire switchman on the extra board I ended up on a lot of hump jobs, especially on nights. Since the Northtown switchmen had a daily markup system the senior employees picked the best jobs first and and the extra board filled what was left over (pulling pins on the hump was not considered a primo job). At that time we had three switchmen on the hump jobs: the foreman went upstairs in the hump tower and operated the hump console (lining switches, blocking tracks for carmen and pullout jobs, operating the loco while humping, etc.) and the two helpers doubled the tracks together, shoved the drag to the hump, pulled pins, and trimmed the bowl after each hump (sometimes cars didn’t roll all the way into a track so we had to give them a boost to get them in the clear and make room for the next hump).
We normally did three shoves on a shift with the junior s
Kurt
Thanks for sharing your memories. This has to be one of my favorite post! I am looking forward to the next one.
Ralph
I agree. Kurt, that was an exceptional post.
This is why I love trains and the people who make them go.
Thank You[:)]
Continuing on from where I left off . . .
I think that the yard jobs I liked working best, both as a switchman, and then as an engineer, were the pullout jobs at Northtown Yard. They were fast-paced so the time went quickly, had some challenge, had good breaks, and got a nice quit besides. It also seemed as though we were really accomplishing something in making up a train, some of which I would later see departing.
Compared with other jobs, the pullouts required an engineer to have a good understanding of the capabilities of the locomotive being used, especially its braking power. The geography of Northtown had much to do with this; the yard was located in the same urban location as Northern Pacific’s old Northtown Yard and had significant design challenges. Hemmed in on one side by the main line (immovable with industries next to it) and on the other by a 50-foot high bluff (although the BN did remove a large area of this bluff to make room for the bowl tracks) the overall width was constrained. The available overall length was fixed by an Interstate highway crossing on the west end and street crossings on the east end. Since I have a civil engineering degree and did track design work on the CNW I spent much time studying the track layout at Northtown (there is a lot of sitting and looking out the window for engineers on yard jobs); I found where a minor change or two could have been made but on the whole the engineers had done a really good job designing the yard given the available space.
One major headache was the Soo Line’s bridge that crossed over the BN just east of our 35th Avenue Yard Office at the east end of the bowl (the pullout jobs worked out of 35th along with a yardmaster and switchtender). This Soo bridge was a long multi-span through-plate-gir
Really interesting reading! Thanks for taking the time to write it up.