Your Tax Dollars at Work in Transit

Trains Magazine Transit
1

In the TRAINS Newswire(12/14/2010) There was recently a story about the State of North Carolina dedicating and naming a couple of rebuilt F59PH( built1988 for GO Transit) locomotives for $1.5 million a piece with monies from a$545 Million Grant from the American Recovery Act; destined to refurbish locomotives and cars used in the “Piedmont Rail” Commuter Service. The 3 Locomotives are part of an$20.3 Million initial phase to rebuild equipment. { I have read in other articles and storys that apparently these particular locomotives do take pretty good regular beatings in grade crossing incidents on many back road crossings with gravel trucks and log trucks and other vehicles.

I understand that locomotives are currently expensive ($2 Million ±each ) but that much( $1.5 million) to rebuild forty year old diesels. Since these units are used in service on regular passenger schedules, would not newer engines be a better, more cost-effective use of that much money? ( Let’s not mix in old steam power in this discussion.)

Then, I turned up this following article from the on-line Arizona Daily Star by Rob O’Dell 12/29/2010 @

“City scrambled to secure funding before seating of new Congress”

“US grants Tucson $63M for streetcar”

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_b12c97f3-22cd-57ff-9c5e-84b579cbb303.html?mode=story

FtA: "…Until Tuesday, the city had not met the requir

2

As you note they are 22-year old locomotives not 40-year old locomotives. New commuter type locomotives are in the $3+ million range since they have to supply HEP. To get even that low you need to be part of a bigger order. Several US commuter agencies were lucky that GO Transit needed to upgrade to more powerful locomotives in order to operate longer trains.

[quote]

Then, I turned up this following article from the on-line Arizona Daily Star by Rob O’Dell 12/29/2010 @

“City scrambled to secure funding before seating of new Congress”
<

3

This is why everything costs so much to build today:

Incidentally, NC already had 2 of those F59PHs. Staying with the same make and model greatly reduces the cost and quantity of spare parts you need to keep on hand and minimizes the cost of training for your maint people.

4

Sad to think what we would done in WWII with that sort of process? Or, more recently, the moon mission?

5

True, but perhaps a shorter version would have avoided the extremely expensive clean-up required at the former nuclear weapons production sites in Washington, Ohio, and Georgia.