While looking up U30Cs, I found this picture but cannot find any NS roster that lists it. Closest I find is starting at 8003 which is a C30. Did NS have U30Cs?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=48679
Also looking for a place that explains why NYC only used 4-axle diesels.
Thanks.
Stork,
I’m not entirely sure when 6-axles first came out but the NYC might have seen them as a needless expense in lieu of their vast size, steam roster, inevitable changes, and consolidations with the Pennsy RR to create Penn Central. (That’s just a guess on my part.)
Here’s a couple of good sites that may be helpful to you as far as rosters are concerned:
http://www.thedieselshop.us
(In particular: http://www.thedieselshop.us/GE_U30_P30CH.HTML)
Hope that’s helpful for you.
Tom
Can’t help on the NS loco. Sorry.
The NYC was built using a pancake for a profile, so did not need extreme traction. OTOH, their roadbed and track were sturdily constructed, so there was no need to spread loco weight over six axles. With those givens, I’m sure that NYC’s motive power department thought of SD’s as “Two more traction motors and gear trains to pay for and maintain,” aka unnecessary expense.
Chuck (who was a New York Central fan once)
Thanks. I was able to find a N&W #8001 that looked similar and since NS inherited N&W units, that’s at least 2 I know about, don’t know if there’s a #8002.
What does, “built using a pancake for a profile,” mean, never heard the term before. But I understand the reasons, thanks.
I first heard the term, “Used a pancake for a profile,” when eavesdropping on a couple of NYC section hands 50+ years ago. Reference was to the NYC Hudson River Route, which had a ruling grade of 0.02%.
I’m sure he was thinking of those old-fashioned pancakes that were uniformly thin and laid flat on the plate. Modern mixes produce a product that bulges up in the middle like a problem in plate tectonics.
Chuck
N&W had three U30C’s, 8000-8002; and eighty C30-7’s, 8003-8082.
New York Central long advertised itself as “The Water Level Route”. The only system main line with any grades of substance was the Boston & Albany.
NYC did have five axle Fairbanks Morse units as well as EMD six axle E units. they did only have four traction motors as they are Whyte configuration A-1-A trucks.
Sorry I am picking nits, but I couldn’t help myself…
Paul
Dayton and Mad River RR
U30C roster is here: http://users.inna.net/~jaydeet/u30c.htm
Diesel Era did a feature on these units in the March/April 1994 issue. The NS units were retired in December 1991.
Are -3 locomotives like -2s where the difference is in the electronics? I have seen pics of GP40-3s and SD40-3s, they look similar to the orginals so I don’t understand the -3.
Dash-3 isn’t an offical EMD model designation, it is used by some rebuilders to indicate a locomotive rebuilt to better than a Dash-2 electrical system, all cases that I am familiar with this means it now has somebody’s aftermarket microprocessor control system. Common ones are manufactured by Q-Tron (QES systems), Woodward-CLC, and an Morrison-Knudsen system (Maxi-Trax?). Wisconsin Central also rebuilt a few of their SD45s with the EMD EM2000 system as used in the SD60.
Some other designations for these locomotives are for example SD40-2MP, SD45Q, etc.
In fact, EMD did use “-3” on a demonstrator, an SD40(-2?) rebuilt by VMV, I think, but painted up in the silver and maroon scheme they used with the SD70M demonstrators (so that sort of fixes the time). From the time of that use by EMD, “-3” became the most popular designation, and it refers to any pre 50 series unit rebuilt with microprocessor controls.
One other system is ZTR, a Canadian system produced initially for CN. Q-Tron is now owned by Wabtech, who took over the former MK operation now known as MPI, so I assume it has superseded the old MK system. I did see the name “MKLOC” on the default screen of the microprocessor on a rebuild with the MK microprocessor system, so I assume that was a name they used for their system.
M636C