Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

What locomotives should I use for my fictional Railroad?

3892 views
34 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2018
  • 15 posts
What locomotives should I use for my fictional Railroad?
Posted by Amtrak 42 on Tuesday, October 23, 2018 7:16 PM

On my layout based in present day Northeastern America, one of the roads on the layout will be the CHR(Chicago Heavy Railroad) which runs from the Appalachian Plateau in Virginia to Chicago carrying coal. All the locomotives in the fleet will all be diesel locomotives built before 1990. I already have a SF B23-7, UP F7A, and a MR C-420 that I will paint in custom CHR liverie (will show pics when done), what other locomotives should I use for the CHR?

  • Member since
    January 2006
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 2,268 posts
Posted by NeO6874 on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 9:09 AM

Wow, I totally misread the question ... 

pre-1990s era locomotives, I'd say you'd probably do well to get some dash-7s or dash-8s.  Depends on how far back you want to go though in terms of age.  I mean, a couple GP9s might not be untoward - but those were last produced in the mid 1960s.

-Dan

Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 9:34 AM

For a coal road still running an F7A after 1990, I expect you'd need another A and two B's.  It's tradition.  And the F's would have been lovingly maintained to last that long, and/or highly modified.  Sounds like fun.

BN was famous for fielding ABBA helper sets over Marias Pass.  And there's a photo of BN F's in iron ore service in 1980.  You might track down photos of them in service for inspiration.

Staying with the coal road concept, one could add more modern power.  That would be either EMD or GE.  I would seriously consider getting SD38's and/or SD38-2's (See Athearn and Kato).

 That takes care of the coal.

 

The B23-7 and C-420 will do well for "other" freight, especially MU'ed together as a way-freight local set.

For faster (than coal) through freights, you can't beat SD40-2's.  They are kind of bland (except for the porches), so you could argue for something "different".  But the SD40-2's would likely be THE best choice.  OR. You might get something like SD45-2's.  Or even argue for F45's.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 9:44 AM

An alternate use of the F7A, since F-units were most all retired from general freight service a long time ago, would be to power an excursion or dinner train. One F-unit with 3-4 dining cars or coaches might be a nice diversion from the usual coal trains. It wouldn't matter if the cars were all from different railroads either, as historical societies and railfan rail organizations often 'mix and match' equipment.

Stix
  • Member since
    January 2015
  • From: Southern California
  • 1,682 posts
Posted by Lone Wolf and Santa Fe on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 12:26 PM

So your present day railroad only uses 30 year old locomotives? Um ok. Then you will need several SD40-2 locomotives. They were built until 1989. Also GP50 or GP60 locomotives. You might also want some SD40T-2 tunnel motors. Of course you don't have to paint them all in your railroad's livery. You can do what the real railroads do when they buy used locomotives and just renumber them. If your railroad can't afford new locomotives then it probably can't afford paint either.

 

 

Modeling a fictional version of California set in the 1990s Lone Wolf and Santa Fe Railroad
  • Member since
    January 2004
  • From: Canada, eh?
  • 13,375 posts
Posted by doctorwayne on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 1:57 PM

I'd suggest using locomotives from only one manufacturer, as it would cut down on the parts inventory that your road would need to have on-hand, and also simplify maintenance, as the shop forces would need to be familiar with only one brand.
It would also make sense to standardise on the models to choose:  one type for the mainline trains and something else that's suitable for switching, perhaps.

While from a modelling perspective, it might be less interesting visually than having locos from different manufacturers, I'd think it to be more prototypical.

If you want to include variety in your fleet of similar locomotives, buy the same models, but in different roadnames and paint schemes, then simply "patch" them with your freelanced road's reporting marks and numbering system.

Wayne

  • Member since
    May 2017
  • 382 posts
Posted by xboxtravis7992 on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 2:34 PM

So present day, but all locomotives are nearly 30 years old?

The EMD SD40 series as previously mentioned is an obvious choice. If you like the look of GE locomotives, the GE C40-8 series as another option if you want older locomotives on line.

An EMD SD50 is another option. They were gas guzzlers, but a railroad looking for some high horsepower options might snag them up and use them into the present, despite their reputation for burning fuel.

As for classic F units? You could see those in service on freights up until the 1990's; but if its the present day I can't think of any railroad still running those unless it has a tourism or museum operation of some sorts. You might be able to get away with using an F45 though in freight service, if you justify it as some second hand engine picked for its common EMD parts despite being poorly designed for switching. Shove it into the middle of a consist to sell the image that its not used for switching and just really on the train for the added horsepower. 

Speaking of switching, yard or local power can easily run on EMD GP9 or GP15 engines. Maybe some SW1500's or some older switcher units can work yards. The Rapido GE B36-7 coming out soon might be another unique choice for an old yard or local engine although those are somewhat rare engines in comparison to the EMD models previously mentioned.

Or go crazy... a few railroads still run ALCO diesels. Those are rare operations, but those that do have managed to keep those old engines running well for over 50+ years now. 

In short, use some online photos to look at area shortlines and start grabbing ideas were you see them. Make sure the power has a common 'look' to them. Even buying second hand locomotives, chances are your railroad's power department looked for specific classes or unit types to compliment the roster, or bought batches or second hand engines together in auctions. You don't want it to look like the roster of some museum with "a little bit of this and a bit of that," but you can still have a varied look ala the Kyle Railway for example as long as there is a sense of history in how these strange units all ended up on the same railroad. 

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:03 PM

Keep in mind EMD built F-7s from 1946 to 1954, so the OP's F-7A would be somewhere between 64 and 72 years old!

Regarding Alcos - Montreal Locomotive Works continued building "Alco" engines for 10+ year after American Locomotive Co. quit making them in the 1960s. Minnesota Commercial RR runs some used MLW "Alcos" built in the 1970's ('80's?) - along with a few actual US Alcos. Several companies make models of MLW engines.

Stix
  • Member since
    October 2018
  • 15 posts
Posted by Amtrak 42 on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:04 PM
Thanks for your help! Those locomotives are good ideas! The F45 is one of my favorite locomotives and I will definitely consider utilizing one! Also, on the CHR, the F is modified with an EMD 12-710G3C-EC prime mover instead of the 567 engine which is almost 80 years old. I will also use some SD40-2s. Kyle Martin, Modelling a multi-road railroad set in the Northeast since 2015
  • Member since
    October 2018
  • 15 posts
Posted by Amtrak 42 on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:05 PM
Thanks for the suggestion! I will probably use some GP9s for switching!
  • Member since
    October 2018
  • 15 posts
Posted by Amtrak 42 on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:11 PM
Thanks for the suggestions! Did you know the Keokuk Junction railway still operates heavily modified Fs for freight, and sometimes Pan Am uses their F9s for freight. I would probably mostly use the Fs for an OCS or excursion service, but they would occasionally pull freight.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 3,139 posts
Posted by chutton01 on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:42 PM

Just wondering, does the Chicagoland area nowadays receive a significant amount of inbound coal traffic?  I know southern Illinois has several coal mines, but not sure what level of coal traffic Chicago has (maybe Gary, Hammond and what remains of industry in NW Indiana, SE Chicago?) 
Maybe this can help you if you haven't already seen it (Illinois State Freight Plan):
http://www.idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/files/Transportation-System/Reports/OP&P/ILFreightPlan_FINAL.pdf

I took a bit of a look around, including that report I linked to. In 2014 Coal comprised 40+% of all rail traffic in Illinois (which is not that great for future traffic levels).  Inbound coal seems to be thermal coal (for power production), and a number of articles mention at least 6 coal power plants fully or partially closed down in the north Illinois since 2012.  Maybe the OP might want to diversify their planned traffic flows...

  • Member since
    March 2017
  • 58 posts
Posted by RobertSchuknecht on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 6:23 PM

You can't go wrong hauling coal to Chicago with Century Series Alcos. 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 9:58 PM

Coal road?  1990's?

SD40-2's, SD40-2's, SD40-2's.  Maybe a set of C40-8's for new power.  Oh yeah, get some SD40-2's.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 9:59 PM

chutton01
Just wondering, does the Chicagoland area nowadays receive a significant amount of inbound coal traffic?

Yes, they recieve a lot of coal from the Powder River Basin.

So Ill coal isn't very useful since its very high sulpur and causes emissions problems.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • From: Southern Florida Gulf Coast
  • 18,255 posts
Posted by SeeYou190 on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:35 PM

SD40-2s and GP50s.

.

Both of these were available in Undecorated in Athearn Blue Boxes. The freelance railroader's best friends.

.

-Kevin

.

Living the dream.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Thursday, October 25, 2018 10:06 AM

SeeYou190
SD40-2s and GP50s.

I would go with GP38-2's, more parts in common with the SD40-2's, they have the same 500 hp/axle as SD40-2's.  GP50's are good for higher speed, lower tonnage trains such as intermodal, automotive or perishable service.  Not so good for bulk service.  Actually they weren't so good for any service since the SD50's were retired by the class 1's pretty quick, but they wouldn't know that yet in 1980-1990.

C40-8's (or C36-7's) had more tractive effert than an SD50.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Thursday, October 25, 2018 10:48 AM

And, on BNSF, the GP50's have mostly been effectively downgraded to GP38-2's, anyway.  Pretty common for wayfreight work on the north bank of the Columbia will be a GP38-2 and a former GP50, running back to back.

I agree that a railroad would be well served by buying only GP38-2's and SD40-2's.  But most of us can't exercise such restraint.

So I will still advocate for getting some SD38/SD-38-2's for coal.

And, if you want some F45's mixed in, it is not at all unreasonable.  Your railroad might have bought some from BN when they sold theirs around 1985.  You could have a patched BN one, and/or one repainted for your railroad.

And, noting the existing U23B and C-420, there might be other interesting remnants.  Who knows, maybe a cow and calf (and another calf?)(C&O) SW7.  Just don't get carried away with wide variety.

But to field a reasonably prototypical roster, I advocate the coherence of MOSTLY those dash 2's mentioned earlier.

 

Ed

 

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Heart of Georgia
  • 5,406 posts
Posted by Doughless on Thursday, October 25, 2018 1:53 PM

How come nobody is mentioning U-Boats?  Six Axle.  U33C, U36C.

Or C30-7s.   

I'd think that if the railroad used B23-7's, they'd have more GEs.

- Douglas

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Thursday, October 25, 2018 4:23 PM

Amtrak 42

On my layout based in present day Northeastern America, one of the roads on the layout will be the CHR(Chicago Heavy Railroad) which runs from the Appalachian Plateau in Virginia to Chicago carrying coal. All the locomotives in the fleet will all be diesel locomotives built before 1990. I already have a SF B23-7, UP F7A, and a MR C-420 that I will paint in custom CHR liverie (will show pics when done), what other locomotives should I use for the CHR?

 
Just to refresh everyone's memory, we're talking about a layout set in 2018, but using locomotives that were built before 1990.
Wink
Stix
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Friday, October 26, 2018 9:51 AM

wjstix
Just to refresh everyone's memory, we're talking about a layout set in 2018, but using locomotives that were built before 1990.

Its a fantasy line.  Got it.

Then he can use whatever strikes his fancy, pick which engine he thinks looks best.  What the prototype would do becomes irrelevant.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Friday, October 26, 2018 10:02 AM

Now, back to the chit-chat:

 

It's been sticking in my head that there's the little U boat and the little Alco.  How to explain them, if everything else is EMD.

So, the argument to go GE DOES have a good point.  You could have a mix of Century's and GE's.  Instead of the dash 2's.  And you'd also need a really good crew in your shops to keep them happy.  There's a reason the dash 2's won.

I think the point of the question is how to assemble a roster that looks sorta kinda half-way reasonable.  And fun.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Friday, October 26, 2018 10:40 AM

dehusman
 
wjstix
Just to refresh everyone's memory, we're talking about a layout set in 2018, but using locomotives that were built before 1990.

 

Its a fantasy line.  Got it.

Then he can use whatever strikes his fancy, pick which engine he thinks looks best.  What the prototype would do becomes irrelevant.

 

 
As a free-lancer myself, not sure I'd agree with that. I try to use equipment that is plausible for what my railroad would use if it really had existed.
 
My real point was that some of the answers posted appear to have been based on the assumption that the OP's layout was set in 1990, when he actually was asking about a current 2018 railroad, but only using engines (primarily second-hand units) built before 1990.
Stix
  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Friday, October 26, 2018 10:54 AM

I'm not seeing where the OP said "primarily second-hand units".  They COULD be.  They could also be leftovers on a frugal railroad.

OP might want to change from "insisting" that all locos in 2018 are required to have been built before 1990.  But "frugal" combined with talented shop crews might pull it off.

Sometimes people come in with a certain idea, and leave with a modified version.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Friday, October 26, 2018 12:25 PM

wjstix
As a free-lancer myself, not sure I'd agree with that. I try to use equipment that is plausible for what my railroad would use if it really had existed.

Just take into consideration that many of the engines suggested (Alco's, U boats, F units) had already been scrapped for a decade or more before the 1990 cut off.

The NEWEST engine he could have is almost 30 years old.  SD40-2's are over 40 years old.  On any railroad that runs coal trains, those engines have been down graded to switch engines, maybe locals or transfers.

If the question is, "What would the prototype do in 2018?", the answer would be not use 40 year old engines for long distance coal trains.  Now he could ask the question, "What would the prototype do in 1990?" and then do that.  That question has been answered.  If its not one of those two questions, then it pretty much opens up the possibilities to anything thing he wants (and that's fine).

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Morristown, NJ
  • 808 posts
Posted by nealknows on Friday, October 26, 2018 1:56 PM

Some great suggestions for this person. 

I model modern and have U boats on the railroad, Alco engines, lots of geeps. It's what you're comfortable with and can afford. It's fictional, to a degree and like Dave stated, what would the protoype do? 

Whatever you decide, please post pics so we see what your railroad fleet looks like!

Neal

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Friday, October 26, 2018 1:57 PM

Altough it was a short line, the Transkentucky Transportation Railroad used old GE diesels to move coal.  The linked article says they shut down the railroad after losing the coal contracts and weather damage to trackage.  A look at the corporate website shows only transloading, car storage, and warehousing as the services now provided.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transkentucky_Transportation_Railroad

I think the take away from the article isn't the use of older power for moving coal, but that if the time being modelled is the last few years (instead of sometime 1990/95 to 2010) that a railroad is going to need something other than coal to survive.  Coal still moves, but in most places it's not what it was 10 years ago.

Jeff   

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • From: Potomac Yard
  • 2,767 posts
Posted by NittanyLion on Friday, October 26, 2018 2:07 PM

While generally I dislike whimsical things like this, it isn't without real world analogue. The Western New York and Pennsylvania has a fleet of around 19 locomotives and everything is ALCO and MLW. The baby of the fleet dates to 1971.

No cutesy scenic line or anything. Just a work a day regional with a decided atypical fleet. 

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Heart of Georgia
  • 5,406 posts
Posted by Doughless on Friday, October 26, 2018 2:44 PM

7j43k

Now, back to the chit-chat:

 

It's been sticking in my head that there's the little U boat and the little Alco.  How to explain them, if everything else is EMD.

So, the argument to go GE DOES have a good point.  You could have a mix of Century's and GE's.  Instead of the dash 2's.  And you'd also need a really good crew in your shops to keep them happy.  There's a reason the dash 2's won.

I think the point of the question is how to assemble a roster that looks sorta kinda half-way reasonable.  And fun.

 

Ed

 

Wasn't GE thought of as the successor to Alco?

- Douglas

  • Member since
    April 2012
  • From: Huron, SD
  • 1,016 posts
Posted by Bayfield Transfer Railway on Friday, October 26, 2018 5:45 PM

Depends also on the size of the railroad.  The Escanaba and Lake Superior still occasionally runs its Baldwins.

Here in South Dakota I've seen SD40-2s start popping up as switching power at elevators.  There were a LOT of them built, so they aren't hard to find on the secondhand market.

GP40s also show up fairly often in regionals.  The Milwaukee was using GP40s for yard switching in the early 80s, for that matter.

There are real, actual "used locomotive for sale" brokers out there.  Check their web sites; what your railroad has would be influenced by what's available.

 

Disclaimer:  This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.

Michael Mornard

Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!